Let's talk about karma

[Tuannon]

I've read a lot of comments on staff/player trust but what about player/player trust?

What is player/player trust? MCB is a thing that people who are not me take very seriously and literally.

[CirclelessBard]

I've read a lot of comments on staff/player trust but what about player/player trust?

What is player/player trust? MCB is a thing that people who are not me take very seriously and literally.

From my experience on other MUDs, TTRPGs and other roleplaying mediums, player/player trust is established by four main things:
1) Understanding that conflict is character vs. character (CvC), not player vs. player (PvP)
2) Understanding that in a collaborative story, every player should be given a chance to contribute
3) Understanding that every player believes their character is special and has a place in the game world, and should not be treated as expendable for its own sake
4) Having players participate in routine check-ins with one another to ensure that any conflict their characters are engaged in are fun for the player, if not necessarily for the character

I think 1-3 are easily achievable in Armageddon, and 4 is achievable if not for the fact that the staff have said they will never, ever under any circumstances consider letting players know who each other plays, even though I personally feel that outlook is detrimental to a healthy RP environment where players trust one another.

[Riev]

Player/Player trust, to me, is knowing that if we meet out in the wilderness and end up fighting ... if I emote backing off or surrendering, that you aren't just going to keep swinging, go for the immediate murder, and at least let me play out the scene.

Maybe I'm going to die anyway, but I want to back off, surrender, yell something, etc. Maybe I live for it, maybe I don't.

On the flip side, to know that if I'm trying to raid or kill someone, they aren't just going to no-emote spam flee and run to a nearby known-aggro monster and drag it back to me to have it try and kill me instead.

[najdorf]

I think player / player trust can only be ooc. Whatever happens in game is fair game as long as it is within the rules of the game.

[Diesel]

Why can't we just say killing pcs, or sentient nonaggro npcs, without emotes is unacceptable? hemotes and semotes do count here, I'm afraid. All pks should require a log from the killer's perspective to be submitted to have on file for a time period so the victim can put in a request to either see a cleaned up, and redacted if necessary, copy of the kill scene or at least be told, if a stealth kill, whether their killer roleplayed even if they didn't see it. We should be able to hold ourselves to a higher level of rp, myself included. This is a roleplaying game. This is a roleplaying game. This is a roleplaying game.

 Just because the mechanics are built on a hack and slash game, doesn't matter. We know it isn't meant to be one and should be able to adjust our gameplay accordingly.

[digitaleak]

What I meant by player/player trust is that if we were to move to a karma-free system, are we going to have people throwing fireballs left and right and gangs of muls walking around trolling? Or half giants that act like intelligent humans? Can we trust that our fellow players are going to honor the game world and documentation?

[CirclelessBard]

I think player / player trust can only be ooc.

True - this is essentially implied by being described as player trust. The karma system represents staff-to-player trust that is also ooc.

Whatever happens in game is fair game as long as it is within the rules of the game.

A reasonable sentiment, but judging by the staff already having commented on the quality of roleplay from high karma players moving on a downward trend, it's unfortunately just not sufficient to just say "whatever happens in game is fine as long as it follows the rules". If high-karma players were breaking rules, there wouldn't be a karma debate; those players would simply have karma deducted and/or be banned from the game.

[najdorf]

Why can't we just say killing pcs, or sentient nonaggro npcs, without emotes is unacceptable? hemotes and semotes do count here, I'm afraid.

Before, or after PK? If before, what if the victim was weaponless, and draws their weapon? What if they later on claim that they were ALREADY going to draw their weapon, and it was a coincidence. What if the victim prepares themselves in a swift escape, alerted by the sudden awareness from the pre-emote. What if the victim escapes due to being aware, then returns and murders the entire lineage of the assassin? Who is going to monitor all that, judge all that, decide on what is wrong or not, on that.

All pks should require a log from the killer's perspective to be submitted to have on file for a time period so the victim can put in a request to either see a cleaned up, and redacted if necessary, copy of the kill scene or at least be told, if a stealth kill, whether their killer roleplayed even if they didn't see it.

What you say afterwards is already within the rules of the game. Sending PK report is mandatory as far as I know.

[najdorf]

A reasonable sentiment, but judging by the staff already having commented on the quality of roleplay from high karma players moving on a downward trend, it's unfortunately just not sufficient to just say "let whatever happens in game is fine as long as it follows the rules". If high-karma players were breaking rules, there wouldn't be a karma debate; those players would simply have karma deducted and/or be banned from the game.

I don't think PK roleplaying is distinctly a higher concern separate from the overall roleplaying quality. It is especially one of those areas that pre PK emoting might have serious IC issues, and not doing it should not be seen as bad RP.

[Diesel]

Yes it should be. It is bad RP. It is also bad rp to autoflee. Both are true. We shouldn't relax on those points.

[Diesel]

If it's your character's time to go, you should (and should have a chance to) go out in style.

[dumbstruck]

You should be owed at least a single emote, a whisper, a say, something, when your story is ended.

When you take it in your hands to end someone else's story, you owe them something. An end to their story.

However small it is. A say, a whisper, an emote. Something. You are taking it in your hands to write the end to a story someone else has been writing.

This is a roleplay intensive game, not a hack and slash game. And as long as people are given a pass on NOT giving that to one another, the standards are going to continue to be no more than a hack and slash.

You literally cannot have it both ways. Someone in charge needs to decide. And so far, they have decided that the standards are that of a hack and slash, that you don't owe the other player an end to their story, and that is how you get what you have. If there's a problem with it, change the code and change the rules.

But I'm tired of people pretending like it's not poor form to just bum rush someone with code and mantishead them with nothing but code. Is it against the rules? No. Is it shitty and something that completely disregards the player behind the other character, their time investment and the creativity and passion and whatever else they have invested? Absolutely.

So... do we want to lessen that? Maybe we should change the rules or code to disallow it. Yes, you will always have someone crowing about how something being changed is going to be a problem. God knows I'm usually the loudest and longest one on that. What is the problem that it will create exactly? That it makes it harder to kill other characters? Is that a bad thing? I don't think it is. And I don't think it necessarily will make it harder, either. It all depends on implementation.

[Dusty Boots]

Yes it should be. It is bad RP. It is also bad rp to autoflee. Both are true. We shouldn't relax on those points.

I think it's bad to autoflee, not no-rp autoflee doesn't result in me losing a character I spent hundreds of hours on, so I don't hold them to the same regard. I do also think people should have proper, personal motivation to kill another character. I don't think "I hate all elves" is a very good justification for pking every elf you come across if you have the chance. But I also have a pretty different perspective because I consider PKs to be a very extreme action, and I know not all people do.

[najdorf]

Yes it should be. It is bad RP. It is also bad rp to autoflee. Both are true. We shouldn't relax on those points.

With that mindset, we will loose half of the player base. I'm always in for practice > theory.

[Halaster]

Yes it should be. It is bad RP. It is also bad rp to autoflee. Both are true. We shouldn't relax on those points.

With that mindset, we will loose half of the player base. I'm always in for practice > theory.

We're straying a bit from the topic of karma, but I'll address this.  I think the goal should always be to RP (via say/emote/etc) in combat.  Before, after, during.  But let's be honest here:  it's hard sometimes to do that when death is on the line.  Particularly for someone in a once-in-a-long-time kind of role.  A templar, or a sorcerer, or some kind of specapp.  Someone playing one of those gets in a situation where they've got the potential to possible lose the character, and maybe never play something like it again for many years?  They're going to make fast decisions to try to save the character, and I can understand that.  I'm not saying it's 100% OK to never RP during a fight, but I think some understanding for those people is in order.

[CirclelessBard]

The fight-or-flight response during CvC (character vs. character) situations would mainly be mitigated by rules of engagement for players to follow in such situations, something which other RPIs have employed throughout the history of the genre and have found their way into other types of RP from MUSHes to GTA5 RP servers, but seemingly never found a place here, despite being suggested many times over the years. For those not familiar with the concept of rules of engagement, they are basically rules that players must follow during CvC situations, such as: not attacking or moving from the room until both parties in a conflict have emoted, not using long-distance attacks without warning the other player that they are being targeted, making sure all combatants are taking turns with their actions, etc.

Though how to RP during deadly situations is somewhat off-topic, I would generally expect players with high karma whose character is an aggressor to, at the very least, understand what they are taking away from the other player and only use killing as an absolute last resort. However, this is the barest of bare minimums. Ensuring consistently good RP when a high-karma character is under attack is going to basically need rules of engagement, I think, especially given the scarcity of high karma roles and a player's desire to not lose access to said role interfering with the actions their character might take - something anyone with empathy would understand is both human nature, but is considered poor roleplaying form per site documentation.

IMO this all falls under these two points I brought up earlier about how to establish greater trust between players:

2) Understanding that in a collaborative story, every player should be given a chance to contribute
3) Understanding that every player believes their character is special and has a place in the game world, and should not be treated as expendable for its own sake

And I think if rules of engagement existed you would definitely see a higher caliber of roleplay from all players, not just high-karma ones. Of course, this all depends on what decline in roleplaying quality staff are witnessing among high-karma players exactly. If it's something else, like not properly adhering to racial or tribal documentation, rules of engagement would obviously not help with that.

[Riev]

I would hope that a player with a high level of karma/trust/PP Points would be the kind of player that has evolved into understanding how to engage in conflict that doesn't start and end with "I can not leave my enemies alive, or they will only serve to come back at me".

I cannot tell you the number of PCs, in game, have told me that or held that mentality. Kill, because otherwise they're a nuisance. There are myriad ways to engage and possibly resolve conflict that isn't murder or maiming. They just take longer, more effort, or some assistance from staff. Many of us (me included) are not willing to sit for 3 weeks on a grudge because there's staff conversation or the aide you're looking to maim is on vacation.

High karma players should have the understanding that engaging with other players should TRY to default to prolonging the scene or the roleplay rather than immediately ending it. Not that killing and murder is verboten, but it should be the last effort of desperate men (or rinthis)

[BadSkeelz]

Armageddon is a large-scale prisoner's dilemma where there are two options for survival: Kill anyone who poses a threat at first opportunity, or check out from the PVP game as best you can entirely. (And it is a PVP game given the number of people whose characters serve merely to act out power fantasies.)

As far as Karma goes, it just marks staff favor towards players who are allowed to play with loaded decks.

[Master Color]

Some context circa 2021

When players saw my sorcerer coming I think maybe 1 in 10 would stick around. I could arrest them with magick but I wasn't about to force anyone to a scene they weren't into.

Maybe about 1/20 would try to no-emote faceroll my sorc. These were always dwarves, half-giants or muls. Tellingly the rp switch would flip right back on again once they wanted to blubber at my pc over The Way.

[Yelinak]

My main issue has always been that there's been a lot of high-karma players who clearly didn't deserve it. That doesn't come from a place of jealousy--I don't deserve high karma, because I've never lived up to the criteria. My accounts (hehe) get the first point and then I don't care enough for clanleading or biting my tongue in the face of unfairness to ever qualify for more. But to see players of high status who routinely twink out, suck at roleplaying, and just don't represent the standard that should be expected of the game's supposedly most exemplary players, that always made me wonder if making an effort and playing by the rules is a sucker's game.

If you can be a total twink and a lazy RPer and still rise to the top of the karma scale, why should I give 110% myself? All you get out of doing that is disadvantages. Training skills in a realistic manner, giving others the benefit of the doubt in PvP, taking the virtual world into account at all times, these things don't exactly help your character. They're disadvantages for you if others get away with ignoring them, and if others get away with ignoring them and still have plenty of karma, it doesn't exactly encourage dogmatic behavior in oneself.

As far as I can tell, karma comes mainly from three sources:
- Playing a clan leader for a long time, and generally playing for a long time. There's a strong element of 'time served' in the karma system, going so far as 'you must have played this long to qualify'
- Being unwaveringly polite and subservient in communication with staff. You largely have to treat them like you treat your boss at work, even if you've been wronged. Never show any sort of temper or defiance
- Organizing events, no matter what they are (no matter how inane and dull), which has an inherent US-centric bias since almost all events in this game take place in a US-exclusive timeslot and the game is nearly dead outside of it as a result

Things I've noticed playing little to no role in karma:
- Making an actual effort to characterize through emotes, writing with effort, having a detectable personality for your character that you actually adhere to even when it's disadvantageous, etc.
- A realistic approach to the coded systems. Skill-grinding, twinking, insta-attacking in PvP, people routinely get away with these and complaints about it are futile. The rules are so lenient when it comes to this, or at least enforcement of them
- Going out of your way to include as many players in your roleplay as reasonably possible. This game can be very cliquish and exclusive, and reaching out does not appear to garner any sort of recognition for one's efforts, nor do insular habits appear to be discouraged

I've always wished that Armageddon was a game where just pouring your heart and soul into your character could be enough, not necessarily for the top echelons of the reward system, but at least reasonably recognized--and a game where those who don't do that are not put into that top echelon. But it has never been that, so I've always felt like I could have been a much better player myself if it wasn't for the fact that I was up against the disadvantages that come with playing fair; a disadvantage that other players evaded by not playing fair and somehow still got to enjoy the perks of high karma. It made me never want to strive for excellence, because it felt like the system didn't acknowledge the attempt, it just acknowledged not rocking the boat and not expressing dissent, and doing manual labor for the game in the form of being Sergeant Whatshisface or Agent Whoever for x months, even if I did fuck-all with the character. Just filling the position seemed enough.

[Usiku]

- Organizing events, no matter what they are (no matter how inane and dull), which has an inherent US-centric bias since almost all events in this game take place in a US-exclusive timeslot and the game is nearly dead outside of it as a result

We are routinely at 30-40 players at 3pm ST these days, by the way. US exclusivity is becoming less of a thing.

[strangerdanger]

Things I've noticed playing little to no role in karma:
- Making an actual effort to characterize through emotes, writing with effort, having a detectable personality for your character that you actually adhere to even when it's disadvantageous, etc.
- A realistic approach to the coded systems. Skill-grinding, twinking, insta-attacking in PvP, people routinely get away with these and complaints about it are futile. The rules are so lenient when it comes to this, or at least enforcement of them
- Going out of your way to include as many players in your roleplay as reasonably possible. This game can be very cliquish and exclusive, and reaching out does not appear to garner any sort of recognition for one's efforts, nor do insular habits appear to be discouraged

Unless you consider being tactful in communication as subservient, this is how I received most if not all of my karma. Aside from the one hilariously botched and abandoned templar, I have (almost) never played leadership or organized anything worth a shit. My one sorc RPT'd a raid on the Oashi vineyard and it was a total shitshow.

Most of my ~85 characters have made very little impact on the world, I don't write particularly compelling characters, and I pretty often wonder if I'm just playing some different shade of myself. I'm not a great roleplayer.

I do make an honest attempt at all of that quotes shit as often as possible. I consider theme 100% of the time, I read documentation, and I try to illustrate the world in a way that feels like Zalanthas. That's kinda it as far as I can tell; all of my karmas have come from just being a responsible player that respects the game.

I guess if I were to give input on karma and what I want out of it: strip out all the shit except ability to interpret the world as built and play within that framework.

[digitaleak]

If staff find a way to allocate more of their time to working with their clans, I imagine more players who aren't playing leadership roles would get recognition. If finding a new way to work karma opens up their time, then that can only mean good things for the game imo.

[Tuannon]

@Usiku Have you got your data?

[Usiku]

@Usiku Have you got your data?

We have been discussing in the background and trying to design a proposal in tandem with this discussion. With elements of the conversation here impacting that as well as causing side discussions about other issues. I imagine that this has probably run its course and that most of the folks with viewpoints to express have expressed them but we shall see. Now we're trying to put something together that we can all agree on.