Game Feedback Wanted - Results

[Halaster]

About 8 months-ish ago I created a thread seeking feedback from people who don't play anymore.  Relevent thread:

  https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,57217.0.html

I think anyone who is going to reply and reads our forums anymore has done so by now.  There were a number of people who replied in a request or directly to a staff member on Discord.  I'm sure if you individually went through all this you could find other ways to categorize it than we have.

The amazing Usiku took some time to compile the feedback from this thread and put it all into some broad categories.  There were a couple more bits of feedback that came in after she compiled it, but they were on theme with the rest.  The number is how many separate mentions the category had, following by a general category name, followed by a brief description.

------------------------

32 - The Grind - Desire to start the game 'ahead', not have to start weak and from square one every time.  Skilling up taking too long.  Establishing new characters takes too long.

24 - Player Agency / Empowerment - People feel like they're told 'no' too much, not given the trust to get big things done.  Impact to the world, glass ceiling.

23 - Staff Support (tools, request turnaround times, communication style) - Request response time was the main one, but mentions of attitude towards players, consistency between staff and RP standards, de-escalation techniques.

15 - Character Death - Character death can be draining and not being able to talk about it makes it more difficult.  People often take long breaks after the death of a beloved character. Death to annoying stuff.  Death of other characters around you.

14 - Can't Find Others to Play With / Decline in Playerbase - Some clans too restrictive, especially when it's quiet

13 - RP / Social Progress Too Slow - Similar to the Grind above, but more about internal ladder-climbing in clans or socially.  Takes too long to get promotions

12 - Change of Features - Someone's favorite clan closed, or favorite class no longer available.  Mostly centered around old classes going away.

10 - Toxicity in the Community, GDB, Discord - How players treat each other, how staff treat players

5 - FOIC (Find Out In Character) Makes It Hard to Learn - self-explanatory

3 - Karma - Karma timer regen too slow, not having enough karma, losing karma

3 - Offpeak Players Alienated - Miss out on most RPT's

3 - Not Being Able to Talk About PC's/Plots for Too Long - Similar to Character Death above

3 - Overapplication of Political Correctness RL Culture - Some people get tired of being told some word they used for a long time is now banned.

2 - Tuluk Opening - Feel it has negatively impacted the game

1 - Steep Learning Curve - self explanatory

1 - Stats - When you put a lot of effort into a concept and the stats are terrible

1 - Crafting System - general frustrations with the crafting system

------------------------

The 'legitimacy' of any of the above is not really relevant, it is simply the feedback provided.  And by that I mean, you may see something you don't agree with, but it's other peoples' opinions and isn't really up for debate.

NOTE:  These are reasons cited for people not playing, these are not necessarily general 'gripes' about the game such as "Poison is too hard to get".

[stoicreader]

Thank you Usiku, I feel heard.

[X-D]

I find #3 interesting...

While I am one that finds the PC crap more then annoying, it is not something that would cause me to quit, I ignore and wait to get yelled at then open that discussion for how retarded it is. Of course the results of that could get me to quit...but I have yet to be called out on it.

[Barsook]

Thank you Usiku, I feel heard.

And thank you, Halaster, for starting the call for feedback.

[Gentleboy]

Um??? I don't see streetlamps??

[Barsook]

So, what are the plans around the feedback? Are we going have more "Coming Soon" posts like last year?

[Halaster]

So, what are the plans around the feedback? Are we going have more "Coming Soon" posts like last year?

Most of the discussions we've been having recently as staff focus around the first two items - The Grind, and Player Agency.  And a little bit about the 3rd one (Staff Support).  We don't necessarily discuss them from the approach of "Ok, this was the top item on the feedback", but things that are in discussion involve those in some form.  We have a wide range of staff opinions on these topics, and it is pretty obvious we tend to move slow.

If you maybe remember, that rolecall for 5 people I put out a few months ago for the new tribe - that was definitely done with Player Agency in mind.  The group worked through the documentation, got a finalized version, and it's now "in game".  The rest of the playerbase will see and hear about it soon enough.  It's a tribe that's about 90% player-created content with the last 10% being the guidelines and background they had to work within.

There's probably not a lot more to really announce or talk about just yet.  Armageddon is nearly 30 years old and it can be a slow ship to turn sometimes.  I wish that wasn't always the case, but Big Decisions can take a lot of work, time, discussion, and energy.  But there's one thing I can tell you, our internal discussion boards are pretty darn active these days with ideas and debate about a whole gambit of topics.  We really want to continually make the game better, provide enjoyment for people (including ourselves), and do what's good for the game.  We just have to all agree on what that looks like, and preferably try to do those things in a smart way.

[stoicreader]

I really appreciate the follow up.

Asking for our opinions, and telling us that we're heard is more than can be asked for from any organization.

Especially one run by volunteers.

[Riev]

I really appreciate the follow up.

Asking for our opinions, and telling us that we're heard is more than can be asked for from any organization.

Especially one run by volunteers.

This needs to be quoted because its said well. Telling and SHOWING us that we're being heard means a lot.

[najdorf]

In the case of Grind, it is a very delicate point that usually ends up with solutions that revolve around player cooperation.
Please keep in mind that this has the potential to destroy the game for off peakers, as they cannot find other players to teach them, or spar with them as much as those in peak hours.

[Athapaxis]

A few things to note:

It is likely that some things that people sent in as negatives are things that others see as positives.  Like - I would say that the slow build up of skills is something that I find very satisfying and rewarding about the game.  Branching a new skill or getting one up to a level that it is useful after weeks (or months) of work is a really fun.

It feels like the last few years has seen a massive shift in how the staff interacts with us.  I've been around this game a long time (off and on).  My interactions with staff from years ago was either non-existent or negative.  All of my interactions with staff in the past couple of years has been positive.  Even one time when I was mildly scolded for something in game, it was done politely.

I echo what other folks are saying:  the work that has been done here on the GDB to demonstrate staff attitude has been really helpful.

[Fredd]

A few things to note:

It is likely that some things that people sent in as negatives are things that others see as positives.  Like - I would say that the slow build up of skills is something that I find very satisfying and rewarding about the game.  Branching a new skill or getting one up to a level that it is useful after weeks (or months) of work is a really fun.

It feels like the last few years has seen a massive shift in how the staff interacts with us.  I've been around this game a long time (off and on).  My interactions with staff from years ago was either non-existent or negative.  All of my interactions with staff in the past couple of years has been positive.  Even one time when I was mildly scolded for something in game, it was done politely.

I echo what other folks are saying:  the work that has been done here on the GDB to demonstrate staff attitude has been really helpful.

+1

I appreciate the grind, honestly. it makes getting a master thief, or badass warrior feel like an achievement while they are alive.

And it makes really badass people stand out as really badass.  If everyones a badass, no one's a badass. And if everyones a Master Thief, No one is  (everyone is likely complaining about stolen knives though)

[Narf]

A few things to note:

It is likely that some things that people sent in as negatives are things that others see as positives.  Like - I would say that the slow build up of skills is something that I find very satisfying and rewarding about the game.  Branching a new skill or getting one up to a level that it is useful after weeks (or months) of work is a really fun.

I suspect that this is very true, and if staff were to remove or reduce the grind significantly you'd have a roughly equal number of players (different ones though) complaining.

That said, I don't think we have to choose between a grind-heavy and grind-light game. There's ways to accommodate both playstyles, and without giving a clear advantage to one or the other. Personally I'd like a system where you had some sort of meta-resource you could spend at character creation to get higher starting skills (NOT KARMA), or you could spend it on other things that might be cool to have but not necessary for a functional character. Then players that wanted to avoid the grind could opt out of the "select something cool" in exchange for higher starting skills.

[Fredd]

A few things to note:

It is likely that some things that people sent in as negatives are things that others see as positives.  Like - I would say that the slow build up of skills is something that I find very satisfying and rewarding about the game.  Branching a new skill or getting one up to a level that it is useful after weeks (or months) of work is a really fun.

I suspect that this is very true, and if staff were to remove or reduce the grind significantly you'd have a roughly equal number of players (different ones though) complaining.

That said, I don't think we have to choose between a grind-heavy and grind-light game. There's ways to accommodate both playstyles, and without giving a clear advantage to one or the other. Personally I'd like a system where you had some sort of meta-resource you could spend at character creation to get higher starting skills (NOT KARMA), or you could spend it on other things that might be cool to have but not necessary for a functional character. Then players that wanted to avoid the grind could opt out of the "select something cool" in exchange for higher starting skills.

I don't know... If you let people skip to much, you run smack into the problem of no one feeling like they are actually great at what they do. Cheapening the whole experience. If everyone who's played for a couple years can start a new person who's good at things, then you are saying only new players deserve unskilled characters. And I dunno. that sits wrong with me.

Just train, rp, and put in for a skill bump after an IG year with some logs. Boom, grind lessened, and it feels meaningful.

[Jarvis]

A few things to note:

It is likely that some things that people sent in as negatives are things that others see as positives.  Like - I would say that the slow build up of skills is something that I find very satisfying and rewarding about the game.  Branching a new skill or getting one up to a level that it is useful after weeks (or months) of work is a really fun.

I suspect that this is very true, and if staff were to remove or reduce the grind significantly you'd have a roughly equal number of players (different ones though) complaining.

That said, I don't think we have to choose between a grind-heavy and grind-light game. There's ways to accommodate both playstyles, and without giving a clear advantage to one or the other. Personally I'd like a system where you had some sort of meta-resource you could spend at character creation to get higher starting skills (NOT KARMA), or you could spend it on other things that might be cool to have but not necessary for a functional character. Then players that wanted to avoid the grind could opt out of the "select something cool" in exchange for higher starting skills.

I don't know... If you let people skip to much, you run smack into the problem of no one feeling like they are actually great at what they do. Cheapening the whole experience. If everyone who's played for a couple years can start a new person who's good at things, then you are saying only new players deserve unskilled characters. And I dunno. that sits wrong with me.

Just train, rp, and put in for a skill bump after an IG year with some logs. Boom, grind lessened, and it feels meaningful.

I have a love-hate relationship with the grind in this game, and have been mulling over a way to actually get rid of it without devaluing having actual expertize, and having badasses be few and
far in between, etc etc.

Any existing resource to be spent to exchange skill bumps would not only feel like something would be taken from me personally, but I'd also never do anything but. 

What you COULD do is, like Narf said, add something to the game that people could opt out of to get skill bumps.
It'd be cool if everyone spawned in with a unique, randomized "perk".

It could be absolutely shit and menial like getting an increased cap for foraging, increased alcohol tolerance, inversion of his hands (so that es is the primary and ep goes off dual wield).
Or something great, like being inexplicably immune to this one specific spell, or being a natural with X skill which gives them an extra cap or something.

That's a feature I wouldn't either always disregard or always take, I can see good balance in those if done properly. Of course practically it'd be a stupid and ridiculous amount of work and as such its being used as an example of what I personally think that constitutes value of what I'd trade interchangeably with skill bumps.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edit: Something that could work with considerably less effort would be for everyone to spawn with a chance of getting a "talent" on a random skill of theirs, which means they have a naturally increased cap, resulting the trade of general grindless competence vs the possibility to really really excel at something.

[Narf]

I don't know... If you let people skip to much, you run smack into the problem of no one feeling like they are actually great at what they do. Cheapening the whole experience. If everyone who's played for a couple years can start a new person who's good at things, then you are saying only new players deserve unskilled characters. And I dunno. that sits wrong with me.

I get the sense that you're making a lot of assumptions about how this would work that I didn't actually propose and then objecting to the results of those assumptions.

I didn't, for instance, designate how much of the grind could be skipped. I didn't mention anything about "players who'd been playing for a couple years," not sure where that came from. You didn't really address that people could opt to go through the grind and come out on the other end of it better than the players that opted to skip it, which was the central tenet of the suggestion. That players that still wanted to grind could do so, /and/ get benefits from it that wouldn't be available for those that skipped it. I mean if you're ignoring that, yeah, it's a terrible idea. But again, that trade off is the central tenet of the proposal.

[sucre]

I have kids and I don't have time to grind all that much anymore, which is why I usually play medium or less combat guilds. I've wanted combat heavy always, to try it out, but I really don't have time to sink into it.

At least, it seems like it's harder to grind up than crafting or other skills in my light experience anyway.

I don't know. I'm here for the RP. But the RP can totally be lambasted and superceded by code, so... :/

[lostinspace]

I enjoy the grind until I reach a point I can't make progress with regular play.

Both my badass fighters have only been truly badass because they had dedicated, highly-skilled sparring partners from being a part of combat oriented clans, not because I was good at grinding or anything like that.

If I could have any change to affect the grind, it'd be either lesser restrictions on clans so off-peak players can do other stuff when there aren't sparring partners online, or make combat skill gains in the outside world more viable so as to compete with clans.

edit: Alternatively a 'rested xp' type system similar to MMOs. If you haven't raised a skill in X IRL hours, the next time you raise it, the skill gain is increased as well.

[Delirium]

I like the grind. I dislike the timewasting barrier of having no way of working on those skills in a realistic and reasonable fashion.

I dislike the request tool pileup, I dislike the enormous amount of red tape that gets in the way of reasonable requests, and I dislike toxic players/staff who remain unchecked, the latter of which have led me to quit the game for varying periods of time. Trying to work through a contentious issue has historically left me burnt, insulted, angry, and demoralized, rather than empathized with.

There have been exceptions to that rule, but they're unfortunately rare.

Staff tend to circle the wagons and refuse to admit fault on their end, leading to an imbalance where I as a player try to collaborate and meet in the middle, freely apologize to any part I may have had to contributing to a conflict (despite that part generally stemming from frustration from feeling ignored, misunderstood, or sometimes outright attacked, and wrongly so), but despite that attempt at reaching out to reconcile and offer the olive branch of apologizing for my part, it seems to be taken as an excuse to blame me entirely and I get stonewalled and/or dismissed.

It seems like the best way to enjoy the game has been to engage only in roles which don't require staff oversight; that seems telling.

[Halaster]

On a personal level, I'm really torn on the whole Grind part of the discussion.  I totally agree with the notion that if you skip the grind, you have a less developed character.  The journey of the Grind can be what molds a character, helps them develop a personality, builds the relationships and all of that.  Skipping that part can often lead to a more shallow character.  And I agree with the notion that "if everyone is special, no one is".  I really like it when someone eventually rises above the rest and truly is very skilled - they stand out and are remembered.

On the other hand, I haven't played a character in about a year now because I don't want to spend the time doing the Grind - despite everything I just said!  I'm literally one of those people not making a character because of it.  Granted, I get my "Arm fix" by staffing so that's not really the same as someone not on staff.  I probably would have made a character by now if I weren't, but my point is, I really get that side too.

[Fredd]

What if... And I know this is nuts...

Training dummies weren't useless?

Then people with less time, and off peak could actually train there skills.

edit: Also what if: Teaching gave a bonus for a day (or two!), to  skill gains in that skill, letting people who are role playing gain skills a little quicker. Combine the two, and it might solve ya'lls issue of wanting to have a combat person, but not having 5 hours a day to train?

Further edit for clarification: The current use of Teach more or less gives the person a wits test, and if they pass they learn. This means there's no real point in doing actual training after a lecture, codedly. Despite it making the most sense to do so right after the lecture to hammer the lesson in. My proposed change would make it reward rp, instead of working against it.

[Malken]

Can we get offline training options yet? You know it's going to be a thing eventually, so why postpone it.

[Lotion]

it wqould be so good if mounts could regen stamina while wilderness quitted in a not blatantly abusable way

[Fredd]

Can we get offline training options yet? You know it's going to be a thing eventually, so why postpone it.

I'm down for this, if it's tied to clans.

[Jarvis]

What if... And I know this is nuts...

Training dummies weren't useless?

Then people with less time, and off peak could actually train there skills.

edit: Also what if: Teaching gave a bonus for a day (or two!), to  skill gains in that skill, letting people who are role playing gain skills a little quicker. Combine the two, and it might solve ya'lls issue of wanting to have a combat person, but not having 5 hours a day to train?

Further edit for clarification: The current use of Teach more or less gives the person a wits test, and if they pass they learn. This means there's no real point in doing actual training after a lecture, codedly. Despite it making the most sense to do so right after the lecture to hammer the lesson in. My proposed change would make it reward rp, instead of working against it.

Both of these are pretty good ideas to meet the grind halfway without compromising what people like about it.

[Brokkr]

Once you reach Private, both the AoD and the Sun Legions have an option to train against NPCs occasionally.  In part, so that those who really should be good at combat aren't always outclassed by the rabble (Byn), because of lack of other PCs to train with.

[Brokkr]

So, what are the plans around the feedback? Are we going have more "Coming Soon" posts like last year?

I would say some of the feedback has been incorporated already, although perhaps not in ways that were originally envisioned by players.

For instance, with the recent revamp to the Player-Created Clans documentation, underlying themes in the Feedback thread were incorporated as we discussed which direction to go, how much to change and what to change.

I would expect the longer term impact will be just that.  Not lifting specific examples from the discussions but keeping in mind the overall themes when we look at the direction to go with a change.

[Fredd]

Stat change idea:

So, we all absolutely fucking hate rolling shit stats. You are more or less forced to kill off a cool concept (and name you can never use again) or play someone that's not going to fit your intended concept.

And yes, this can be fun, SOMETIMES. Because a struggling character can be interesting. Most of the time the player is dissapointed. I have read, time and time again, peoples complaints about rolling shit stats and having to store/suicide.

So here's my suggestion. Remove the shit stat rolls, but keep their slots. I'll explain.

Let's say the max stat roll is 10. That's your soft cap. And lets say 5 is Average.  Now lets say players consider 6 (above average) the base line roll for "decent".

rolls of 1-6 would return an actual resault of 6, while rolls of 7-10 will give their natural roll without any adjustment.

This "Safety Net" style stat roll means bad/nearly unplayable stat rolls shouldn't happen.  But this will also allow for the roll of super high stats to still feel rare and rewarding, because there aren't more rolls of 10, just no more rolls of 1-5.

[lostinspace]

Once you reach Private, both the AoD and the Sun Legions have an option to train against NPCs occasionally.  In part, so that those who really should be good at combat aren't always outclassed by the rabble (Byn), because of lack of other PCs to train with.

These work great for clan characters, but don't address the issue at all for tribal/wilderness PCs.

[Alesan]

Once you reach Private, both the AoD and the Sun Legions have an option to train against NPCs occasionally.  In part, so that those who really should be good at combat aren't always outclassed by the rabble (Byn), because of lack of other PCs to train with.

These work great for clan characters, but don't address the issue at all for tribal/wilderness PCs.

I'm guessing they're not supposed to. We're all supposed to be playing in clans if we want those advantages.

[betweenford]

There are tribal and wilderness pc clans.

[Brokkr]

Once you reach Private, both the AoD and the Sun Legions have an option to train against NPCs occasionally.  In part, so that those who really should be good at combat aren't always outclassed by the rabble (Byn), because of lack of other PCs to train with.

These work great for clan characters, but don't address the issue at all for tribal/wilderness PCs.

They are meant to compensate for a combination of 1)  Limits on being able to go into the wilderness and 2) Ofttimes low clan populations.

While being in clans that are essentially militaries.

Tribal/Wilderness characters do not have that combination of factors to compensate for.  Nor are they in the military.

Nevermind that my comment was in response to something about training dummies, also not something tribal/wilderness PCs have, so you weren't even referencing the original comment mine addressed.

[lostinspace]

In terms of the combat grind, unclanned PCs have access to all the gortok/chalton they'll ever need to kick in the head instead of a sparring dummy.

What is the wilderness equivalent of NPC elf sparring opponent #2?

[Fredd]

In terms of the combat grind, unclanned PCs have access to all the gortok/chalton they'll ever need to kick in the head instead of a sparring dummy.

What is the wilderness equivalent of NPC elf sparring opponent #2?

I think the arguement isn't that they can go punch chalton.


It's the number of chaltons they have to send to drove before they are "good"

[lostinspace]

FWIW I'm speaking from personal experience here.

I played a wilderness combat PC that later on joined a clan with access to sparring NPCs.

6 IRL months of grinding combat on critters in the wilderness seemed like a huge waste of time compared to 1 month of progress with the NPCs.

[Brokkr]

Intended to be unequal.

Anyways, this thread is about the results.

[Fredd]

24 - Player Agency / Empowerment - People feel like they're told 'no' too much, not given the trust to get big things done.  Impact to the world, glass ceiling.

This one seems odd. I've seen players make coded clans before.(Crimson Wind) i've seen players influence the politics of an entire city (ie: senate meetings in Allanak)

Wasn't Kurac losing complete control of Luirs based on players actions?

Wasn't The Templars of Tuluk "Unified" by Player actions?

Weren't the Red Fangs destroyed by Player Actions?

To much change can be bad, so i'm wondering what people are wanting with this.

[sucre]

24 - Player Agency / Empowerment - People feel like they're told 'no' too much, not given the trust to get big things done.  Impact to the world, glass ceiling.

This one seems odd. I've seen players make coded clans before.(Crimson Wind) i've seen players influence the politics of an entire city (ie: senate meetings in Allanak)

Wasn't Kurac losing complete control of Luirs based on players actions?

Wasn't The Templars of Tuluk "Unified" by Player actions?

Weren't the Red Fangs destroyed by Player Actions?

To much change can be bad, so i'm wondering what people are wanting with this.

I think they want things to be able to change a bit more fluidly. You should be able to, over time, get a group of people together and build something, make something a monument, tear something down, etc.

Glass ceilings are in reference to promotions. Red robes, Masterbards, higher level noble house rankings.

Lots of times things are just told flat no, instead of being offered workarounds, or at least, that has happened historically.

[stoicreader]

Lots of times things are just told flat no, instead of being offered workarounds, or at least, that has happened historically.

This has NOT been my experience at all. Granted I'm "newish" been here a few years and reached two Karma. I've found as far as plots staff has been incredibly helpful, and bring their own ideas into the plot  make things more exiting.

There is a tremendous amount of freedom so long as you make it fun for lots of players and not mess with existing lore.

"Freedom within boundaries".

[Fredd]

Lots of times things are just told flat no, instead of being offered workarounds, or at least, that has happened historically.

This has NOT been my experience at all. Granted I'm "newish" been here a few years and reached two Karma. I've found as far as plots staff has been incredibly helpful, and bring their own ideas into the plot  make things more exiting.

There is a tremendous amount of freedom so long as you make it fun for lots of players and not mess with existing lore.

"Freedom within boundaries".

This has been my experience as well.  The only problem in this area I've ever had is staff rotations causing my plots to just... end.  And that used to be pretty frequent (every some-aught months, if i remember correct) But this seems less of an issue these days as my last two leaders had plots survive staff rotations. So it seems like there has been a marked improvement in that specific area.

That being said. This is the second biggest category. So there's definately somehting that could use discussed and worked on.

[sucre]

Lots of times things are just told flat no, instead of being offered workarounds, or at least, that has happened historically.

This has NOT been my experience at all. Granted I'm "newish" been here a few years and reached two Karma. I've found as far as plots staff has been incredibly helpful, and bring their own ideas into the plot  make things more exiting.

There is a tremendous amount of freedom so long as you make it fun for lots of players and not mess with existing lore.

"Freedom within boundaries".

That's why I said historically.

[stoicreader]

That's why I said historically.

Touche.  <3

When I first started arm. I felt treated like I was a teenager, not a grown up professional with a child and real life responsibility. After about a year, it was a different environment. My VPCs in my bio were being echoed, my plot was being used. It was thrilling. Later on even more so.

I still feel like some of the players are toxic, and the OOC community on discord is a place for them to spew their venom. And I quit a few times because of it - now I avoid discord.

If halaster is going to revamp the poison code, consider the OOC poison killing away great RPers. (Some of the friends I made OOCly in the game also quit.)  It's sad.

[Riev]

24 - Player Agency / Empowerment - People feel like they're told 'no' too much, not given the trust to get big things done.  Impact to the world, glass ceiling.

This one seems odd. I've seen players make coded clans before.(Crimson Wind) i've seen players influence the politics of an entire city (ie: senate meetings in Allanak)

Wasn't Kurac losing complete control of Luirs based on players actions?

Wasn't The Templars of Tuluk "Unified" by Player actions?

Weren't the Red Fangs destroyed by Player Actions?

To much change can be bad, so i'm wondering what people are wanting with this.

Because its who I am, I want to address some of these.

Wasn't Kurac losing complete control of Luirs based on players actions?

Kurac lost Luir's because their military fort nearby got obliterated by the gith and they were no longer able to military hold power over the Outpost and the GMHs teamed up for a central locus of control. It wasn't like a couple PCs died and everyone said "Well Kurac loses".

Wasn't The Templars of Tuluk "Unified" by Player actions?

I can't say one way or the other, but players have no agency in deciding how Templar roles are seen. Staff decided that the split between male and female didn't make much sense in the way it was portrayed. If you call staff members 'players', sure.

Weren't the Red Fangs destroyed by Player Actions?

This one kind of fits, but only because the Red Fangs themselves were a player created clan. If I remember correctly, there was some weird issues with the 'end' of the clan including characters that should have been dead not staying dead, and a zeal for getting rid of the clan entirely.

The way Arm is designed, players do have a little agency, but that is contingent on other player buy in and more importantly, staff buy in. If you can't get a staff member (usually an Admin or Producer) to agree with the direction you're going, the gameworld isn't going to respond. "Historically" anyway.


I am not a charismatic player. I don't know how to convince other players to join my plotlines. Staff GENERALLY are unwilling to dedicate their time to flesh out a single PC's plotline desires, and instead want other PC buy in so it has maximum impact. However, many players won't join you UNTIL they see there is actual movement. Its a catch 22.

[stoicreader]

I am not a charismatic player. I don't know how to convince other players to join my plotlines. Staff GENERALLY are unwilling to dedicate their time to flesh out a single PC's plotline desires, and instead want other PC buy in so it has maximum impact. However, many players won't join you UNTIL they see there is actual movement. Its a catch 22.

With the judicious use of lying, players can create plotlines. I mean - it's all a lie, it's a pretend game where we all act out our characters.

"Come here a second, I'm assembling a secret team. A soh tribe was ambushed and their tribal heirloom, a copper dagger was stolen. I know who took it, and I'm assembling a team to go get it. We're going to need at least five people with some very special skills, a ton of practice. The dagger is wort maybe fifty to a hundred large for us to split. Ya down?"

[Fredd]

24 - Player Agency / Empowerment - People feel like they're told 'no' too much, not given the trust to get big things done.  Impact to the world, glass ceiling.

This one seems odd. I've seen players make coded clans before.(Crimson Wind) i've seen players influence the politics of an entire city (ie: senate meetings in Allanak)

Wasn't Kurac losing complete control of Luirs based on players actions?

Wasn't The Templars of Tuluk "Unified" by Player actions?

Weren't the Red Fangs destroyed by Player Actions?

To much change can be bad, so i'm wondering what people are wanting with this.

Because its who I am, I want to address some of these.

Wasn't Kurac losing complete control of Luirs based on players actions?

Kurac lost Luir's because their military fort nearby got obliterated by the gith and they were no longer able to military hold power over the Outpost and the GMHs teamed up for a central locus of control. It wasn't like a couple PCs died and everyone said "Well Kurac loses".

Wasn't The Templars of Tuluk "Unified" by Player actions?

I can't say one way or the other, but players have no agency in deciding how Templar roles are seen. Staff decided that the split between male and female didn't make much sense in the way it was portrayed. If you call staff members 'players', sure.

Weren't the Red Fangs destroyed by Player Actions?

This one kind of fits, but only because the Red Fangs themselves were a player created clan. If I remember correctly, there was some weird issues with the 'end' of the clan including characters that should have been dead not staying dead, and a zeal for getting rid of the clan entirely.

The way Arm is designed, players do have a little agency, but that is contingent on other player buy in and more importantly, staff buy in. If you can't get a staff member (usually an Admin or Producer) to agree with the direction you're going, the gameworld isn't going to respond. "Historically" anyway.


I am not a charismatic player. I don't know how to convince other players to join my plotlines. Staff GENERALLY are unwilling to dedicate their time to flesh out a single PC's plotline desires, and instead want other PC buy in so it has maximum impact. However, many players won't join you UNTIL they see there is actual movement. Its a catch 22.

This thread isn't here for debating, just expanding on the given info so staff can continue to improve so i'm gonna hold back on it. But I'de like to say there is a Lot of FOIC about the Templar thing. There was a lot more player involvement there then you'de think with the nobles at the time playing a large part.

but I get you. You feel like you aren't able to convince people to follow your plots, so they don't go anywhere. That is a toughy, but one Staff definately do need to hear about. Thank you for speaking up

edit: Didn't know red fangs were player made. That's pretty neat.