Question for y'all

[EvilRoeSlade]

Don't start mutating karma into something it wasn't meant to do unless you revamp it as a whole.

Why not?  Just because the karma system was originally intended for a different purpose than this, doesn't mean it can't be adapted to a new purpose.

My proposal (my second one mind you, not even I like my first proposal), in my opinion is better than limiting it to special application.  The special application process is time-consuming and very intimidating.  I've never done it, and I want to avoid doing it if at all possible.

I'm sure there are other players that don't want to use the special application process.  Hell, they've posted on this board.  So why not create a system that allows for giving them an invitation of sorts to play with an option they might not have the audacity to ask for?

[Callisto]

Notice my amendment.  Just do it for sorceror, nilazi, mindbender.  It wouldn't effect someone like you at all.

I guess I didn't.

That would be a good solution though.

[EvilRoeSlade]

I'm trying to avoid a system that requires a coder changing the current account system.

Consider this.  My proposal doesn't need a change in code.  Sanvean, you could just instruct your staff to remove the karma option for sorceror, nilazi, and psionicist every time they approved such an application.

[Cenghiz]

Or.... They're with high karma, aren't they? That means they have huge respect to the game environment and other players. Maybe just asking them to play other roles next time would be enough. They're the trusted ones. Probably they'll do what you told them to.
I don't think a player with high karma would ignore this. No coded reigns needed for them. They've proven themselves.

[EvilRoeSlade]

Sanvean already said that asking them to play other roles has failed.

[Travel Cake]

Then perhaps limit it to sorceror, psionicist, and void elementalist.

Those Karma options would be designated as one use only.  For example, if you have void elementalist karma and then play a void elementalist, then you no longer have void elementalist karma.  You have to wait until a staff member decides to give it to you again.  A special application would effectively be an appeal to get this temporary karma.

I like that idea.

[Travel Cake]

That'd kind of suck, in much the same way Hitler was kind of a jerk, ERS.

Some of us don't see a lot of karma action as it is, if we lose our karma every time we want to play something other then the standard options, we are going to end up with a desert elf every couple of years, nevermind something higher.

I think he meant only those three karma classes, not the whole system.

[samsara]

Consider this. My proposal doesn't need a change in code. Sanvean, you could just instruct your staff to remove the karma option for sorceror, nilazi, and psionicist every time they approved such an application.

How would this be different from special apps. The only way they'll get the option back is to special app and have an immortal add the option back. Unless what you really mean is that an immortal drops their karma to below that classes level when they get approved which means they need to earn more karma before the option appears again. Which I disagree with because this karma isn't removed because they've done something untrustworthy. Which would blur the meaning of karma, how it's earned,  and how it's lost.

*edit*
Ah reading your last post may have shed some light on me understanding what you were saying. So you can earn it by karma the first time you play it, then special app if you ever want to play it again.

[John]

I don't want to create a system that adds to the overall workload, i.e. requires that staff spend much time tracking who played a void elementalist and how many characters ago it was. Similarly, I'm trying to avoid a system that requires a coder changing the current account system.

Then I'd suggest making it through the special app process along with dishing out the Karma level. You'd still need a *approved by <Imm name>* at the start of any (Void/Sorc/Psionist) backgrounds, but it would still be a good gauge for players to determine how suitable the staff think they would be in such a role.

I can understand Ex-Staff would resent having to special app those roles, considering they were trusted enough to be staff, in theory they should be trusted enough to not need to special app once they leave their staff position. But I can't see any way to get around that.

[jhunter]

Quote:
I'm confused, are you saying that if someone special apps one of these classes that they will be turned down because someone else who has the karma to do it on their own is currently playing one?


That's it exactly. We try not to have 50+ sorcerers running around at any given time. As far as muls go - those I'm not so concerned about, since I'm comfortable with a substantially larger number of muls in the game than I am, for example, psis.

I don't want to create a system that adds to the overall workload, i.e. requires that staff spend much time tracking who played a void elementalist and how many characters ago it was. Similarly, I'm trying to avoid a system that requires a coder changing the current account system.

I know that the current special app process is slow - so if we did this, we'd need to figure out a way to get a quicker turnaround, in that case. (imo)

So let me see...the karma system was put in place to only allow those who've shown they can handle such roles play them...and to limit the number of those in the game, is that correct?

Seems to me that allowing people to special app roles they do not have the karma to play goes entirely against that system that was put in place.

I say, just make special apps for roles the player doesn't have the karma for off limits.


The way it is now...people special app roles they don't have the karma for and sometimes get it, allowing them to get around the karma system that was put in place.

[Quirk]

It would seem to me that if there is a particular small group of players with high karma who're taking advantage of their karma to monopolise the high-karma guilds, they are the problem and they should surely be penalised rather than those who handle their karma responsibly? I have to confess that having finally reached a karma level where this would affect me, I'd be saddened to have to put in a special app each time I wanted to play a certain class (that has admittedly only recently become available to me). I've not had the best of experiences in getting special apps returned swiftly or indeed at all, though admittedly I've apped very rarely, and I know others who are similarly loath to app often. In the end, the roles will end up going to those who have the temerity and the patience to keep sending in special applications and be kept out of the hands of those who only play what they have karma for, even if they have quite a lot of karma.

Karma is, I'd assume, there for a reason. It's obviously desirable to have the roles most damaging if abused in the hands of those who have proven themselves not to be abusive. Given this, it would seem logical that an app by someone with karma, assuming it's distributed well, would be a far safer bet than a special app from someone who has yet to prove themselves. However, if people who have that trust make only high-karma characters, and keep making only high-karma characters after being asked politely to branch out further, it would seem to me to be a strong argument against them keeping the karma.

Quirk

[jhunter]

I agree with Quirk, it is probably more of an issue with those who have the karma being somewhat abusive with it.

[John]

Is it abusive to only play humans?
Is it abusive to only play dwarves?
Is it abusive to only play desert elves?
It is abusive to only play rukkians?
Is it abusive to only play Sorcerers?

I'm curious as to what people think.

[Bestatte]

I don't know that it's abuse, as much as it's overuse judging by Sanvean's initial post. It's not that they're playing these high-karma roles badly or inappropriately. It's more that they're playing them over and over again and preventing other people from holding the spots available.

To that end, I'd agree with the general consensus that we not get rid of the karma points for these roles, but instead keep an eye out for over-use by players and when a sorc/nilaz/mindbender app comes along by someone who's done nothing else for the past 3 or 4 characters, reject it and suggest they try something else this time around.

[Lazloth]

I like none of the suggestions proposed.

Possible alternative (not that I'm necessarily advocating) in autogen would be having the options disabled if the pool is full (read from some config file or what-have-you.)

[jhunter]

I'm not saying abuse as in playing the roles poorly...I'm saying abusing the fact that they have the karma for it.

[Zhaira]

I like none of the suggestions proposed.

Possible alternative (not that I'm necessarily advocating) in autogen would be having the options disabled if the pool is full (read from some config file or what-have-you.)

This would not really work, as there are people who make something and then stop playing.

[Lazloth]

This would not really work, as there are people who make something and then stop playing.

*shrug* Retire them.

When I came back to game after one hiatus, I was asked to retire my character and did so willingly.  Different factors at play, certainly.

Certain roles, imho, should be terminated due to excessive inactivity.

[Lirs]

I don't particularly like the idea of taking karma away once a class has been played once, karma isn't the easiest thing to come by and quite frankly if you manage to get karma at that level I would expect it to have been well-earned.

However, I do agree that if some players are constantly creating the same class characters, especially after having been asked to consider other options, then it is a form of abuse.  I would expect someone deserving of that level of karma to also have some sense of responsibility in choosing what they play and not overplay a certain class.  I'd like to see the system remain the same and hope that after this discussion on the GDB those players at fault might reconsider their playing choices in the future, if not, then I think their karma should be reassessed.

[Anonymous]

I like none of the suggestions proposed.

Possible alternative (not that I'm necessarily advocating) in autogen would be having the options disabled if the pool is full (read from some config file or what-have-you.)

Alternatively, perhaps only have those options show up in a player with the requisite karma's guild list if the number of active Sorcs/Psis or Nilazis is under a certain number.

[Carnage]

I personally don't care for any of the options. I don't like the idea of Nilazis, psionicists, and sorcerers all being limitted, but I also don't like the idea of people with 8 karma monopolizing playing them.

In my opinion, just let the karma and application system work. If someone is out of hand and playing 20 sorcerers in a row, drop them an e-mail suggesting a different type of character or whatever. I'd like to see something more personal introduced before a "We have this many people playing this class, sorry" or making certain classes just limitted to special apping. It defeats the purpose of karma.

[jhunter]

It defeats the purpose of karma.

As does allowing people to special app for karma options.

[adgohan]

First of all, if the staff and ex-immortals are the ones playing sorcerers and psionicists over and over again, it is A) Easy to regulate and B) Not quite right. Presumably, it should be players attaining 8 karma and being able to play psionicists and sorcerers.

If you were going to make them special applications, then yes, the special application process would need to be re-vamped and there would have to be more immortals on it. There should also be a cap on sorcerers and psionicist in game as there is (or supposed to be) on elementalists.

A little bit on Nilazians. I don't really think they should be included in this, because granted they are the highest elementalists for a reason and have some extremely powerful spells, they are not near the power of sorcerers and psionicists. Nilazians should definitely have a cap on them, but I do not believe they should be removed from the karma list entirely. They are still limited, still elementalists. Sorcerers especially are rediculously powerful, and I would consider them as special app only.

Realistically, if ex-staff and staff are causing the problems because they're playing sorcerers/psionicist over and over again, that should be looked into. I like the idea (which is simple to code) of a timeout that Pungee suggested, maybe a time in between when you can play a sorcerer (1-2 characters that also have some sort of basis on days played so people don't suicide two characters to play a sorcerer again)

The players should have the options, or should have a way of advanced special applications to approve it, we do not want to limit sorcerers and psionicists in the game to absolute zero, but I understand at the same time the immortal staff doesn't want twenty sorcerers running around.

Save the issue with people playing sorcerers and psionicist over and over again, I think the current system is fine. The karma system has been revamped several times, but I believe making psionicists and sorcerers specifically special app would exclusively allow staff access to the roles while players may be left behind. There should be a simple way to address this, perhaps something aforementioned.

[Forest Junkie]

Agreed, Pungee and adgohan.

[spawnloser]

It has been said, but I will say it again slightly differently: If the staff believes that overplaying those roles is wrong, and tells someone that has that karma level that they believe it is wrong...and they keep doing it, they are breaking the trust that the staff have in them that allowed them to get to 7-8 karma in the first place.  Give them one warning, and if they don't stop, penalize them on karma so they can't do it anymore.

Personally, I'm with the people that say they would prefer not to special app anything and would like to wait until they have the karma for it.  I would like to see every playable option on the karma chart and leave that at that.  Penalize the people that are doing what the staff says is abusive.