Question for y'all

[spawnloser]

Oh, I forgot about that one, ERS.  Since you asked, though...

The auto-strip of nilazi/psi/sorc karma solution seems kinda harsh, to me.  It seems to suggest that once you've earned the right yo play a nilazi, and you play it...all of a sudden you're not trusted enough any more to play another one?  Also, under this solution, when you play any of these guilds, you can't play any of the other three when the karma get's stripped.  Let's pretend someone gets there 7th karma...and they get all excited...they wait...they get their 8th, and they're so excited they nearly pee themself...now, they want to try out these new options they have.  Suddenly they have to choose between the options, knowing that they will likely have to wait a little while before they get back up to 7 or 8 karma again to be able to play another of any of these guilds.

[EvilRoeSlade]

You misunderstand.  If they played a psionicist, a psionicist is the only option that they'd lose.

Anyway, the purpose isn't to punish them, just to make sure that they have to wait a while before playing those certain guilds.  I purposely leave it up to the staff to decide how long they want them to wait.

At any rate, the timer option would also be an effective solution.

[Jacques]

After having read all of the above in one sitting, my brain is slowly leaking out of my ears - seems just TALKING about psionicists is enough to melt my mind. However, I want to point out something that I don't recall being discussed, and then offer a variant of the Highlord+ option that seems to me to be a possible workaround for this.

It is possible to have a LOT of karma from playing simple roles, and playing them well. I know for myself there are a lot of the mid-level karma options that I have no real interest in playing. The problem will be if someone like this gains a bunch of karma and then gets ambitious and decides "I've always wanted to play a mindbender..." (You laugh, but the thought has crossed MY mind more than once). OK, he has no idea how to do this, and after a confusing 6 or 10 hours, dies due to a horribly foolish mistake. People are now saying that he can't try again for a RL year? That seems unfair to me. Sure, maybe not two in a row, but if he goes out, plays something else for a month or two, and then wants to try again, I don't see why he shouldn't be able to.

For myself, I would prefer the following solution. The next time that new staff applications are taken, make one of the staff members (new or old) a chronicler for high-karma roles - that would be their primary job on staff. Any application, special or regular, for a role requiring 6 or greater karma will go through this staff member. The person's job will then be to look at an out of game record (text file, database, spreadsheet - whatever) of people who have played these roles, when their last app was, and determine if the person is "overdoing it." Make a policy - maybe no more than two roles from the 6+ list in a row - after that, you have to play something else for a while, to give others a chance. The position would be similar to that of a clan imm, and since it is all being done by a single person, it would be a lot easier, communication-wise. You could list in the documentation somewhere: "All applications for these classes must also be forwarded to KickAssGuildApprover@zalanthas.org or they will not be considered."

This way, there would be an out of game record for this, so that whoever is in charge of it can review things without having to access a person's account on Arm unless they wanted to. The "chronicler" would simply check to see if the account had played a bunch of high-karma roles recently, and send either a "This person has played a lot of these - ask them to play something else for a character or two." or a "If this person has enough karma, or you think her special app is all right, she's fine."  Once the new role is approved, an email gets sent to the chronicler, who puts it into the record with the date of the app and what guild it was. A quick comparison of this record with the list of characters associated with an account could tell you how many in a row someone had played.

Is it work? Absolutely. But it wouldn't necessarily be a LOT of work - just something that the person would have to look at a couple times per week. If you're applying for a high-karma role, you can wait a few days, after all. It would mean people with the karma could play a Void Elementalist, and then a Psionicist if they wanted, but would stop people from playing 4 Sorcerors in a row.

Just my couple of 'sid on this topic.

[X-D]

First, I'm against taking them off the karma list, I like the idea of earning them, I like seeing them on my list of choices, specialy for the first time, I HATE special apps and basicly avoid them at all cost.

The timer idea I kinda like, except I do not like the set time based on karma of char.

Why? because odds are quite high that the first char or even the first few somebody gets on a new karma level will die quickly.

Instead, How about a simple timer that starts when the char has X number of hours played, say, 12-24, the timer starts and if the char dies then you cannot make another char of that karma (psi/sorc/nilazi only) for X times number of hours played.

I know Sanvean said that she would prefer if coding was not an issue, but this should be pretty simple, and -should- work quite well to limit number of chars of a type in game and take care of the problem of people taking sorc or psi or nilazi over and over again. Say, give nilazi a multiple of 5 sorc a multiple of 10 and psi a multiple of 20.

Personaly I think it would work well enough to maybe even cut down on the special apping of said classes.

[spawnloser]

If we're going to do a timer for those karma roles, it should be a timer that is based off of play time...if your nilazi was played for 30 days, you will have to play another role(s) for 30 days of play time...same for psionicist/sorc...maybe twice as much.

[Bestatte]

I'd rather let the staff decide on a case by case basis, rather than come up with some arbitrary numbers or days or timers. If a 30-day nilazian was being played badly, twinking on occasion, not taking his surroundings into consideration, spam-crafting feather earrings while he waited for his mana to regen or -whatever- - then why should he be given a 30-day wait time before he can play another one? He should have nilaz taken from him and suggestion made to try something less stressful/boring/whatever until he proves himself worthy of the class again.

Or if a 2-day nilazian did an AWESOME job interacting, RPing, getting things moving, getting deep into his character from the get-go, why penalize him a 30-day wait period if he got unlucky with a backfiring spell or whatever happens to those types when something goes wrong?

In short, keep it simple. Let the staff decide who gets what, and when.  If they feel nilaz/sorc/mindbender should be special app, I say let them do it without complaint for awhile. If it turns out to be a failed experiment, they'll bring back the old system or try something else.

Edited to add one point I feel is -very- important:

Please, if the staff does make the change to special app, I urge the staff to add more people who can review and approve them. Putting all special apps into one person's hands is already daunting I would think. Adding more would tip over the line into ridiculous.

[Akaramu]

Please, if the staff does make the change to special app, I urge the staff to add more people who can review and approve them. Putting all special apps into one person's hands is already daunting I would think. Adding more would tip over the line into ridiculous.

I'm with Bestatte there. If there were more staff member viewing / rejecting / commenting on special apps I'd be a very happy player. It is quite disheartening to wait months for a "This wontnt work" response. Or get none at all. It would be great if we could get the "this wontnt work" after a week or two for EVERY serious special app. If there were some added comments about why it wontnt work, I'd be even happier. I've had an app pending for about a month now, I have no idea if I will ever get an answer.

[flurry]

I voted for make them special app, but as an alternative I'd prefer something simpler than some of the other suggestions on this thread.   Just make it a policy that one can't play two void elementalists in a row, two psis in a row, or two sorcerers in a row.   Don't worry about coding this or having people remove options and add them back in later.  Don't worry about having immortals keep careful tab of who played what when.  Karma 8 people are supposed to be ubertrustworthy, so just tell them that's the policy.   If any of them can't follow that, or somehow abuse that policy, they shouldn't be at 8 karma.

[spawnloser]

You see, Bestatte, Sanvean wants something that will cause the least amount of work for staff.  Having the staff have to decide on a case by case basis is probably adding a bunch of work.  I'd rather just remove the karma from people.

[Carnage]

You see, Bestatte, Sanvean wants something that will cause the least amount of work for staff.  Having the staff have to decide on a case by case basis is probably adding a bunch of work.  I'd rather just remove the karma from people.

Usually the solution that involves the least amount of work is the worst one.

[spawnloser]

Why is that, Carnage?  Too much work for too little gain is a waste of time.  How would you suggest dealing with the problem without punishing anyone else?

[Forest Junkie]

Why is that, Carnage?  Too much work for too little gain is a waste of time.  How would you suggest dealing with the problem without punishing anyone else?

How about I answer this for him.

SET A TIMER AS PUNGEE THE PENGUIN SUGGESTED. THIS RULES OUT ALL POSSIBILITIES OF CHEATING, HORDING ROLES AVAILABLE, AND ALL THAT SHIT.

Conclusion, others will have a chance to play high karma roles, no one has to lose karma, everyone will be happy, since everyone shall get equal playing time, so, more than likely, there shall not be incessant whining in the sand box.

[spawnloser]

How do you know that a timer would be the easiest method to code (because it would take code).  Skipping code issues and having the staff take care of it rules out cheating too, or are you saying that you think the staff cheats?  Why should people that are abusing the system not lose karma?

[Forest Junkie]

Skipping code issues and having the staff take care of it rules out cheating too, or are you saying that you think the staff cheats?  Why should people that are abusing the system not lose karma?

What the hell, how do you come up with this shit? I never once inferred the staff cheats, but if you want to get anal, go read Sanveans original post. She stated retired staff are ones who have been noted to do horde roles.

Again, no one said they are ABUSING the system. People said they were not moving on to new things. There is a difference. It's not like they killed someone, they just play high karma pcs too damn much. They shouldn't be PUNISHED for using their karma. They should be LIMITED, to give others with karma a chance to play them.

What's easier, in your mind:

Setting a one-time clock, that handles ALL accounts, or watching each and every player seperately to make sure they do not take every sorc role available. Not only would the timer be easier on STAFF after it was implemented, it would be FAIR AND BALANCED.

P.S. Just like Fox.

[spawnloser]

I inferred nothing.  I asked a question, FJ.  You're reading in to what I'm saying too much.  If the staff says, "You are playing this role again and again, cut it out," and the person told this doens't cut it out, they are abusing it.  They deserve karma loss.  If the staff isn't cheating, this solves the problem.

As far as timer vs karma loss, how is an arbitrary clock that doesn't take into account that someone made a character and was getting used to what it could do...testing things, and then goes to make a character that is more realistic and will have a truer impact on the world with what they could and should do instead of bumbling around like a Half-Giant with a nuke...and now they can't do that because this arbitrary number has been assigned that can't see all of the variables, just one.  It's not like people that are playing those roles are going to die terribly often.  Most of them have been around for a while and have a good feel for how the mud works, in general, so we shouldn't be seeing the apps that would need this additional twenty seconds scrutiny.

[Carnage]

Why is that, Carnage?  Too much work for too little gain is a waste of time.  How would you suggest dealing with the problem without punishing anyone else?

I've said it before. Put in a system that allows players to see something like "There are many Nilazi in the game" "There are a few psionicists in the game" "Some sorcerers are in the game". Let players moderate and decide before bringing down some iron-fisted enforcement.

On the other hand, you could just tell players that constantly make these roles and ask them to take a break from them every now and then. Sure, it takes work, but it's better than basically taking away two levels of karma from the tree.

[spawnloser]

I'm not saying to take away those two levels...I'm saying to take it away from the people that don't listen to the staff, obviously meaning that the staff can not trust them, so they don't deserve the karma.

[Unicorn]

Just make it a policy that one can't play two void elementalists in a row, two psis in a row, or two sorcerers in a row.   Don't worry about coding this or having people remove options and add them back in later.  Don't worry about having immortals keep careful tab of who played what when.  Karma 8 people are supposed to be ubertrustworthy, so just tell them that's the policy.

I quoted this just in case this excellent suggestion got lost in the furor of other "debate".  I think it is elegant in its very simplicity.   IF someone doesn't follow it then let some karma loss ensue just as it would for not following other important policies.

[creeper386]

See, I don't think there is really a problem with people even playing alot of high karma level things all in a row. Now, if it's to the point of being bad for the MUD ...  Yes perhaps then the staff should ask someone to play something else for abit, but I wouldn't want to see anything like it coded so you can't play them, or even a policy that you CAN NOT play this more then once in a row.

Heck, I'll probably never have the karma to play them but if I gained that much karma although I probably wouldn't play the same thing over and over again, I'd be alittle miffed if I was told outright something like that. To me it's an insult to those that play right aren't trusted now because someone else can't play fairly.

Whats next? Special App or some code that stops you from playing muls, or magickers more then once in a row? Perhaps we should just institute code to keep anyone from playing the same race/class/subclass twice in a row and that'd fix everything.  :roll:  

Creeper

[flurry]

Heck, I'll probably never have the karma to play them but if I gained that much karma although I probably wouldn't play the same thing over and over again, I'd be alittle miffed if I was told outright something like that. To me it's an insult to those that play right aren't trusted now because someone else can't play fairly.

Well I don't think it's so much an issue of people playing fairly.  They're just playing what they want to play and what they have the karma to play.   The problem, as I understand it, is that the karma 8+ people are accounting for more void/psi/sorcs than the Immortals feel is a healthy number.   So that has two possible negative consequences that I see -

(a) it will be that much harder, if not impossible, for special apps for those roles to be approved,

and also (which I haven't seen mentioned)
(b) it will be that much harder, if not impossible, to get bumped up to 8 karma.  

So something does have to give it seems like.

P.S.  Sanvean said that asking people to play something else for a bit hasn't worked.

[jhunter]

I don't think it's right that the people with the karma to play them are playing them to the exclusion to anything else...seems like there's only one reason they would do so...

I also don't think it's right even to allow people to special app for things they don't have the karma to...those with the karma should get priority and I don't think that should change either.

I think the best over all  solution is to just flat out deny an app for the karma options in question with the reasoning that they are doing it too damned much...which is the fact of the matter or we wouldn't be discussing this now.

I know this has already been suggested and I think it the best route to take personally.

[spawnloser]

jhunter, something it seems to me that you have not thought of, what is the point of special apping if you can just make the character anyway due to your karma level?

[Forest Junkie]

jhunter, something it seems to me that you have not thought of, what is the point of special apping if you can just make the character anyway due to your karma level?

That's just it, I think he's trying to say special apping has no purpose, and should therefore be eliminated.

That would be slightly drastic, though, and a bit unfair to players who wish to be given a chance to prove they can do something.

[jhunter]

jhunter, something it seems to me that you have not thought of, what is the point of special apping if you can just make the character anyway due to your karma level?

Man. that's about an insulting question...that would be the main objection to making people who already have the karma have to special app them...whatever gave you the idea that I -don't- know this...seems like the -most obvious- aspect of this entire discussion.

[jhunter]

Yes, Forest Junkie that's exactly what I am saying.

As for players special apping to be given the chance to prove they can do something...isn't that like begging for karma?

I mean...if you were trusted enough by the imms to have such a role...wouldn't you have the karma to make it yourself?