2023 Karma Revamp Discussion

[Coda]

...I got curious, because what staff is outlining is strange when compared to any LARP management system that I've ever heard of or experienced.  It's instructive as an additional example of LARP rulesets.

I also went and found this - https://www.modernenigmasociety.org/prestige/

The Prestige System, so let's take it point by point.

•    The reward used by the MES is known as the Prestige system, a point-based method that tracks a member's activities within the club and their participation in club-sanctioned charities.

•    Broken into three levels (General, Regional, and National), the value of the reward is often based on time contributed, dollars spent, or a set amount based upon fulfilled activities.

•    Prestige itself is awarded by Coordinators within the organization, dependent on the level of the task.  For example, assisting a Regional Storyteller may award you Regional level Prestige, whereas publishing a local newsletter may award you General level Prestige.

•    To be rewarded with Prestige, at the end of each month, you will need to submit your Prestige Log to your direct Coordinator, and they will review the log and award you the General Prestige that you may have earned that month.

•    Ultimately, it is each member's individual responsibility to keep up with their Prestige Log, and to have the ability to demonstrate proof of receipt of their award, so putting in links to any Reports which include the award will always prove helpful down the line.

This looks like a player-handled system that is reported monthly with communication between local STs and players that is awarded for contributing seemingly mostly in OOC ways, including financial remuneration, creating newsletters, and other similar things.  It doesn't mention roleplay once, is player managed, and is handled by a player-written log being presented to a local, likely personally known, ST in a conversation that allows them to grant a player Prestige within the system.  This is nothing like the proposed system staff is suggesting.

It also sounds like MES has a very different ST to player ratio, and a very different relationship between player and ST.  All these factors change the nature of the system used in the LARP, albeit not more than 'pay money or write a newsletter to earn the equivalent of karma' already does.

You're right, a person who abuses half-giants could go on to abuse dwarves, or ruks, or whatever else.  They would continue to lose access or, if it became clear that they were a problem player, they'd have a chat with staff about their behavior and/or be banned depending on the nature of the abuse.

So, let's look at the feasibility of this system you're describing. How do you determine what's open to a player? Do you use some sort of ranking system? How do you determine when it's time to rank someone down? Does this go on top of the current system? Is this feasible in code as we have now? What do you believe warrants restriction from a role?

No, a person-to-person conversation with a potential problem player about what they're doing wrong and why it's not ok, as I suggested, is about as far from [bureaucratic] as a system can be.

I'm a-ok with you finding the system a reasonable compromise, I don't mind that and have no issue with you, I just don't see it that way.  I am bringing up issues that I see, and laying them out for others to engage with in the hopes that staff will see this and change course, because there are clear and obvious issues.  You seem to have chosen me as some sort of boogeyman who you simply cannot stop quoting and posting at.

No, you see, you keep posting the same argument over and over again, and I keep posting the same counter over and over again. My counter relies statements from the people who have experience in the system, the staffers. Your idea relies on a reaction to a change in the status quo, and claimed prior authoritativeness on the issue. Here's the thing, the bulk of your claim is that this will create more work. The bulk of mine, is that the people with actual experience have stated that your claim is not actually true in this case.

Look, you may or may not, I'm not contesting it, have experience making these kinds of policy changes in workplace, or institutional environments. We're not institutional. We're a bunch of idiots playing a text game myself included.

Armageddon is an institution.  The fact that it's a silly 90's era text game doesn't change the fact that we're people interacting in a society or organization founded for a social purpose. 

The 'people with actual experience' do not necessarily have experience in this area.  That's why I, as a community member with experience in this area, have spoken up.  To help them because I want the game to do well, because I enjoy the game.  That's the root of why I'm writing the equivalent of a short novel about my opinions on the OOC management of the reward system of a silly 90's era text game. 

Also because I have too much free time on my hands, clearly.

Staff are human, staff can make mistakes.  This is quite literally reverting to a system that was deemed unworkable and staff-time heavy as a solution to a system that they deem unworkable and staff-time heavy, except with a new cast who didn't (as staff) experience the issues that pushed them to the current system instead.  It's why I asked if staff would be willing to talk to someone with actual experience about how to manage the shift, and adjust the fifty-four-metric system into something more reasonable in one of my earlier posts.

edit: I just want to say, stepping back, that it's really amusing to me that I'm posting this much about a text game.  I just can't avoid being a Cassandra when I see an issue.  I really hope staff take the voice of the majority of the playerbase into account, rather than just the people that agree with them.

I'm similar once I get stuck on an issue I get stuck on it. I'm hoping staff agrees with the future personally.

Because,

That poll is not the bulk of the playerbase. The bulk of the playerbase did not vote in that poll. Likely, about 40% did. Even then, those 40% are thinking with present knowledge, and not on the benefits this will bring to newer players. Which sticking to the current status quo, or altering it in a way without changing the lack of granularity will not provide.

Polls aren't perfect, but they tend to be at least somewhat representative.  If there's no point in polls, they should be disabled on these sorts of issues.

We disagree.  I made my points and hope staff read them and take them to heart. 

You were also posting. I hope they read those too, and take to heart that this is a community that cares about the game, and wants it to succeed.  My random throwaway 'even this system would be better' isn't the end all be all, it was meant to show that you can have what they say they want (an easier way to manage who has access to what) without suddenly inventing a fifty-four bullet point system that is set up to absolutely, without fail, cause a proliferation of staff complaints, argumentative responses to karma docks, and hurt feelings.  All of which will detract from what everyone, staff and players alike, want staff to do:  Play the world, and tell fun, nerdy stories with us.

[Edited by Moderator]

[RheaGhe]

...Prestige system has different criteria but is... Or was at the time I played, ultimately an example of the same thing. Trust. It is a metric of how much the organization, or group TRUSTS you to be be controlled and understand your actions. There was at the times, caps on Member Class. And each venue, had different charts akin to the one Mansa posted, of what you could play per memberclass. With rarer, or more difficult to RP things increasing in rank requirements.

The games I played in, you had a Local Story Teller, A Domain Story Teller, and a Regional Storyteller, who then took advice and orders from a national/international storyteller. It had a VERY similar staff layout. And a very similar outlook. And staffing numbers on a regional level. With the one difference being the equivalency of a coordinator branch instead of a builder/coder branch.

[Edited by Moderator]

[Coda]

I just really have my doubts about staff noticing and analyzing everyone's play to the extent that this new checklist requires. The burden of staff attentiveness has increased substantially. Thus far, currently and in the past, it has not been my impression that staff maintains enough oversight and scrutiny of individual players to make such a formulaic karma process work. I think indies, off-peakers, and generally anyone who isn't playing a high-profile role is liable to fall through the cracks.

It's an understandable concern. The new system allows any staff member to use any of fifty four different parameters to remove  karma at any time. It also allows them to spin those same fifty four different parameters into giving you karma.

What it doesn't do, however, is engage them with the playerbase. It will remain easy to fall through rhe cracks, and the additional burden of fielding the uptick in staff complaints from the more fluid nature of karma will almost certainly exacerbate rather than solve the issue.

I'm pretty bummed about it, and I've had max karma in every system that's existed and have played many, many sponsored roles.

[Kestria]

Self edited and retracted.

[Usiku]

I'm getting confused between the two threads, so I'm just going to put all of this here!  [I merged this post into this thread - Moderator]

I'm not sure how clear it is from the player side, but players are constantly coming and going from the game. This is not a static player base of exactly 150 people and if we make this change 20 of them will walk out and never come back and we will be at 130. That just isn't how it goes.

We also have a bigger picture vision for the game. You may not think we are listening because we not behaving reactively to what you are saying right now, but we have been actively listening to what you have been saying for the last three years and now we are beginning to implement plans to try and shift the game in the direction of what the majority player base has been asking for over that time. In the past 4 days 3 veteran players have returned who haven't played for months to years.

Ultimately, we lose players year on year. If we make no changes at all we will lose players. If we continue at the same rate that has been shown over the last decade then the game will only have a small handful of years left before it's unplayable. The only option we have now is to make changes and try to make the right ones. Our focus has to be on attracting and retaining new players. It has to be on attracting and retaining the right kind of new players from the right communities. If we want this game to continue to be an RPI, then we have to make sure that when roleplay loving new players show up, they find an environment they want to role play in, that they find a community they want to be part of, that they find a game that works for them.

We need to make changes with confidence and we need to keep moving forward. Everything we are doing is to try and make sure this game and this community survives. I am all over those player numbers and I know it's scary. But the people clicking the, "If you don't do what I want (nothing) I will quit and never play again" button are doing us the most harm. They are trying to force us into a corner where will never be able to do anything except slowly wither away until there is nothing left. The game cannot be held hostage by people who threaten to quit over every change they don't like. The overall game design and direction cannot be led by who shouts the loudest. That would not be a cohesive plan of action to lead us to a place we need to be. Any big change we make is going to be hard to swallow for some players (probably different players each time). But if we want this game to survive, and even thrive, then we need big changes.

I hear you when you say some insight into our long term vision would help, we will knock heads and try to finalise the mission statement that somewhat stalled.

@Krath - Yes, there are over-arching plots which allow players to have world changing impacts on the future. There are currently two 'world' plots, with another that is a little on the back burner now. We also have smaller, more localised plots that have been expanded by player action into more world level plots. Should we by hyping up plots outside of the game? How? How much detail is right?

@dumbstruck - You're a veteran player. You have a vast amount of knowledge about this game. You are an experienced and talented role player. I have no doubt, looking at the list of criteria, that you would probably tick off a bunch of them in your sleep. The reason your karma is currently limited is because we are beholden to the old and extremely slow system. If anything the new system should get you where you want to be much faster. You currently have access to Illusion via spec app. You will have access to Illusion via spec app under the new system once we review, I am 100% certain. Also, you are here, playing the game, being awesome, being part of the community. Trust and the chance to turn over a new leaf goes both ways.

@Coda - That statement is offensive to Cassandras everywhere!

[Coda]

I'm not sure how clear it is from the player side, but players are constantly coming and going from the game. This is not a static player base of exactly 150 people and if we make this change 20 of them will walk out and never come back and we will be at 130. That just isn't how it goes.

We also have a bigger picture vision for the game. You may not think we are listening because we not behaving reactively to what you are saying right now, but we have been actively listening to what you have been saying for the last three years and now we are beginning to implement plans to try and shift the game in the direction of what the majority player base has been asking for over that time. In the past 4 days 3 veteran players have returned who haven't played for months to years.

Ultimately, we lose players year on year. If we make no changes at all we will lose players. If we continue at the same rate that has been shown over the last decade then the game will only have a small handful of years left before it's unplayable. The only option we have now is to make changes and try to make the right ones. Our focus has to be on attracting and retaining new players. It has to be on attracting and retaining the right kind of new players from the right communities. If we want this game to continue to be an RPI, then we have to make sure that when roleplay loving new players show up, they find an environment they want to role play in, that they find a community they want to be part of, that they find a game that works for them.

That's fine.  The players posting, voting, and being vocal are your long-time core base.  That you're patently refusing to listen to them is.. distressing.  It is what it is, but I had hope that things would be better, not more of the same.  Guess we'll keep losing people regularly and hoping we have enough replacements to keep a game worth playing, which is how you described things unless I'm misreading?

We need to make changes with confidence and we need to keep moving forward. Everything we are doing is to try and make sure this game and this community survives. I am all over those player numbers and I know it's scary. But the people clicking the, "If you don't do what I want (nothing) I will quit and never play again" button are doing us the most harm. They are trying to force us into a corner where will never be able to do anything except slowly wither away until there is nothing left. The game cannot be held hostage by people who threaten to quit over every change they don't like. The overall game design and direction cannot be led by who shouts the loudest. That would not be a cohesive plan of action to lead us to a place we need to be. Any big change we make is going to be hard to swallow for some players (probably different players each time). But if we want this game to survive, and even thrive, then we need big changes.

We do need big changes.  But we need big changes handled well, not.. this.  There doesn't seem to be any derailing this train, so I continue to post pointlessly against a ridiculous top-down decision that makes little to no sense when you compare what you're doing with your stated goals.  But I don't currently have a staff avatar, so my voice doesn't count unless it's voicing agreement.  That sucks.

I hear you when you say some insight into our long term vision would help, we will knock heads and try to finalise the mission statement that somewhat stalled.

@Krath - Yes, there are over-arching plots which allow players to have world changing impacts on the future. There are currently two 'world' plots, with another that is a little on the back burner now. We also have smaller, more localised plots that have been expanded by player action into more world level plots. Should we by hyping up plots outside of the game? How? How much detail is right?

@dumbstruck - You're a veteran player. You have a vast amount of knowledge about this game. You are an experienced and talented role player. I have no doubt, looking at the list of criteria, that you would probably tick off a bunch of them in your sleep. The reason your karma is currently limited is because we are beholden to the old and extremely slow system. If anything the new system should get you where you want to be much faster. You currently have access to Illusion via spec app. You will have access to Illusion via spec app under the new system once we review, I am 100% certain. Also, you are here, playing the game, being awesome, being part of the community. Trust and the chance to turn over a new leaf goes both ways.

@Coda - That statement is offensive to Cassandras everywhere!

Repeatedly announcing warnings of danger that are going unheeded by the stubborn leadership above me.  Can't get much more Cassandra.

Please, slow your roll.  Take a breath.  Engage with the community of which you are a member.  We want a good, fun game too, even those of us who are currently disagreeing with you.

[Edited by Moderator]

[RheaGhe]

CLIPPING THIS FOR LENGTH

In response to this. Basically all I have to say is that was masterfully delivered. Usiku and I have had a near shouting match(Kidding... Or am I?) over the English language before. And even then, I can basically back up everything they said.

Hell I might be one of the veterans coming back they are talking about(Probably not...)

This system is better for newer players. And even if you look at it from a staff burden perspective. If that is what it takes for the game to continue existence as an RPI, which is presumably what staff wants. Then they may have to carry some of the load. Just as we will have too as well. To be examples to others.

I sent a message to Halaster privately the other day... And I think I'm going to adapt part of it to this.

I told him, a lesser person would have ghosted. But he was still attempting to do the right thing for the game. Even as he was so burnt out.

Instead here, I'll say this. Lesser -games- would fade. Lesser games would cling to their old ideals.  Staff seem to be attempting to do the right thing for the future of the game. Yes, there may be stumbles. Yes there may be roadblocks. But a lesser game would fade. A greater game takes action to ensure it does not.

[mansa]

I've done too much edited to remove snipes between various posters, but I believe I have kept the core of the discussion points from the community members.



Do keep these questions in mind:
What am I trying to accomplish by arguing/discussing with another member of the community?

Am I trying to convince someone to change their mind?  Or am I letting them come to the conclusions themselves and letting them change their own mind?  Am I giving them enough time to think about it?

Is that member of the community even acceptable to any argument, or do they just want to vent their frustrations?
(aka - "How to talk with my significant other -> Do they want me to solve their problem, or Do they want me just to be emphatic and listen to their problem?")

[betweenford]

The other thread is currently unaccessible due to moderation but I just want to say that the two vivaduan subclasses Healer and Creation being on the same level for karma is really weird to me.

Healer is genuinely the weakest built Vivaduan subclass, and has alot of very very very very niche spells. Creation and Corruption have the ball very much in their court when it comes to potentially killing someone, causing massive amounts of damage, and being potentially threatening.

I would also argue that Creation is a better "combat healer" archetype than Healer itself.

[seltzer]

Also, something our current system was lacking was really any expectation for any standard of RP beyond the very very basic. The RP point is awarded very early usually, for staying in character, for using emotes and so on. This player understands the basic concept of role playing. That is it. So if we get repeated complaints or observe, for example, that a very experienced player is failing to account for the virtual population around them? We absolutely expect our top karma players to do that. Why? We didn't give karma for that. So we can't take away karma for that. We can talk to them, but if nothing changes we still can't really do anything.

The current system does not really allow for us to remove karma at all, not in a way that is fair or in a way that could be fairly applied to all players. The current system has absolutely no guidelines or mechanic that we can follow in order to do this. We were fairly hamstrung. Now, we don't particularly want to take away karma, in fact we rather dislike it, but we had reached a point where a *lot* of players have 3 karma, not all of them were behaving well or representing the game the way players expected, and we were facing an awful lot of backlash from the player base about 'allowing' these things to happen.

Allowing karma to be removed in a way that is fair, easier and less impactful/dramatic was one of the requirements that needed to be met by the new system. It should be a fairly minor and easily reversible thing to go from 7 to 6 or 8 to 7 and so on.

This thought is a little stale, since the thread got locked during my original reply, BUT-

Could staff either manually or automate a system that forwards account notes/karmic adjustments to the player in question? So many of these things are hidden behind an opaque layer that I'm not convinced needs to exist.

My last request for account notes was 7/29/20 or 29/7/20 if you're weird. God only knows what evil shit has ended up there in between then and now. I'm on my 24th character since then.

Whether everyone on staff intercom thinks I'm bad or good, I would love to have some sort of feedback, even if indirect in the form of a notification. I've had wants_rp_feedback or wtf ever the flag is on my account almost since its inception and it's extremely rare that any is received. Some idea of thoughts about play or comments about where I stand would go so far toward having something to orient myself to. From my perspective that could be something like "keep doing this", "stop doing this", or "adjust this in some way".

I'm all for a push and pull of karma adjustment but I want to feel like I'm being given a bit more agency in it, with the ability to play proactively in a direction.

[Usiku]

The other thread is currently unaccessible due to moderation but I just want to say that the two vivaduan subclasses Healer and Creation being on the same level for karma is really weird to me.

Healer is genuinely the weakest built Vivaduan subclass, and has alot of very very very very niche spells. Creation and Corruption have the ball very much in their court when it comes to potentially killing someone, causing massive amounts of damage, and being potentially threatening.

I would also argue that Creation is a better "combat healer" archetype than Healer itself.

This has been updated in the original thread.

[Brytta Léofa]

You may not think we are listening because we not behaving reactively to what you are saying right now, but we have been actively listening to what you have been saying for the last three years and now we are beginning to implement plans to try and shift the game in the direction of what the majority player base has been asking for over that time. ... We need to make changes with confidence and we need to keep moving forward. Everything we are doing is to try and make sure this game and this community survives. I am all over those player numbers and I know it's scary. But the people clicking the, "If you don't do what I want (nothing) I will quit and never play again" button are doing us the most harm. They are trying to force us into a corner where will never be able to do anything except slowly wither away until there is nothing left. The game cannot be held hostage by people who threaten to quit over every change they don't like. The overall game design and direction cannot be led by who shouts the loudest. That would not be a cohesive plan of action to lead us to a place we need to be. Any big change we make is going to be hard to swallow for some players (probably different players each time). But if we want this game to survive, and even thrive, then we need big changes.

Good post, 'siku, thank you for this.

It took me half of forever to get max karma. I'm scared that I may not get it under the new system. I may not deserve max karma. (I don't think the new system is perfect...I'd like to see max karma possible without ticking every last box.) And, look, taking away toys was guaranteed to cause an outcry.

But what I really care about is Armageddon continuing to exist, the health of the community improving, and the quality of the game increasing. I'm not gonna ragequit because some things get switched around.

[Coda]

This has been updated in the original thread.

Do you intend to address any of the issues that have been brought up, or are we posting into the void?

Good post, 'siku, thank you for this.

It took me half of forever to get max karma. I'm scared that I may not get it under the new system. I may not deserve max karma. (I don't think the new system is perfect...I'd like to see max karma possible without ticking every last box.) And, look, taking away toys was guaranteed to cause an outcry.

But what I really care about is Armageddon continuing to exist, the health of the community improving, and the quality of the game increasing. I'm not gonna ragequit because some things get switched around.

I don't think anyone is ragequitting because some things are getting switched around.  I think some people are simply stating that if staff goes forward with a plan for the community that they don't agree with, they'll choose to do something else with their time.  Part of managing and being part of a community is participating in that community.  Handing down a fifty four parameter system for managing your ability to be allowed to pretend to be a certain kind of elf wizard from on high isn't really doing that.  So people may end up choosing to do other things with their time.  It's unfair to the people making that choice to paint it as a 'ragequit', and it dismisses the, valid, concerns that have been brought up.

I think you brought up a great point here, and it's one I've been trying to wrestle an answer out of staff for:

taking away toys was guaranteed to cause an outcry.

Karma will become more fluid.  People are going to get upset if they lose karma because an ST saw them spamcrafting.  When they raise the issue, it will require staff time to read and address it.  To pull logs.  To communicate with the Player Council about the Staff Complaint.  It's a system that, at it's core, is practically guaranteed to add an enormous amount of overhead to staff's time.


The main point of karma being more fluid isn't bad, nor is raising non-human races to 1k - I like the idea of what they want, and I've long advocated for non-human races to be 1k.  I, and a little over half the polled playerbase, just see some very obvious issues with how they're doing it.  And thus far, staff hasn't really addressed the concerns, except to wave their hands and state that this will save time.  And that's at odds with Usiku's prior statements about openness, communication, and collaboration.

I know staff put effort and time into designing this system.  I want to be sure it works the way they want it to.

[betweenford]

The other thread is currently unaccessible due to moderation but I just want to say that the two vivaduan subclasses Healer and Creation being on the same level for karma is really weird to me.

Healer is genuinely the weakest built Vivaduan subclass, and has alot of very very very very niche spells. Creation and Corruption have the ball very much in their court when it comes to potentially killing someone, causing massive amounts of damage, and being potentially threatening.

I would also argue that Creation is a better "combat healer" archetype than Healer itself.

This has been updated in the original thread.

Nice. I see the change. Alot of those creation type subs are on that same level of danger IMO due to those... shared-or-similar spells that can't quite be mentioned here. Heh.

[mansa]

Karma will become more fluid.  People are going to get upset if they lose karma because an ST saw them spamcrafting.  When they raise the issue, it will require staff time to read and address it.  To pull logs.  To communicate with the Player Council about the Staff Complaint.  It's a system that, at it's core, is practically guaranteed to add an enormous amount of overhead to staff's time.

You need to make this bolded and larger, as it is also one of my worries.  It's not the -adding- of karma that is my worry, either, but specifically the removal.


How can we systemically and culturally change so that removing karma / receiving punishment / getting spanked isn't as anger inducing as it currently is.  The removal of karma is one area that I don't think is fleshed out enough in the current revamp.

[Armaddict]

How can we systemically and culturally change so that removing karma / receiving punishment / getting spanked isn't as anger inducing as it currently is.  The removal of karma is one area that I don't think is fleshed out enough in the current revamp.

This was my major deal.  I believe the criteria and setup are going to lead to it in the beginning (i.e. I have done the things you asked, I should have this thing, when staff are in a different boat about that thing and how it's done; again, a lot of these things are subjective on staff's part, and right out of the gates you're going to have a flood of people going to 're-earn' the roles they lost and progress along the karma ladder), with a general loss of trust that the system is as reliable as people 'were told it would be in this thread', and then when people who DO get karma still seeing it removed for whatever reason, it will drive the nail into that discussion.

In order to achieve the culture you're talking about you have to do what I've beent alking about:
1) Make it clear that karma is not a personal reward system, otherwise it is a personal attack/pat on the head with every bit of it, since you will be 'attacking' someone's roleplay, a creative outlet, a game, which people take pretty seriously.  You may as well criticize their writing altogether, or their storytelling, or their voice.  Then, after that clearness is made, don't treat it like a reward system either or it's just false pretense and basis of distrust.

2) You don't need to remove criterion.  You need to acknowledge openly and candidly that these are subjective terms that have less of a personal report card and more of a judgment call on whether any certain player's usage at any certain time has something to contribute as a role in the game.  Rather than things being a punishment or slap, removal of karma is addressed as a limited space factor where you are not currently prime in that space, so removal is less about you, and more about someone else doing really great.

3) Rebuild the ability to say 'No' freely, openly, and without hesitation on karma-based apps whether made with karma through chargen or submitted as a special application. Remove the limit on special applications, but let someone know if they're spamming them too much (i.e. You sent this in last week, please wait longer or we'll have to ignore your special apps for awhile).  The playerbase needs to lose the idea that Karma is just...'Now I can spam this thing' and know it's still subject to what the condition of the game is.

[Pariah]

One of the things I think needs to taken into account with Karma is special classes.

We all know that Muls and Half-Giants have raw power, the ability to PK super easy with their hit you once and knock you out ability etc.

But the thing I think that's always been "lost" in the Karma conversation is that say you play well, you get yourself up to Void Elementalist stuff, you then play it and have no idea what half of it does outside of help spell thing.  Some spells have incredible nuance to them that you simply won't know about till you're in the trenches playing the mage.

So while you might get there from your thinks, feels, RP etc.  Sometimes you're just gonna wild out with spells because you simply don't know what they do.  So while I see some people saying things similar to, If you got the karma for a void and play it badly you knew better.  No, you most definitely didn't all the time.

[dumbstruck]

One of the things I think needs to taken into account with Karma is special classes.

...

Sometimes you're just gonna wild out with spells because you simply don't know what they do.  So while I see some people saying things similar to, If you got the karma for a void and play it badly you knew better.  No, you most definitely didn't all the time.

I can save you bad experiences in the future with magickers. Not all of them. But some of them. Don't "practice" what 'help spell spellname' even hints are damaging or offensive on other pcs.

I don't... understand why anyone would do that to start with, but not doing it in the future is going to make the future better.

You don't need a special outside warning. You will accidentally hurt someone practicing nukes with them. That's why people don't do it more (or have hidden it from me so well for a decade and a half that I don't and haven't seen it).

It might not help other issues, but it can help the one.

@Usiku I hear you. I think actions speak louder than words. I hope you will note (inwardly) my actions after seeing your response when you last targetted in thread (hint, I'm a mess and there's a request).

[Coda]

Karma will become more fluid.  People are going to get upset if they lose karma because an ST saw them spamcrafting.  When they raise the issue, it will require staff time to read and address it.  To pull logs.  To communicate with the Player Council about the Staff Complaint.  It's a system that, at it's core, is practically guaranteed to add an enormous amount of overhead to staff's time.

You need to make this bolded and larger, as it is also one of my worries.  It's not the -adding- of karma that is my worry, either, but specifically the removal.


How can we systemically and culturally change so that removing karma / receiving punishment / getting spanked isn't as anger inducing as it currently is.  The removal of karma is one area that I don't think is fleshed out enough in the current revamp.

I keep trying, I've posted it like three or four times now. It's why I'd really like staff to like... talk to someone experienced in change management about how to make this change. Not even specifically me! Anyone!

Armaddict made a bunch of great points too, but I'm phone posting and lazy.

Removal of karma is basically them saying 'hey you did it wrong' and from the amount of moderation you've had to do on this topic alone, it's clear how people handle even very mild disagreement like posting an opinion that doesn't conform to theirs.

Removing karma is that plus a direct statement that your creative input is wrong, bad, or a negative influence on the game. Nobody wants to hear that.

It's why I think having a person to person chat would go a very long way toward making the system more functional. You can't legislate your way out of the negative feelings that arise from what is, essentially, a critique of someone's creative hobby.

If we want to shift the culture away from karma loss being Bad, we need to shift the culture away from Pronouncements From On High. It's an issue with the staff, it's an issue with the Moderators. It's why my constant refrain is: just be a part of the community, we're all trying, we're all here to tell nerdy stories. Let's be friends and chat and get to know each other.

That's the missing link imo.

[Krath]

I keep trying, I've posted it like three or four times now. It's why I'd really like staff to like... talk to someone experienced in change management about how to make this change. Not even specifically me! Anyone!

It has been offered, by several people, and not taken up on.

[Pariah]

If I had to guess, they are probably going back and forth on the immortal side of things way more then engaging us currently.

I wish they would be more open, but I'd say it's fair to say historically this game just is "Staff decides something among staff and they do it." It's sorta hinted at in Brokkr's post too.

We recognize that significant changes are often controversial, and while there's a possibility for minor modifications, we plan to implement this system soon. We'll conduct a review every six months for the next year and a half to evaluate the impact and make any necessary adjustments.

Basically, we are doing it no matter what is how I read that.  Which in a way I can respect as I'm very much a "Fuck ya feelings" type of guy.  But, I would also say that staff is more open to feedback and since this is almost all BAD feedback, maybe they will put a pin it it?  Who knows but them.

[Usiku]

I keep trying.

You have absolutely inundated both threads with just way too much to pick through, and most of it is just back and forth fighting with other players which I am not following, sorry. This is the chat. If you think you have ideas for actual, implementable, actionable solutions then just say them clearly right here. Not what won't work. Not what is wrong with our system design. But what you think will work. Keeping in mind the requirements and what we are trying to achieve.

[Coda]

I keep trying.

You have absolutely inundated both threads with just way too much to pick through, and most of it is just back and forth fighting with other players which I am not following, sorry. This is the chat. If you think you have ideas for actual, implementable, actionable solutions then just say them clearly right here. Not what won't work. Not what is wrong with our system design. But what you think will work. Keeping in mind the requirements and what we are trying to achieve.

That's not what a chat is, it requires an actual dialogue because it's a complex system. Also, a good chat wouldn't start off with you furious that I posted my thoughts.

But I'll write something up and throw it in the thread, sure. I'll quote you again when I do. From the framing, response, and inability to acknowledge concerns voiced and held by everyone from mansa to me, I don't have a lot of incentive to put a ton of effort into it. But I'll do my best.

[Master Color]

I would have suggested making sure there were a few extras on the table to get people excited about. If you take away one goodie, you could try to find ways to offer others.

There should be karma options for wild talents, boosted guilds, options to start with literacy, options to start with coins, cool armor and metal items. All of those would be amazing and imho fairly easy to automate.

[Usiku]

I have listened to, acknowledged and addressed a lot of concerns in the replies I have given over the last few days as well as during discussions on the IDB. We have also edited and changed the proposal a few times now and are still working on a few more tweaks based on player feedback from this thread and the Discord discussions.