Armageddon General Discussion Board

I was thinking about the change in the way plots work. And how someone recently said that with the way things are there's not enough room for politics.

It's really hard to get a big plot off the ground. I think it's hard when you're an imm with a bunch of imms to coordinate with and the ability to watch everyone and hear every thought and animate the people who pay the people who will eventually do the leg work, and make several characters to move the plot along.

Without that it's just daunting.

This isn't a real suggestion. This is throwing a thought at the wall to see if it splatters pretty.

I'd like to do come ooc coordination.

What I do want:
Hey Bob, I was thinking if I played Rennik and you played a Jihaen templar I could go after some area that belongs to someone and you could react. I could try and make friends and once I have a few, you guys could take it back. I could do something agressive. What would piss you off? Ok, cool, well if I had a lot of friends at that point, you could hire someone to kidnap me and hold me for ransom. What could we do to invest someone else with a stake in that thing/person/place? Cool. After your guys kill my noble you should do this.

What I don't want:
Hey Bob. What if I play a Rennik and you play a Jihaen and we try to start a war? We should start by taking out so and so.


It shouldn't be used to gain an advantage or to a player who isn't privy to the conversation's disadvantage. It should be possible only to try to figure out how to find an arc of conflict. Once conflict is in motion communication should stop.

I don't know if I'd want this or not. I guess I don't care xD!

thank you for that extremely constructive response saellyn

Quote from: Saellyn on June 09, 2011, 07:56:02 PM
I don't know if I'd want this or not. I guess I don't care xD!

I have no strong feelings one way or the other.  All I know is my gut says maybe.

It would benefit the game and piss a lot of people off.

I'd tentatively approve this, if it worked the way family-role applications currently work combined with special applications. In other words, a producer looks it over. You have to be high karma and trusted. You're not allowed to plan out anything other than the beginning of the situation. I'd say planning the kidnapping, in the above scenario, was going too far. Just some good set ups and then let things go as they will.

I've never read the novel, but someone was telling me about a Terry Pratchett book that begins by a new island emerging from the ocean and then everyone is scrambling to get the resources, etc. I sometimes think that just having a new resource spot emerge somewhere would really kick up some dust in a good way. I mean, come on, everyone is just HOPING to have a good enough IC justification to run around doing dangerous shit and starting wars. Well ... what templar wouldn't want to be rewarded for capturing such a prize? What noble wouldn't want to have access to it? What other nefarious forces might want it?

An iron ore deposit is uncovered in the Red Desert. All it takes is changing one room description. Hell, all it takes is inserting one (non-movable) object into the room. Everyone wants it. Everyone has to struggle through mantis. Everyone will kill for it. FUN.

Just my two cents, though I know the staff would look at that idea and see all the work involved that we don't.

I think people would have to enter under the understanding that apart from facilitating that conversation, staff would be under no obligation to take an interest.

I don't think that "it's really hard to get a big plot off of the ground" is a good reason to do this.

What I'd want:  "Hey, Rennik.  I'm in your base, killing your dudes.  Your mother was a Tor.  Do something about it, you Allanaki cur."

What has changed that prevents people from doing what they have always done with regard to plots?

What's wrong is the lack of global movement. And while the imms may not feel any sense of loss, I think at least a portion of the playerbase does.

There are people doing very interesting things in game. There are people who are doing an awesome job of making things happen.

But what I haven't seen is the makings of another copper war.

I'd like one.

Quote from: Nyr on June 09, 2011, 09:40:29 PM
What I'd want:  "Hey, Rennik.  I'm in your base, killing your dudes.  Your mother was a Tor.  Do something about it, you Allanaki cur."

Christ, trust a Tuluki to not even be able to spell d00dz correctly.

Oh, you want another war HRPT.

I don't even have it in me to discuss this again or link to previous opinions. Sorry, good luck, though!

Nyr.

I hear that you are frustrated with me. Fair enough. I keep bringing up things that don't interest you, that you don't think are needed.

I confess I'm a little frustrated too. I feel like you think I want you to make an hrpt for me. And I don't. All I want is the ability to make one for myself. It's fine if the staff says: we don't want to play with you anymore. You play alone.

Ok. So, can you let us have the pails and shovels since you don't plan to use the sandbox?

I once tried starting a skirmish. I got yelled at by NPCs. Of course, that didn't stop me from continuing.

Don't let something silly like (perceived) staff disapproval tell you not to go doing silly things. Though if they NPC-gank you, then you've gone too far.

Alright, I hereby grant you the ability to make one for yourself. Good luck!

Nyr gave Barzalene copper! EVERYONE GET HIM!

I dislike consent based roleplay. People are itching for confrontation. As long as you get a group of players together ICly then there shouldn't be a problem doing almost whatever you want.

Quote from: Nyr on June 09, 2011, 09:40:29 PM
What has changed that prevents people from doing what they have always done with regard to plots?

There's no more institutional memory or driving force, there's no external factors, and there's no visible, over-arcing, OOC-benevolent storyline.

A lack of institutional memory is the biggest hurdle from the player perspective, IMO.  A player's ability to drive a plot is largely limited by their character's lifespan, and pushing a big plot is often a life-ending proposition unless you're one of the 4-5 templars or high-powered nobles in the game.

Players are limited by the toys in the sandbox.  Players can't start plots that involve external game factors like the discovery of metal, or foreign armies, or things of that nature.  Sadly, most of the toys in the sandbox have been passed through the playerbase so many times that it's hard to drum up excitement with them.  

Lastly, large, world-changing plots allowed players to create plots in their wake because the large events, almost by definition, involved everyone.  Most player-driven plots are highly secretive, exclusive affairs, and that's counter to what the game needs.  

Well, okay, so there's two things being discussed here.

Barzalene's original post was that she (and, Barz, correct me if I'm wrong) was asking what people thought about making it kosher to organize conflict-driven plots out of game. Sort of like having players play pseudo-NPCs -- like, "okay, well, you play this, and I'll play this as a sacrificial lamb, and that way by you doing x and y, we can get a number of players involved in a plot that's driven by z," as an answer to the lack of staff-driven conflict. An intention to, pre-character-generation, provide the framework for which to organize a plot (or plots) to involve everyone in new, fun and exciting things.

This got derailed a bit about asking for involvement from staff in plots, which while it is something I support, should perhaps be in its own thread. There's two different conversations going on here, and I don't want to see Barzalene's original point get lost immediately due to other topics.

Just my thoughts for clarity (aside from my previous dudes vs d00dz joke, which I thought was pretty good.)

To get a plot moving, I just suicided my 150-day maxed sorcerer somewhere in the Red Desert, along with all his loot, which includes numerous metal weapons and several highly desirable magickal artifacts.

P.S. Don't junk the head, it's very important. *wink*

Quote from: Synthesis on June 09, 2011, 11:06:49 PM
To get a plot moving, I just suicided my 150-day maxed sorcerer somewhere in the Red Desert, along with all his loot, which includes numerous metal weapons and several highly desirable magickal artifacts.

P.S. Don't junk the head, it's very important. *wink*

These items were later lost in a server reset.

Is this a discussion that has to be repeated every 3 months?

Here's the Policy Discussion 2011 (http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,40747.0.html) thread.  The majority of that thread was just more of the same repeated points from 2010, by the way.

In an offshoot from that thread:

Quote from: Adhira on March 06, 2011, 04:34:27 PM
Staff are allowed to write plots, and they do.  They are however based on what they see going on in game.  Writing plots these days essentially consists of coming up with a range of scenarios that spring from what they see players doing or moving towards in  game.  It's one good reason to keep staff informed of the lofty goals of your PC, they may not comment on them, they may say, this will be difficult to achieve, but they'l be watching and waiting to put a few things in to move that plot along.  What staff aren't doing is sitting down and saying 'Wouldn't it be cool if zombies came along and took over the rinth, then marched on nak and ate all the Templars'. We aren't going to sit around and make shit up that has no basis in anything, give us something to work with, and we'll go from there.

More stuff about staff and plots from 2011. (http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,41086.0.html)

This theme is oft-repeated since the policy change.  Repeating it doesn't change these two points:

QuoteStaff are allowed to write plots, and they do.  They are however based on what they see going on in game.

and

QuoteWe aren't going to sit around and make shit up that has no basis in anything, give us something to work with, and we'll go from there.

So,you (the playerbase, not specifically any person in this thread):  go get out there and do the ground work for plots and stop posting threads every 3 months about how we aren't helping you (the playerbase, again) make plots happen.  We are.  Crap, I've got things I'm working on based on what players in the clans I'm over have brought to my attention by reporting in character reports.  You want to go discover enough metal to weigh down a mekillot out in the desert somewhere?  Get to digging--and that is meant both figuratively and literally.  Do some research in-game, then act on what you discover.  The Copper War happened under old policies.  Cool, yes.  New policies now, yes. 

I could understand this coming up regularly right after the new policy, but it has been more than 2 years since it was announced. (http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,34248.0.html)  It is time to start working with that policy in mind instead of fighting against it or pretending it is not there. 

Take a moment and reread the initial policy as indicated by Adhira there.

Take a moment and go over the thread discussing it at the time. (http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,34249.0.html)  I just did.  Lots of people were excited about it then because it was a change and it was something new, I'm sure.  There were the usual sticks in the mud that don't like anything (whether it's new, or whether it's just "not what they are used to"), but that's normal.  Anyway, it didn't take too long for people to want it the other way either out of sincere desire or due to the fact that it was something different.  I think that's normal, too, and it'd be difficult to determine which would be more preferred by players as a whole out of a legitimate desire to actually see things the way they were.  Unfortunately, it's a policy, we've made the decision, and we're moving forward from it, not moving back to what was done before.  If the producers change their minds and want to tweak this some more, shelve it, or what have you, you'll know when it happens.

Back to the other part of the discussion.

The beginning of the discussion in this thread regarding setting up conflict OOC with other players in advance of said conflict doesn't seem to have any place in an RPI.  All of the things mentioned in the scenario that the OP would like to see are things that can and do occur in-game.  Here is how it happens (I'll even throw in the things that happen to cockblock plots, entirely done by players):

Hey, so I'm playing a Rennik and this other guy is a Jihaen templar.  I could go after some area that belongs to someone that the templar is close to and the templar could react.  I'd have to find that out first by doing IC stuff (which has its own pitfalls and may turn up other things not looked for). I could try and make friends and once I have a few, his guys could take it back (or kill my PC, or kill my PC underlings, or ignore it entirely as PCs are wont to do). I could do something aggressive. What would piss him off?  I could send out spies to find that out or pay people to find that out.  Ok, cool, well if I had a lot of friends at that point, he could hire someone to kidnap me and hold me for ransom (or kill my PC, or kill my PC underlings, or plant spies in my organization of spy networks, or any number of things up to and including ignoring my PC and my PC's actions).  What could I do to invest someone else with a stake in that thing/person/place? Cool. After your guys kill my noble you should do this. I hope that they do something even cooler, more original, or just involve other players without railroading things into "killing my noble" and me knowing that is going to happen from the start.

This proposal as is would suck most of the fun out of the game; even the Black Moon/flood/rain/omgwtfbbq HRPT from December 2009 had several possible scenarios that could occur based on player action or inaction.  We didn't railroad it as in the above scenario.  That's right--even we on staff had the possibility of being surprised by an HRPT (one heavily influenced by player actions and activity).  If things happened as proposed, I'd never want to do a plot that way and would actively avoid it.  I'd probably stop playing if everything was prearranged by players in advance.  What's the point?  Why log in if it's micromanaged to a script?

I guess that's all I have.

If I may put in my short 2 cents, as I am nowhere near able to organize my thoughts into Nyr/LoD style posts:

I get where both staff and players are coming from, but as a player, and having PLAYED in leadership positions, it is sometimes difficult to really 'feel' like these things are possible, whether its because staff are telling us its "not realistic" in a Request Tool Response, or the IC response of their superiors saying "If you do this, you're fucked."

Personally, I would not want to play the Jihaen that goes off and starts war mongering. Why? Because all it takes is that one staff that says "Hey, thats not what Jihaens should be doing" and you lose karma/special apps/brainz. When I played my Jihaen, I was most definitely afraid to come up with things to do, because there was no real "political" backing (Other Templars had been around longer and rockblocked me) and when I -did- come up with ideas, I'd send it in a request, and just hear "Oh, yeah. Virtually, your boss loves that so it already happened."



TL;DR

In a game that has been evolving for almost 2 decades, there is now sort of a wall. Players feel that "everything has been done before" and when they come up with some really cool idea, because they want to do it a month out of chargen, its often not a 'realistic direction' for their character, regardless of their station or ability. Sure, staff can write plots out to help move things along, but it cannot be random, must pass Highlord's to make sure it wouldn't cause some massive world-shaking event, and must be initially player driven.

For some people, thats awesome. For others, that sucks. What I'm feeling here, is, "If you don't like the way the game is run now, go play another game."

And that hurts.

I bet Nyr is gonna be flooded with reports about people digging in the sand. Similarly, deaths to raptors and gith will triple.

Nyr needs to stop saying shit I agree with. It's making me suspect the really real this time rapture of October might actually be coming.

Quote from: Nyr on June 10, 2011, 12:21:15 AM



I could understand this coming up regularly right after the new policy, but it has been more than 2 years since it was announced. (http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,34248.0.html)  It is time to start working with that policy in mind instead of fighting against it or pretending it is not there. 

The thing is, that's exactly what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to work with that policy in mind. And exactly, pretending it's not there doesn't work. So, I'm trying to think of different ways to work that will.

I think the problem is that you are inferring some sort of criticism. There isn't a criticism here. It's a thought on evolution.

Quote from: Riev on June 10, 2011, 01:09:37 AM
If I may put in my short 2 cents, as I am nowhere near able to organize my thoughts into Nyr/LoD style posts:

I get where both staff and players are coming from, but as a player, and having PLAYED in leadership positions, it is sometimes difficult to really 'feel' like these things are possible, whether its because staff are telling us its "not realistic" in a Request Tool Response, or the IC response of their superiors saying "If you do this, you're fucked."

Personally, I would not want to play the Jihaen that goes off and starts war mongering. Why? Because all it takes is that one staff that says "Hey, thats not what Jihaens should be doing" and you lose karma/special apps/brainz. When I played my Jihaen, I was most definitely afraid to come up with things to do, because there was no real "political" backing (Other Templars had been around longer and rockblocked me) and when I -did- come up with ideas, I'd send it in a request, and just hear "Oh, yeah. Virtually, your boss loves that so it already happened."

I don't understand.  You got free conflict with other templar PCs that were around longer and cockblocked your plot, and the other ideas were accepted by your boss so it "already happened."  What did you expect or want instead?  Other templar PCs to stand aside and let the new kid do whatever he wanted to do?  Your boss to hate your ideas? 

Quote
because they want to do it a month out of chargen

This seems like an incredibly unrealistic expectation. Based on what you indicated above, it doesn't sound like you had the role very long (at all, or in comparison to existing templars there).  You weren't brought in to shake things up right away or do a bunch of stuff.  You were brought in to fill a need first and foremost.  You should be filling that need first, then taking the time--after settling in, hopefully--to try to move some things the way you want them to go.  Even in real life, no one likes the new guy to come in and change things up or shake them up, and there is likely just as much OOC push behind the IC push to cockblock an idea formed a month out from that PC suddenly showing up.  Nobility, templarate, and GMH family PCs should all take note of that as well.  Don't try and change a bunch of crap as fast as you can right after being approved.  You'll either gain immediate enemies and immediate friends (and these are friends of convenience, only befriending you because you pissed off one of your immediate enemies that is more powerful than you).  If you like that kind of upstart conflict, that's fine, just go in expecting that you're going to face adversity that is going to leave your PC weaker in the end.  Not everyone is lucky.  Not everyone hires the smartest lackeys.  Not everyone is going to succeed, and not everyone is even going to get down the road safely from their apartment to the local bar.

Quote from: Barzalene on June 10, 2011, 06:49:17 AM
It's a thought on evolution.

Evolution towards what?  You want the ability to make an HRPT for yourself.  You have the ability to make an HRPT for yourself.  If you mean evolving towards player-led, OOC-railroaded plots, I don't know how much more I can make it clear that I hate the idea of that and that I think it has no place in this game.

See! While not the answer I wanted it is an answer to the question I'm asking (which is a different question from last year.)

I see why you don't like it. That's fair. I'll ask that you give it a little consideration in spite of your distaste. We'll kick it around. Maybe we'll find something useful in a discussion different than what's initially proposed and actually usable.

As a suggestion for something that might be more useable ...

What about allowing players to app in as pre-existing nemesis without forcing them to be family members?

Not any pre-designed ideas for plots like: Ok you kidnap me at X time and I'll escape at Y time ect ect ... just the ability to have something of a joint background so that you have some conflict built right into the concept right from the get go.

I like Musashi's idea.

I just want to clarify- I am not proposing scripts, or at least I'm only proposing scripting to the point of conflict and letting things roll from there. My above example illustrates that poorly. Sorry for the confusion. Entirely my fault.

Quote from: musashi on June 10, 2011, 10:52:54 AM
As a suggestion for something that might be more useable ...

What about allowing players to app in as pre-existing nemesis without forcing them to be family members?

Not any pre-designed ideas for plots like: Ok you kidnap me at X time and I'll escape at Y time ect ect ... just the ability to have something of a joint background so that you have some conflict built right into the concept right from the get go.

This might be fine for the two players who are in on the joke, but it can get a little frustrating for those who aren't.  I'm pretty sure I've been a third party to at least one such arrangement (although obviously it was unofficial), and it can get -really- frustrating when your boss won't seal the deal on taking care of his "nemesis," because he's OOCly more interested in keeping the plot going than really killing the guy.

I mean, if I knew you weren't really interested in pulling the trigger at the outset, I would have logged out instead of traipsing through the desert, semi-afk, for 5 hours.  Thanks for wasting my time.  And yes, after that, I was intentionally avoiding you.

I wouldn't want any scripting at all. At all. Even a "at some point in the future you could kidnap me" would be unacceptable from my point of view. I'm not talking about having plot ideas already drafted from the get go.

I'm talking more along the lines of just being able to put out a call for a nemesis role on the GDB, and having something in your joint backgrounds that might look like: Ok my PC hates yours and wants to ruin them because you framed my sister for a murder you committed. Then let things take the course they will from there.

To Synth: I think some players are just like that.

I, for example, am very hesitant to kill other PC's. I just find it more fun to torment them and let them get away.
For other people, racking up a PK count is where it's at.

In the suggestion I made, I would imagine that both types of players could be accommodated. Maybe you want a nemesis wherein the goal is just a race to see who can gank who first. Maybe you want to just make them suffer instead.

But I'm not really strongly tied to the idea as a whole. It's more just the end result of me typing 'salvage thread'.

Ok. I guess I don't love that idea after all. Not because I think it's a bad idea, but because it doesn't address the issue of global plots specifically. It addresses the problem of personal plots. But I don't think personal plots are a problem for us. I think we do a great job already with creating conflict and letting others in on it. I think the problem is expanding the conflicts outside our spheres of immediate contact. I don't see that a preplanned nemesis tackles that.

Well the only way that you are going to get a global plot moving is if you app a character, have them survive and thrive to the point where they can move and shake things, and then start moving and shaking things.

The way I see it, the only thing standing in the way is the fact that characters aren't promised a long life wherein they can become a power player on the scene.

You have to earn that.

But it happens. I believe (and sorry if this is stepping on toes or shedding too much IC info) that the last HRPT that happened ... was in fact the result of something players started and pushed for.

That's not stepping on my toes at all. That's awesome.

Well there's your answer then, now go dig up Steinal  :D

Nyr you can quote posts all day long but the truth is that the "Be the change" Motto of the staff is just bull.

Recently I have seen a plot where a character plants the idea in group A's mind that they need item B. Group A has the authority ICly to get item B as they have had item B before. Group A makes connections to other groups and begins gathering resources for item B. Then the mighty staff comes down and says since certain staff did not pre approve the plot, just cancel everything for some lame reason.

QuoteWe aren't going to sit around and make shit up that has no basis in anything, give us something to work with, and we'll go from there.

We'll go from there and cancel the plot because we didn't come up with it.

QuoteStaff are allowed to write plots, and they do.  They are however based on what they see going on in game.

Unless we just don't feel like it and you didn't file the proper paperwork..which sounds like you want OOC pre approving of everything...which sounds like what Barzalene wants anyway?

Be the change..hah.

The plot you're mentioning may have had other reasons for that.  Especially if it's the one I'm thinking of.  There are other concerns, especially for specific sorts of items, than just 'is it literally possible.'  Some items are pretty damn gamebreaking if there are too many of them at once.

That's a convenient excuse. It makes less sense for the group NOT to have one. I don't see how it is game breaking if they had one within this character's lifetime before and it was certainly -not- game breaking then. Without having heard conversation about it, just reeks of favoritism or fickleness.

I  don't like Barzalene's idea . The biggest reason is because that begins taking us in MUSH territory, into something they do much better, whcih is scripting scenes. A does this, then B will do this, wait C hadn't done that...well lets just get them to do what we need to, then we'll get D to do that aswell. It is a slippery slope.  I think one of Arm's charm as a mud is that things aren't always scripted at all, random acts, decisions and deaths are all part of the on going story.

Originally i had no opinion on the policy, since i hadn't played since the last HRPT.

However as time passes what i read that policy to be is this:

HRPT and global events take alot of time and effort on our part as Staff. We are currently working on another game and have no time and/or will to do this anymore. We will be leaving the onus on large world changing plots/ grand events on you players from now on, and will help you if we see you putting some effort on it.  There will be no more random spawning of demons. Do not prepare for a zombie apocalypse on our game anymore.

No random events in the world basically creates a static world we are currently experiencing now.


Now this is fine and all but there are two problems.

1. The players too have no time to invest in creating world changing/epic plots.
2. The players that might have time are now more prone to being killed or dying because others are bored.
3. The glass ceiling still makes it a huge time investment on the player side to achieve anything.

In short the players have no time or feel they don't have the tool inorder to make the game less static.

At the end all this thinking is moot since we don't know how far away Arm 2 is from coming out. That said it would be nice if the next  HRPT we experience isn't basically the closing of ARM 1, more so if it is still several years away.

I for one though would welcome some random shit happening now and then. Ah, Zombies~  :'(

My point is that every time someone wants the staff to do some plots, the staff points to the fact that they base the plots off of your actions.

The only problem there is more exceptions than you can shake a stick at. Of course there will be some but there are still too many "Only If" clauses loaded in "Be the Change".

No matter how well thought out, well planned out, well executed, or how much is just plain makes sense, don't plan on your plot going anywhere.

I accept that is the way it is but please stop throwing it in our faces that we need to be the change if for the unlucky few (or many or one) of us, it is for all intents and purposes impossible.

KankWhisperer, have you reported any of this to staff in a character report, perhaps, or submitted a player/staff complaint?

Quote from: Dresan on June 10, 2011, 01:58:14 PM
I  don't like Barzalene's idea . The biggest reason is because that begins taking us in MUSH territory, into something they do much better, whcih is scripting scenes. A does this, then B will do this, wait C hadn't done that...well lets just get them to do what we need to, then we'll get D to do that aswell. It is a slippery slope.  I think one of Arm's charm as a mud is that things aren't always scripted at all, random acts, decisions and deaths are all part of the on going story.

I MUSH.  A lot.  There is no scripting that even vaguely resembles anything like that, sorry to burst your bubble.  But the allowance for some OOC communication does lend itself to some twisting to make plots work.  This is not the norm in Armageddon (I personally don't see an issue with a little bit of OOC wiggling, to allow a plot to happen.  It's the tradeoff between REALISM OMG and fun.  Plots are fun, sitting around with nothing to do but spamcraft/cast/hunt is not as fun) but that's not what staff wants here, and it's not my sandbox to tell them how to do it, there are options here to make plots, some limited, some not.  Arm has the ability for low level plots all the time (hunting a mek, etc.) with no staff support, MU*s do not, there are pros and cons to each system.  However, if you're going to make an argument, don't make shit up entirely to support your point.

Quote from: Nyr on June 10, 2011, 08:54:06 AM
You were brought in to fill a need first and foremost.  You should be filling that need first, then taking the time--after settling in, hopefully--to try to move some things the way you want them to go.  Even in real life, no one likes the new guy to come in and change things up or shake them up, and there is likely just as much OOC push behind the IC push to cockblock an idea formed a month out from that PC suddenly showing up.  Nobility, templarate, and GMH family PCs should all take note of that as well.  Don't try and change a bunch of crap as fast as you can right after being approved.  You'll either gain immediate enemies and immediate friends (and these are friends of convenience, only befriending you because you pissed off one of your immediate enemies that is more powerful than you). 

I've seen this a few times from the viewpoint of a lower ranking clan member and it's enormously annoying. You spend a month becoming familiar with the docs for Clan A, then another few months getting into your nitch and establishing your character's place in the hierarchy, then all of a sudden someone shows up who is codedly above you on the clout scale and starts contradicting documentation because they haven't taken the same time and care to learn it as you have. Best scenario is a flash-in-the-pan leader who is suddenly stored, while some of the worst involve pissing off large sections of the Known because they have no idea what sort of trouble their self-centered actions will cause.

In a RL example, I worked for Hollywood Video when they sold to Movie Gallery. Oh, the horrors. Huge, sweeping policy changes, with no regard for the local shops. Some of the policies actually angered our regular customers (as in people who rented on a daily basis) so much that they stopped coming in all together. About a year later, the company tanked. But, the Movie Gallery corp heads -knew- how to make a business thrive, so they made their decisions, and we had to live with them.

Maxid,I agree that we are in no danger of becoming a mush.

In fact I agreed with most of what you said.

But I don't think Dresan was making stuff up, I think he or she was expressing a concern based on his or her perception.

Going back to earlier discussion,if some people are pleased with things exactly as they are now, that's excellent. I just think it would be even better if everyone felt that satisfied.

I don't think I have an answer about how to make everyone happy. But at least I'm tossing things out there. It's maybe a starting place. It's probably not the destination. That's ok, right?

Maybe it was poor phrasing, but MUSHes do not script out events the way he claimed.  Ever.  That's considered metagaming, and tends to get you kicked off the MUSH in question.

Unless he's talking about the new PRP (Player Run Plot) surge on nWoD MU*s, in which one player is given rights to run a few NPCs/etc. for other players.  They might script, but it's a far cry from the PCs themselves scripting to boost their own characters.

Some Mushes have more code then others, some of the ones i've played had little to almost no code. So you need to go through a scene oocly before you play. Just to give a general idea of what is happening, where things are going, what is allow, what the other would like to see or do.

This might not be like the mushes you've played but there is a level of OOC scripting in those scenes, otherwise you get code

ROLL 100

OOC: PLease think he is beautiful plz.  thx.

That is my experience with them, you may have others, it varies but regardless i want to see Arm Mud continue being random and unpredictable where things suprise you as players and even as staff sometimes. While the world might currently be a little static, the players themselves are still not. Players chatting between themselves on who should die or who should live or trying other OOCly managed plotting isn't something i really want to see, i think it will make things worse not better.

Dresan, please know this is absolutely NOT what I'm advocating.

I have literally never seen anything even remotely resembling that, outside of a talker, in like 15 years of MUSHing.

Weird.  Most games have stats, like Arm, and PCs are not allowed to OOCly script scenes to happen one way or another, except through IC interaction, like Arm.

Edit: Err, wrong thread.

Quote from: Nao on June 10, 2011, 06:32:21 PM
I love and adore accents that are spelled out. Writers do it all the time. There's a reason to not leave regional accents to the player - they're not just there to add flavor to individual characters, but to actually give a hint to where the character is coming from. It needs to be recognizable by all characters as 'northern', 'southern' or something else, but you'd have a hard time trying to get players to all type out the same northern or southern accent.

I agree, but at the same time, I think that spelling things out to sound how they're intended is a lot better way to handle it than just sticking commas in to replace letters.

Like don't... don', dun, dunno, etc. The ways where it shows you the difference in pronunciation, rather than just a missing letter.

this is not the thread you're looking for

start a dude who pisses off some tribe or merchant house. Throw an anakore's head into the Sol Lanah Kah's camp every few weeks, leaving a detailed description of yourself in a drawing beside it. Throw magickal artifacts into the Tuluk gates once a week. Toss a dead songbird into an arabet camp once in a while. Do ALL of this as one character. App a like-minded family of Shit Starters. Start raiding great merchant house caravans, and throw their occupants' heads at the guards of city-states at the gates and then run. Set the rumor boards and templars' tempers ablaze. Get caught and killed impressively faster than you thought you would.

I've dreamed of becoming a 'gicker noble in Tuluk who, with staff permission, manifests in a packed bar and kills most of the npcs trying to escape and none of the other pc nobles, but I'm not about to waste my time on that.

I guess you could app for a tribe that isn't particularly friendly towards outsiders with a sociopathic character who decides his tribe is slowing him down and needs to die. Tell staff what you're doing, ask for permission, figure out a way to start a war that ends in a lot of pointless bloodshed.

I want to see a tin deposit in the northlands for christmas. That'd be neat.

Quote from: Synthesis on June 10, 2011, 06:40:28 PM
this is not the thread you're looking for

Quote from: Barzalene on June 09, 2011, 07:43:27 PM
I was thinking about the change in the way plots work. And how someone recently said that with the way things are there's not enough room for politics.

It's really hard to get a big plot off the ground. I think it's hard when you're an imm with a bunch of imms to coordinate with and the ability to watch everyone and hear every thought and animate the people who pay the people who will eventually do the leg work, and make several characters to move the plot along.

Without that it's just daunting.

This isn't a real suggestion. This is throwing a thought at the wall to see if it splatters pretty.

I'd like to do come ooc coordination.

What I do want:
Hey Bob, I was thinking if I played Rennik and you played a Jihaen templar I could go after some area that belongs to someone and you could react. I could try and make friends and once I have a few, you guys could take it back. I could do something agressive. What would piss you off? Ok, cool, well if I had a lot of friends at that point, you could hire someone to kidnap me and hold me for ransom. What could we do to invest someone else with a stake in that thing/person/place? Cool. After your guys kill my noble you should do this.

What I don't want:
Hey Bob. What if I play a Rennik and you play a Jihaen and we try to start a war? We should start by taking out so and so.


It shouldn't be used to gain an advantage or to a player who isn't privy to the conversation's disadvantage. It should be possible only to try to figure out how to find an arc of conflict. Once conflict is in motion communication should stop.

SO! Does anyone else have something to contribute to the actual topic of this thread?

Here's mine: I'm not fond of "setting up" plotlines oocly. I know of some games that do this, and they're contrived. The only kinds of "setting up" I like are, for example, when I'm logged in, something interesting is going on, I know that the player of another character who -would- be interested, isn't logged in, and I IM him to tell him "hey. This might be a good time to log in, if you can." I don't need to tell him why, or what to look for, or even to find my PC's mind..only that this is the moment of an unscheduled RPT.

So my vote would be against the ooc setup. My vote is -for- ooc heads' up (such as, "My character would probably have reason to interact with yours, if you were to be logged in.") and they get to find out ICly whether that reason is to kill them, befriend them, hire them, or frame them.

Quote from: Lizzie on June 13, 2011, 08:18:49 AM
SO! Does anyone else have something to contribute to the actual topic of this thread?

Here's mine: I'm not fond of "setting up" plotlines oocly. I know of some games that do this, and they're contrived. The only kinds of "setting up" I like are, for example, when I'm logged in, something interesting is going on, I know that the player of another character who -would- be interested, isn't logged in, and I IM him to tell him "hey. This might be a good time to log in, if you can." I don't need to tell him why, or what to look for, or even to find my PC's mind..only that this is the moment of an unscheduled RPT.

So my vote would be against the ooc setup. My vote is -for- ooc heads' up (such as, "My character would probably have reason to interact with yours, if you were to be logged in.") and they get to find out ICly whether that reason is to kill them, befriend them, hire them, or frame them.

I'm down with this.  And I dig it.  So long as it's not used to call for help.

I tend to get into enough trouble ICly without OOC communications to stir up plots, but as long as nobody abuses it by calling for help in a fight or anything, I'd be ok with it.

Quote from: BleakOne on June 14, 2011, 07:05:22 AM
I tend to get into enough trouble ICly without OOC communications to stir up plots, but as long as nobody abuses it by calling for help in a fight or anything, I'd be ok with it.

There's no way to moderate ooc communications out of the game itself. That's why the staff is so strict about the rules. By even -discussing- the idea here on the forum, there will be players who think, "well obviously the playerbase is cool with this, so I'm gonna go ahead and create the next batch of Klestion brothers."

And then, y'all will only have yourselves to blame, for saying you have no problem with OOC creation of IC plotlines. That is *exactly* what the Klestions did, and it spun out of control -because- there is no way to moderate OOC communications.

Who the hell are the Klestions?

Quote from: Bacon on June 14, 2011, 11:45:42 AM
Who the hell are the Klestions?

Apparently the Klestions were a family a oof players came up with.

Every time a brother would die, one of the players would roll up a cousin, uncle, son, father, etc., etc., so on and so forth. And it kept going on in this fashion for a long while.

Okay but what does that have to do with OOC plotline discussion? We have a limit to the numbers of family members you can have now. Although, I don't really see a problem with doing what they did. You make a family group or group of any kind in game and others want to tear it apart just to tear it apart. So what if they decided to keep making new family members to keep it going? There's no rule against making a new pc in the same clan you just had a pc in is there?
All that rule does is make it easier for other players who want to break your new toy, simply because it is there, to do so.

There isn't a rule, no, but it's discouraged.

The idea about letting people know to log in has merits. I think that, however is a different discussion. I don't think it is a solution to how to create global plotlines.

The Klestion discussion is more on point. It ties in with the idea of scripting, which I agree is not what we want.

What I would like is some facility to putting pieces in place to start the ball rolling toward big (BIG) conflicts. If they can arise out of personal plots that's even better. But once the pieces are in place the plot has to live or die on it's own. The ooc has to stop at some point, preferably early.

Quote from: Bacon on June 14, 2011, 12:52:40 PM
You make a family group or group of any kind in game and others want to tear it apart just to tear it apart.

All that rule does is make it easier for other players who want to break your new toy, simply because it is there, to do so.

(http://radiohappyhour.com/wp-content/uploads/dawson-crying.jpg)

Welcome to Armageddon

Quote from: Bacon on June 14, 2011, 11:45:42 AM
Who the hell are the Klestions?

dude bad thing happened a decade ago must stop all things remotely like it so bad thing does not happen and break game again

Quote from: Fathi on June 14, 2011, 09:22:01 PM

Quote from: Bacon on June 14, 2011, 11:45:42 AM
Who the hell are the Klestions?

dude bad thing happened a decade ago must stop all things remotely like it so bad thing does not happen and break game again

I definitely have mixed feelings towards this, because I can see where it would be abused and made "exclusive" (i.e, plots made specifically for x number of people, and screw everyone else), but I also understand the OP's point.

One of the things that drew me to Armageddon several years ago (I have just returned and am currently enjoying N00b status once again) was that I had the potential to DO anything -- you know, with a lot of patience and creativity and pizazz I might one day roll a sorcerer and get to play a dragon myself, or found my own group bent on subverting the integrity of the Tuluki nobility.  When I hear things that suggest that this game doesn't have any room for plots which disrupt the status quo, I get discouraged and feel that my time will be wasted here.  If there are rules in place to put a stop to "unrealistic" goals or changing the face of the game world -- be it a player-initiated mass RPT or a whole new faction or a massive attack against XYZ -- then where is the game going?  Why should it look exactly as it does 10 months from now?  Is that really what you think fun us?

There is also this weird idea that you can't DO anything if you have a "new" character.  This bugs me, too, because I really don't think it's wise to invest a year+ or more into a character before trying to decide if I want to maybe sorta get involved in this tiny little plot that will eventually fizzle out (and that is what this thread SEEMS to be suggesting).  I play quick succession characters -- I think they have the potential to be high impact.  I want to get in on a plot and play and have fun with it, and then when it gets boring or ends, move on.  Power to the folks who can sit there and play the SAME character 18 months straight -- but that's not for me.  Why would my playstyle -- which is no less pro-roleplay -- need to effect my involvement in starting large plots?  Sure, I won't go running out and fisty-cuffing mekillots, but seriously.  Is that what matters?

I also understand that it sucks to be an overworked, under-appreciated staff.  So... meh.  :/

TLDR ahead!

The opinions stated in this thread may or may not accurately reflect reality. I'd suggest that you attempt world-shaping plots and see how your experience matches up.

In regards to the necessity of living a long time: You can't get "stuff" done without other people. Many people play a succession of characters (sound familiar?) or don't have endless time to commit to the game. This means that any "stuff" takes 10, 100, or 1000 (or more) times longer than you would think.

Let's say you have a scheme to have a minion assassinate a noble that you hate for you and then pin it on a noble from the other city in order to start a war. Well, you have no assassins. So you have to be awesome enough to: attract a player of an assassin awesome enough to be skilled enough and dedicated enough to do the job for you. However, most such minions will suicide, store (I'm guilty), or stop playing. So you'll need to try over and over again until you get just the right assassin who manages to be skilled enough (both coded skill, the player's knowledge of game mechanics, and the player's creativity) to get the job done. This will take a while. At that point, the noble you were going to assassinate in order to make it look like an act of murder committed by the other city state in order to spark a war has stored. The only other active noble plays in a totally different time zone from you and your assassin. So you start to alter your plans. At this point, a mindbender sniffs out your plot and rats on you (subtly, perhaps, or perhaps not) to a templar who summons you to an apartment where five goons who just created their characters in the last week manage to pummel you to death behind a locked door.

Welcome to Armageddon.

Ok, so it's not always like that ... but do you see the necessity of living a long time? It's not necessarily a staff rule saying, "No, you may not assassinate a noble and make it look like the other city did the deed in order to start a war." You just have to play a long time to get it done. And what if you want to be a solo-assassin (guild assassin, in the following case) who pulls it off without messing about with all the minion crap?

Well, now you need to: train your combat skills and train your stealth skills. That takes time, especially the finer points of combat. Then, you're going to need a steady supply (and knowledge) of poisons. Where are you going to get those? Well, you're going to have to buy them or get a boss/friend who trusts you enough to start passing those things on to you. Both of those take time. Oh, and you'll need cures, too, for when you fail with the poison. So you'll need a friend/boss/coins who can provide you with those. Now where and how will you practice backstab? How twinky are you willing to get? Etc., etc., etc.

Ok! Ok! Enough with the assassination, you say. I just want to dig up Steinal. Well, OK. You think finding the location is going to be quick? Do you think getting the technology/tools to unearth it will be quick? All of the above applies all over again, especially because you're going to need combat people to protect the expedition, hunter types to lead the expedition through storms and handle the huntery aspects, certain other peoples to have the skill to search the ruins for you and uncover secret doors and disable the locks if necessary, etc., etc., etc. Again, you'll need coin and minions. See where this is going?

But, but, but you say! I don't want to LEAD an expedition to Steinal. I just want to INSPIRE one with my week old character. Well, let me tell you, you're going to have to be one hell of a con artist to trick a leader into devoting huge amounts of his/her OOC time plus huge amounts of IC time/resources/minions to this fun idea of yours and to carry on doing it once you get bored and go on to the next character.

I'm not saying all this to discourage you. Both of the above scenarios (Princess-Bride-assassination and finding Steinal) are awesome plots that I'd love to see in game and that 100%. would. be. possible. (I'm not saying the imms will build Steinal for you, but I'd warrant that if you invested the time, you'd find SOMETHING interesting out in the sands). So you can do those things. But you can't do those things without huge initiative, determination, and time.

My problem is not that getting something "big" done would be a lot of work. 

My problem is that there is this general pessimism about it.  Ok, so there's no "official rule", right -- well, there's still the fact that if you talk about something cool, everyone who's already jaded with the game is gonna frown at you.  It's no longer, "Well, this COULD be a pretty cool idea -- let's give it a try!" it's, "This is a lot of work so I'm going to give you 20,000 reasons why you shouldn't even bother.  Here, play this nameless Bynner instead and go cyber -- I mean, have story-appropriate mudsex."

Take my, "I want to be a dragon!" aspiration.  Rather than going, "That's neat.  Here's some things you can do first to learn how to play a role like that..." and then getting these suggestions about what kind of roles would interest someone like me, I get things like, "That's IC.  Go find out IC!  IC!!!!!!!!!!!!" (especially in response to questions that would otherwise be inappropriate to "find out IC"), or "ROFLCOPTER!  Newb." or "We really don't accept sorcerers-wanting-to-be-dragon apps anymore.  See x Policy, Chapter 7, Article 2."  It's a buzzkill.  I lose any interest to play.  It's not that the game isn't FUN, it's just that the knowledge that none of my awesome goals are really attainable bums me out and now, thanks to you (the jaded guys out there), I'm jaded too.  And now I frown at n00bs who want to do cool stuff.   Eventually, I do get tired of playing the same three races and the same five classes.



A bit back on topic -- a long while back, I had a hard time trying to get even personal plots going because of the OOC rule.  I'm ALL for respecting IC and OOC boundaries because it's just not cool to screw someone over when the purpose of a social game like this is to have SHARED fun.  The policy gets taken to a point where it longer has any common sense in some situations, and as a result, negatively effects the game and the spirit of this idea of "shared fun."  I personally don't want to try and randomly start a plot with some random guy if the kind of plot I'm looking for requires some short-term cooperation:  take for instance, the kidnapping scene.

Maybe it's not like this anymore, but back when I played some years ago, players had a knee-jerk reaction to just kill people.  If someone was trying to kidnap me -- how in the hell would I know that, rather than them trying to just PK me straight-up for my shiny chalton boots?  It's way more complicated than that -- if I were to get kidnapped, the kidnapper's PLAYER has to have the semi-comfort of knowing I will cooperate through roleplay:  I'm not going to just wait for him to log off and go, "Pffft", take off my virtual ropes, and walk back to Allanak.  ICly, I would not be able to do that because his character would have virtual control over mine -- but OOCly, he either has to trust me to "play along" for the sake of the fun of it, or he has kill me (which is not the point of the RP).  As the kidnapee, I have to trust that he's not going to tote me off to his seekrit hideout and then leave me there to sit on my hands emoting to myself for 6 RL days. 

Adding in "coded" ways to keep me from being an OOC douchebag, like say, coded ropes, would be a TERRIBLE thing to do, because what if I play six hours a day and he only plays two?  Well, that's punishing ME and not my character, and that's not cool.  So in the end, something like that HAS to be OOC arranged for everyone to enjoy it and to see something come of it.  There doesn't need to be any silly agreements like, "I promise not to kill your PC", but there needs to be, "This is what we intend to do and this is how we can facilitate it if we work together."

In the end, I have NO problems what-so-ever with a player PMing me or whatever and going, "Hey, the game's been kind of boring.  What to try something cool?"  In fact, I'd be syked that they'd want to include me.

Quote from: Erisine on June 15, 2011, 12:15:49 AM
My problem is not that getting something "big" done would be a lot of work. 

My problem is that there is this general pessimism about it.  Ok, so there's no "official rule", right -- well, there's still the fact that if you talk about something cool, everyone who's already jaded with the game is gonna frown at you.  It's no longer, "Well, this COULD be a pretty cool idea -- let's give it a try!" it's, "This is a lot of work so I'm going to give you 20,000 reasons why you shouldn't even bother.  Here, play this nameless Bynner instead and go cyber -- I mean, have story-appropriate mudsex."

Take my, "I want to be a dragon!" aspiration.  Rather than going, "That's neat.  Here's some things you can do first to learn how to play a role like that..." and then getting these suggestions about what kind of roles would interest someone like me, I get things like, "That's IC.  Go find out IC!  IC!!!!!!!!!!!!" (especially in response to questions that would otherwise be inappropriate to "find out IC"), or "ROFLCOPTER!  Newb." or "We really don't accept sorcerers-wanting-to-be-dragon apps anymore.  See x Policy, Chapter 7, Article 2."  It's a buzzkill.  I lose any interest to play.  It's not that the game isn't FUN, it's just that the knowledge that none of my awesome goals are really attainable bums me out and now, thanks to you (the jaded guys out there), I'm jaded too.  And now I frown at n00bs who want to do cool stuff.   Eventually, I do get tired of playing the same three races and the same five classes.

You seem to be confusing the GDB with the game.

Not everything said here is true. Or as true as you/they think it is.

In the interest of playing devils advocate here. Consider the following.

1. In theory kidnapping is an OOC consent scenario.

tl:dr - Situations which significantly affect a PCs playability should be viable for consent. If given then it's an indication they intend to play along and RP the scenario properly.

I'll qualify this with the simple logic that is a character is given consent rights for torture, disfigurement, and graphic scenes. There's really no reason not to allow for kidnapping consent. Since kidnapping someone is significantly affecting their play [possibly like enslaving them would] I wouldn't imagine that asking OOC - You have been kidnapped. Consent to kidnapping? -after- the deed is done would be out of line.

If they consent, then it should be implied that are playing along. If they do not, then you off them. It's a shame if they choose not to consent but if your plan requires player co-operation and could possibly significantly affect their playability, then it's really only right. Kill em off or ask the staff if the PC can be stored and their vnpc retained as a hostage. etc etc etc.

Any further thoughts or work-arounds would require staff input, but consent means co-operation and no consent means death or a work around approved by the staff. Ta da.

Sounds like you want to be a dragon.

1) I don't mean to be a buzzkill, but saying, "Could I become the third most powerful (commonly) known being in the Known?" isn't going to get you a response of "Sure! Here it is! Have fun and drive responsibly!"

2) That's a neat goal. You can go achieve it. No one is going to give you truly detailed suggestions, because many players have no clue (me included) how to really go about it. Your assumption that step #1 is "be a sorcerer" might not even be correct, for all you know. Maybe you have to pull a magick sword out of magick stone in a magick castle somewhere. If I were going to attempt this with a character you can play NOW, though, I'd operate under the following guidelines that might also serve as grist for your imaginative mill: A) make it your character's goal to understand magick AND history as much as possible, B) spend a lot of time pondering how the God-king's operate - everything from the big picture to some of the little tiny details of their laws and start piecing together information that will help you with part A, and C) figure out a social position or role in the Known that would allow you to do all this, or maybe look the other way while you did it, or maybe help you. Pursue all this, and you'll be well ahead of me in game knowledge and even if you don't end up as a God king, you'll end up as a bad-ass who knows lots of cool dangerous stuff and has so many ancient magickal texts that he uses them for toilet paper.

3) If you're wanting an OOC long term strategy to play a sorceror: play a character who is compelling and file regular reports until you get a point of karma and keep doing it until you get two points of karma then try out a gemmed water mage. Make the character old, frail, and possibly unappealing (half-elf, rinthi, weird mutant, etc.). Do you like the experience of playing a loathed and limited water mage and did you really enjoy the magick system? Did you demonstrate to yourself that you can handle an extremely lonely and sometimes stultifying existence? If yes, keep playing compelling characters, following the OOC rules, and exploring varying magick-related roles (taking breaks for mundane fun, just to learn more game mechanics and to keep your play fresh) until you are within 4 karma points of a sorcerer. Start special apping sorcs at regular intervals while maintaining a trustworthy and high level of play. Demonstrate to staff that you can responsibly handle the most powerful of roles and can be both a compelling character and someone who can handle isolated experiences. Demonstrate that you can keep secrets, that you can survive ICly and are worth the time setting you up in a very special role, and that you are a trustworthy player who also doesn't go all drama-queen on the staff whenever the game doesn't go your way. Eventually, you'll probably get a shot at playing a sorc.

4) All of the above isn't a chore. It's not obstacles. It's FUN. I really mean that. And you can really achieve it. Or, even if you don't achieve it, you'll have so much fun along the way that the goal you started with won't really be that important in the end, because you've been doing other awesome stuff and have discovered that there's actually whole dimensions of the game that you never guessed at and that are way cooler than being a flashy dragon.

5) You can combine my point #2 and my point #3, too! You can do both at the same time. So get out there and have fun and see where you end up. If you want to play a dragon tomorrow. Or this week. Or this year... well, probably not. But you may be surprised by what cool stuff you stumble into.

Is that positive enough? It's not mean to be sarcastic or condescending. I just kinda inspired myself ... into wishing I had the play time that I once had.

p.s.: The players who actually know about magick, dragons, and sorcerers are probably all snickering at my suggestions. That's OK. You can start where I'd start. Or start with some other plan of your own. It doesn't matter. You'll either get there or find something even better along the way. Go get 'em!

Quote from: Thunkkin on June 15, 2011, 01:18:52 AM
Sounds like you want to be a dragon.

1) I don't mean to be a buzzkill, but saying, "Could I become the third most powerful (commonly) known being in the Known?" isn't going to get you a response of "Sure! Here it is! Have fun and drive responsibly!"

2) That's a neat goal. You can go achieve it. No one is going to give you truly detailed suggestions, because many players have no clue (me included) how to really go about it. Your assumption that step #1 is "be a sorcerer" might not even be correct, for all you know. Maybe you have to pull a magick sword out of magick stone in a magick castle somewhere. If I were going to attempt this with a character you can play NOW, though, I'd operate under the following guidelines that might also serve as grist for your imaginative mill: A) make it your character's goal to understand magick AND history as much as possible, B) spend a lot of time pondering how the God-king's operate - everything from the big picture to some of the little tiny details of their laws and start piecing together information that will help you with part A, and C) figure out a social position or role in the Known that would allow you to do all this, or maybe look the other way while you did it, or maybe help you. Pursue all this, and you'll be well ahead of me in game knowledge and even if you don't end up as a God king, you'll end up as a bad-ass who knows lots of cool dangerous stuff and has so many ancient magickal texts that he uses them for toilet paper.

3) If you're wanting an OOC long term strategy to play a sorceror: play a character who is compelling and file regular reports until you get a point of karma and keep doing it until you get two points of karma then try out a gemmed water mage. Make the character old, frail, and possibly unappealing (half-elf, rinthi, weird mutant, etc.). Do you like the experience of playing a loathed and limited water mage and did you really enjoy the magick system? Did you demonstrate to yourself that you can handle an extremely lonely and sometimes stultifying existence? If yes, keep playing compelling characters, following the OOC rules, and exploring varying magick-related roles (taking breaks for mundane fun, just to learn more game mechanics and to keep your play fresh) until you are within 4 karma points of a sorcerer. Start special apping sorcs at regular intervals while maintaining a trustworthy and high level of play. Demonstrate to staff that you can responsibly handle the most powerful of roles and can be both a compelling character and someone who can handle isolated experiences. Demonstrate that you can keep secrets, that you can survive ICly and are worth the time setting you up in a very special role, and that you are a trustworthy player who also doesn't go all drama-queen on the staff whenever the game doesn't go your way. Eventually, you'll probably get a shot at playing a sorc.

4) All of the above isn't a chore. It's not obstacles. It's FUN. I really mean that. And you can really achieve it. Or, even if you don't achieve it, you'll have so much fun along the way that the goal you started with won't really be that important in the end, because you've been doing other awesome stuff and have discovered that there's actually whole dimensions of the game that you never guessed at and that are way cooler than being a flashy dragon.

5) You can combine my point #2 and my point #3, too! You can do both at the same time. So get out there and have fun and see where you end up. If you want to play a dragon tomorrow. Or this week. Or this year... well, probably not. But you may be surprised by what cool stuff you stumble into.

Is that positive enough? It's not mean to be sarcastic or condescending. I just kinda inspired myself ... into wishing I had the play time that I once had.

p.s.: The players who actually know about magick, dragons, and sorcerers are probably all snickering at my suggestions. That's OK. You can start where I'd start. Or start with some other plan of your own. It doesn't matter. You'll either get there or find something even better along the way. Go get 'em!

Well, it was an exaggerated example to begin with, but this is more in line with what I feel would be a better response to ideas, so thank you for the post... especially since you said you even inspired yourself, and that's what I think we (as a community) should try to do.  Inspiration > Pessimistic "you can't play that way" bullcrap.

Quote from: Jeshin on June 15, 2011, 12:32:42 AM
In the interest of playing devils advocate here. Consider the following.

1. In theory kidnapping is an OOC consent scenario.

tl:dr - Situations which significantly affect a PCs playability should be viable for consent. If given then it's an indication they intend to play along and RP the scenario properly.

I'll qualify this with the simple logic that is a character is given consent rights for torture, disfigurement, and graphic scenes. There's really no reason not to allow for kidnapping consent. Since kidnapping someone is significantly affecting their play [possibly like enslaving them would] I wouldn't imagine that asking OOC - You have been kidnapped. Consent to kidnapping? -after- the deed is done would be out of line.

If they consent, then it should be implied that are playing along. If they do not, then you off them. It's a shame if they choose not to consent but if your plan requires player co-operation and could possibly significantly affect their playability, then it's really only right. Kill em off or ask the staff if the PC can be stored and their vnpc retained as a hostage. etc etc etc.

Any further thoughts or work-arounds would require staff input, but consent means co-operation and no consent means death or a work around approved by the staff. Ta da.

This is definitely one way to do it, but my play-style is a little more "friendly" than that, OOCly speaking.  I don't really think it's all that cool to go around PKing people without a LEGITIMATE IC reason to do so, or putting them in a position where they have to choose to significantly alter their style or kiss their PC goodbye.  Usually when you set out to kidnap someone, then it means you don't actually intend to kill them:  doing so really negates the entire purpose of kidnapping them, and probably not just gives that player a really bad day, but it can also potentially screw over your own plot line.  You can chock it up to an "accidental death", but then you're just making excuses for something that would not have happened "IC", but you had to do because you pidgeon-holed yourself.  Thus, waiting until AFTER you have 'kidnapped' someone is sloppy, at best.

I think that it would be a good idea to allow for a player to ask another player for OOC consent to rape/kidnapping/torture/whatever via staff and the request tool.

That way you could do so without having to OOC'ly tip your hand and be like "Oh yeah BTW you probably shouldn't go anywhere alone with me since I'm asking if you're cool with being kidnapped."

Quote from: musashi on June 15, 2011, 09:23:39 AM
I think that it would be a good idea to allow for a player to ask another player for OOC consent to rape/kidnapping/torture/whatever via staff and the request tool.

That way you could do so without having to OOC'ly tip your hand and be like "Oh yeah BTW you probably shouldn't go anywhere alone with me since I'm asking if you're cool with being kidnapped."

I like this idea, actually -- it also allows you to remain semi-anonymous, so you can safely make such requests without fear of bumping into that one Bad Player.

I disagree that things that alter playability should all require consent. (Sorry if I've misread- on phone- at work.) If shitty thing happen that's awesome. It never feels awesome in that first moment though. Sometimes choice isn't all it's cracked up to be.
Rape is an exception. I've had two PCs raped over the time I've played. The first was before the rule that you had to consent. The second I simply asked to fade. I didn't want to be rude. Or a wimp. Or take an easy out. Both times were faded. Both times left me feeling a little depressed and icky. Both times it invaded my sleep even though both times were faded. I think rape is too intense not to require consent. I don't even care if the majority of people agree. If that policy spares people real life stress or trauma it's doing it's job.  But murder? Torture? Abuse? Kidnapping?  That's the game world. You give consent by logging in.

Does anyone here actually think that murder requires consent in Armageddon?  :-\

Kidnapping could hypothetically fall under the new slavery rules, at least if it's more than 1-2 RL days.

Also, consider the duration of coded jailing.  If long-term (ish) kidnapping was really 100% cool with the immortals, jail times would be WAY longer, or at least the procedure would be to keep them there indefinitely until a PC (templar) came to deal with them.

Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 15, 2011, 10:36:16 AM
Kidnapping could hypothetically fall under the new slavery rules, at least if it's more than 1-2 RL days.

Also, consider the duration of coded jailing.  If long-term (ish) kidnapping was really 100% cool with the immortals, jail times would be WAY longer, or at least the procedure would be to keep them there indefinitely until a PC (templar) came to deal with them.

Hence why I was thinking getting consent beforehand would be nice to make sure the person is cool with being kidnapped.

Quote from: musashi on June 15, 2011, 10:40:26 AM

Quote from: Marauder Moe on June 15, 2011, 10:36:16 AM
Kidnapping could hypothetically fall under the new slavery rules, at least if it's more than 1-2 RL days.

Also, consider the duration of coded jailing.  If long-term (ish) kidnapping was really 100% cool with the immortals, jail times would be WAY longer, or at least the procedure would be to keep them there indefinitely until a PC (templar) came to deal with them.

Hence why I was thinking getting consent beforehand would be nice to make sure the person is cool with being kidnapped.

But if they're OOCly cool with being kidnapped, but their character is ICly not interested in letting that happen...you can't get around the fact that you're warning them ahead of time.

Compromise solution is to go through with your plan, catch them and put them in the box, and then OOC: D you consent being jailed confined indefinitely (not permanently), or shall I kill you now?

Rape is the only kind of plot that should absolutely not happen if the other player does not consent, IMO.

Well just because you ask for consent via staff doesn't mean you're going to kidnap them that same day. The actual strike might happen weeks, maybe months later. Plenty of time for them to slip up and let their guard down I think. But just my opinion.

Quote from: musashi on June 15, 2011, 11:14:13 AM
Well just because you ask for consent via staff doesn't mean you're going to kidnap them that same day. The actual strike might happen weeks, maybe months later. Plenty of time for them to slip up and let their guard down I think. But just my opinion.

I wish I could trust the playerbase that much. :X

Who's talking about trusting them? I'm saying their attention span is short  :P

Quote from: hyzhenhok on June 15, 2011, 11:15:15 AM
I wish I could trust the playerbase that much. :X

I think this fact prevents a lot of potentially interesting stuff from happening.  Players don't trust other players, so we put up walls in order to protect our characters and inadvertently kill fun conflict before it ever happens.

I'd like to see a system in place to promote trust between players, but I don't know how it could be done without adding some sort of OOC-knowledge.

What if we created some sort of player archetypes, or codes of conduct with rules like, "I don't invite other characters into my character's apartment with the intent of killing them," "My thieves won't take everything your character owns, just their fair share," or "I play out potentially fatal scenes rather than fleeing at the first sign of trouble," and then had some way to reference it in game, so you could develop some reasonable expectations from the players around you?

Because SoI is rather annoying, Old Kank, and I have a feeling most of the playerbase doesn't feel like adopting some of their policies.

Quote from: MeTekillot on June 15, 2011, 01:23:50 PM
Because SoI is rather annoying, Old Kank, and I have a feeling most of the playerbase doesn't feel like adopting some of their policies.

I've never played SoI.  Is that something they do and does it work?

They have codes of conduct. You can't 'run' in the wilderness. You can't attack someone in the wilderness without throwing off 4-5 emotes. Various other stupid things like that.

Aren't most players here cool with getting their asses handed to them? Seriously. If I ever had a PC that was kidnapped, held for ransom, locked up with some scrappy duds and only a piece of bread a day, I think it'd be pretty neat.

SoI, you've got to understand, has certain standards it must meet due to Tolkien Enterprises. Arm doesn't have any copyright infringement BS, I'm fairly sure, (right?) and so I think this game makes it so much more easy to play a -real- gritty character, with real devious intent.

And now that I've strayed to the topic at hand by straying with the strayers and trying to cull themmmm.  :-[

I can see the view of a request to staff, but I can also see the lack of feasibility in such. Thus this makes each instance a case by case issue.

1. First point, say your trying to run a long kidnapping plot, then it would make sense to let staff know. But not so much to inquire with the player if they care for this, but to establish what might need to be in place staff side so they know what the intention is.

Now Kidnapping for ransom is very different for the intent to enslave. Simple for the fact you do not intent to keep the person bond for a life time.

I believe that it is the responsibility of the kidnapper (player) To insure all things are in order as far as needing to have the third party for whom will pay the ransom also available. This can be done via the way and does not need to be done oocly.

To continue, Kidnapping does not need to be ooc either, simple state your intention to the pc in the moment, or if you gain their trust, trap them some where alone with you. Sure they may fight and try to get away. That is their right, and in Rl a person with an opportunity to get away would.
If you do not wish to kill them yet need to use force, then I suggest you take into account your choice of weapons and or mercy status.
You may have to drag their limp body off and revive them after they are (emoted to) tied up.

2. second point, suppose you are a raider, not a murderer, just a raider and you happen upon a well to do that has ties to a house, merchant or noble. Say for instance in that moment you see an opportunity to gain more sid by ransoming them.

So here you do not have an opportunity to first send in a request, nor do I see a need to say Of ooc: I'm going to kidnap you.
I do believe this falls into the Ic "I'm going to hold you till you house can pay for your return." If they run then chase them down, or simply knock them the 'f' out before hand, ties them up, revive them and tell your intentions. All available to be done Icly.


3. Third point, Consider your target audience, who are your ransoming the person back to. If an agent of a merchant House, then perhaps you would get the name of someone above them from the person. In this you will need to arrange with staff for that NPC, VNPC to be available. Thus, put in a request before hand and or do a wish up (depending on the circumstance for which makes this an and or situation.)


All of this keeps the elements of spontanaity to the scene and game.

Quote from: MeTekillot on June 15, 2011, 01:28:22 PM
They have codes of conduct. You can't 'run' in the wilderness. You can't attack someone in the wilderness without throwing off 4-5 emotes. Various other stupid things like that.

And yeah. Mostly out of courtesy and because people would twink from hiding spots and shoot people to PK in the face. The orc players with their ridiculous caps on shit (they had 100% higher caps due to their strength caps), would just murder anything that came past them in the wilderness, without any RP.

I think that it's lame to not RP something out like death, kidnapping, torture, whatever,  but hey. I think the imms would address someone if they were being twinky as balls.

Quote from: boog on June 15, 2011, 01:29:37 PM
Aren't most players here cool with getting their asses handed to them? Seriously. If I ever had a PC that was kidnapped, held for ransom, locked up with some scrappy duds and only a piece of bread a day, I think it'd be pretty neat.

I think players like the IDEA of being cool with getting their character's asses handed to them, but philosophy and practice start diverging when there's 40 days of playing time invested in a character.  I don't blame them, either - I don't want to see the time I invested in my murderous assassin thrown away because some newplar wants to make a name for himself.

Quote from: MeTekillot on June 15, 2011, 01:28:22 PM
They have codes of conduct. You can't 'run' in the wilderness. You can't attack someone in the wilderness without throwing off 4-5 emotes. Various other stupid things like that.

Are those hard and fast rules that are regulated by the staff?  If so, I agree, that sounds annoying.

I wasn't thinking of a code of conduct as a set of rigid requirements.  I was thinking of it as something that says, from one player to another, "I'm not out to fuck you over."

Quote from: Old Kank on June 15, 2011, 01:42:54 PM
"I'm not out to fuck you over."

Murder. Betrayl. Somethingsomethingsomething.

Let's face it. A large appeal of this game is the chance to fuck other people over.

I see what you mean, though. I think you mean, "I'm not out to fuck you over in a twinkish, unrealistic, or unsatisfying way." But then many of us would have to add, "Unless it serves my character's true ends to have your throat slit without any warning to you or any chance for you to ask me about my true plan or to say dying words to your loved ones."

So ... yeah ...

"I'm not out to fuck you over for the sake of 'winning', I'm out to fuck you over if it advances the story in a meaningful way."

For the record, I've never instarun from tense PC-PC situations without at least emoting first, and I've never been screwed over for it. I may be optimistic, but I like to think that if you show the other player you're willing to play ball, they will roll with it.

I walk into bad situations knowing it's bad because I want that experience. And sometimes it leaves me feeling -really- empty, and other times it leaves me feeling fulfilled.

So, dying to NPC #2345535 is bad, but dying to amazing pc (whatever) is substantially more amazing. And tends to be amazing to begin with.

Quote from: Thunkkin on June 15, 2011, 02:07:15 PM
I think you mean, "I'm not out to fuck you over in a twinkish, unrealistic, or unsatisfying way." But then many of us would have to add, "Unless it serves my character's true ends to have your throat slit without any warning to you or any chance for you to ask me about my true plan or to say dying words to your loved ones."

Yeah.  I think 'unsatisfying' is the key word.  I don't mind putting my characters in harm's way, but I hope to get something satisfying out of it.  

When it comes to death, my wish would be that characters be dealt with according to their actual/potential contribution to the game's story rather than with a focus on 'winning,' as Delirium said.  Treat your character's enemies with the respect that their players deserve because, for better or worse, they make the game more interesting for you.

Also remember that the way you would do something isn't necessarily the way your character would do something. You may very well be Dr. Doom, but your character can be a bumbling idiot when it comes to actually trying to deal with their enemies.

I would REALLY hope that the "appeal" of this game is NOT to "fuck people over."  There is a HUGE difference between getting off because your character just executed a well-laid trap with perfection, and getting off because you think that well-made negatively effected the player behind the keyboard.  If you want to play that way, I hope that you get bored and move onto some other crappy MUD.

I think that players SHOULD have a code of ethics.  You don't have to promise you won't run in the wilderness, or not kill someone in a mugging-gone-bad.  But you SHOULD be able to say to yourself, "You know what, I'm not going to just make it a habit to type, 'e', 'e', 'n', 'k man'."  I had expected that this is partially what the karma system was for.  If the staff agree with this notion, then I don't see any reason why we can't continue to send notes into the staff when we observe other players going out of their way to show good ethics, or when we see players in certain positions (like templars) showing bad ethics.

If I go through the efforts to use a request tool to send a message to someone asking for consent, I EXPECT them not to use that OOC knowledge.  The rules of the game EXPECTS them not to use that knowledge.  If they do, then I hope the staff would take notice, because that is bad ethics and it negatively impacts the game overall.  There is no reason for me to go out of my way to be a DICK to someone just because I want to imagine myself getting one over on somebody.

As for murder -- that's separate.  If I INTEND to kill someone, then I will.  It doesn't handicap the player in question.  Hopefully I do in a manner that shows good ethics and that I don't simply make it a borefest for THEM -- hopefully they get to interact instead of being all, "La la la, I'm gonna log into Arm today!"  *MANTISHEAD*  "Wtf?"   <---- This is fine for NPCs.  This is not fine for you or me.

Two things, first the idea that we don't risk long lived pcs because they are long lived obviates the need for permadeath. I'm not saying it's wrong- just that I don't understand.

Second, if we all decide not to take risks to further plots, plots will become small safe and static.

It is all good if you want to make a character from time to time that "wants to set the world on fire just to watch it burn". The problem I have is that it seems all to often that players decide out of character: "Looks like someone is trying to build something in game. I'm going to contrive a reason for my character to disrupt/destroy it."
If things happen in character to actually create a reason for your character to even want to pay attention to what's going on with the other or to take action against them or what they are doing, that's fine too. I think that it is sleezy  as a player to come up with reasons to tear down other's shit, just to be an asshole to the player.

My honest opinion is that those types of players are bored and lazy. Bored, so they seek something to get involved with, lazy, because they decide that fucking up someone else's hard work is easier than trying to create something to conflict with or surpass the other persons' achievements. Not to say that it isn't okay to try and obstruct someone else's goals.

I think most people know the difference between petty griefing and legitimate conflict, but it's those few who don't that tend to tear down the entire stack of dominoes and make it insanely frustrating for those putting real effort in. Some players have become rather hesitant to contribute an overabundance of time or effort for just that reason. It becomes a chore to lead, create, and inspire, when others try to destroy you merely for putting yourself out there, being good at what you do, and involving others.

I think that's a large reason why you see so many calls for leadership roles.

Some people just get off on griefing.

Years ago, (before online games were the norm), one of my cousins liked to challenge people to games of Risk^TM. He wasn't a bad player, so long as he was winning, but as soon as the tide turned against him, he would amass a single army using all his resources, then proceed to cut weaving lines through other players' territory. He would only leave a single army to occupy any territory he took, and wouldn't stop until he had exhausted his troops. At the end of his turn, he would forfeit and walk away, leaving the other players with an hour's worth of cleanup if they even wanted to continue playing. As far as he was concerned, he had just won, because he had fun at the expense of every one else.

Years later, I tried to introduce him to Eve, but realized my mistake as soon as he started asking questions about anonymous spamming.

Some people just get off on griefing.

People do this RL too, not just in games.  People love to shit up everything when they aren't on top.  That's a pretty realistic aspect.  Look up crab mentality, for this well documented phenomenon.

I think, "People just love to grief" is a loser's mentality...a rationalization for when things just happen not to go your way.  Your character's story isn't any more important than any other character's story, and if their story happens to involve fucking your shit all up, really...who are you to complain about it?

Quote from: Erisine on June 15, 2011, 05:00:42 PM
k man

This is what happens when you type that

You kiss the bearded, slope-browed man.

The bearded, slope-browed man says in sirihish, sounding incredulous:
     "Th' fuck ya doin' fella!?"

The bearded, slope-browed man attacks you!
The bearded, slope-browed man slashes you in the head, dealing frightening damage!

Unless you alias "k" in your client to "kill". Which, then, you're just being a jerk.

I love the idea of 'fucking someone up'. Though I do hate that most would just rather playerkill instead.

In my oppinion, it's not that some players are griefers. It's just that some players are lazy. They would rather bump x character out of the story completely than have to cope with them.

I guess this has been said more or less already.

Quote from: Synthesis on June 17, 2011, 12:17:37 AM
I think, "People just love to grief" is a loser's mentality...a rationalization for when things just happen not to go your way.  Your character's story isn't any more important than any other character's story, and if their story happens to involve fucking your shit all up, really...who are you to complain about it?

There's a big difference between it being in character for them to go fuck someone else's shit up and doing it purely because out of character, then enjoy it. I have absolutely no problem with it being done for in character reasons, not at all. It's the people who are doing it for purely out of character reasons that irk me. For example, people who make it an out of character goal to kill a long lived character purely to kill a long lived character. Another example, people who make it an out of character goal to destroy a player created clan for their own personal pleasure/hatred of a player whose character is involved/wanting to wipe out the clan so the characters will go join coded clans,etc.

In character caused and created struggle, strife, competition, and conflict is fine. Contriving reasons to make it look in character when it is purely out of character motivated, is griefing.