Quote from: staggerlee on December 02, 2008, 05:53:58 PM
I'm not sure there is a clean solution to the problem, so don't feel pressured to provide one or take this as an attack on the game or its direction.  There's always going to be a somewhat awkward relationship between code and rp, and they're never going to mesh perfectly.

This is likely to persist, despite the innovations or changes planned for Arm 2.0.  There will always be a disconnect between people wants, expectations, and opinions.  It's nearly impossible to think of a solution that perfectly balances all of these variables and integrates them into one tidy package.  I agree with Synthesis that the game strikes a nice balance between the two; code heavy characters can impose their will to some degree, but without any RP - they aren't really contributing to the story, and the lack of socialization and interaction with the PTB (powers-that-be) will curb them from achieving anything of substance.

It's in that way that I stress code doesn't trump RP.  I couldn't have achieved any of the goals that I'd planned without RP, no matter how much coded ability I had at my disposal.  No amount of fighting prowess would have convinced the Lirathuans to sell me the land I needed to build.  No amount of hard coded trading and wealth would've provided me with the contacts and relationships necessary to protect me politically against would-be usurpers to my business.  No amount of coded stealthiness would've provided me with the passion and fire to ignite a dwarven army to fight.

At any rate, I have no doubts that the system will continue to improve as we move from Arm 1.0 to Arm 2.0 and address at least some of the concerns you have regarding the relationship between RP and code.  Until then, it may help your feelings of frustration by developing characters whose concept abides by the actual state of the game, rather than whatever you might perceive as its intended state.

-LoD

I think it's a phallacy to think that code and RP are mutually exclusive. As LoD posts, code gives structure to the universe that is Arm. It gives physics to the World and Universe that is Zalanthas. It's designed to create a (semi) realistic setting, with which to frame and shape the actions of your characters in your RP.

For instance:

Quote from: ale six on December 01, 2008, 07:30:20 PM
- Deaths are not reversed except in cases of bugs, no matter how stupid or accidental, no matter how many plots they destroy, no matter how ICly ridiculous the death is. If the plots of an entire city are revolving around you, but while alone in your apartment late at night you accidentally fill a cup from a keg of cleanser and drink it, GG. I'm sure this has happened to somebody at least once.

IRL, accidents happen all the time. Bad things happen to great people, and no ammount of wishing is going to bring someone back, regardless of the plots they were in. Elvis died on the toilet. Heath Ledger randomly died out of the blue, on the cusp of one of his greatest accomplishments. Their deaths may be stupid, and tragic, but they shape our lives, and we're the players in our own version of Armageddon. This is what makes Arm great: that stupid, tragic things happen every day, and that shapes the survivors lives.

All of that said: during my time on Staff, I've seen PCs spared from death many times, and not simply for bugs. I've seen PCs brought back for drinking from cleanser buckets, from twinky assassinations in apartments (or even in public), and even from perfectly valid and reasonable IC deaths. Each was taken as a case by case basis. Does it mean it's a perfect system? No, but nothing ever is.

Quote
- The weather code can make travel simply unplayable for days on end in some areas. Even if you have a major RPT scheduled for weeks, if it's blinding sands, no luck for you.

IRL, people plan major RPTs all the time. They're called weddings. You know what? They get rained out all the time. Again, the code forms the physics and framework of the world. IRL, when people plan outdoor weddings, they also usually have a backup plan in case of poor weather. Finding a solution around the problems the gameworld gives you is part of the experience of roleplaying in a realistic setting.

That said: I've also seen sandstorms done away with when they got in the way of something really important. Again, this is (or was) handled on a case by case basis. If it were me, I would make planning for inclement weather part of the experience of RPing in a world where sandstorms are common.

Quote
- Thieves and burglars with a few days spent buffing their skill can pull off some hugely unrealistic things, like raiding entire apartment buildings, and locked estates. You can quit your character out in a one room apartment with all your stuff there and return the next day to find it empty. ICly your character never left. Codedly? Room was empty. Stuff ganked.

Again, I dissagree here. Sure, people can (and do) do these things. But we also call those people twinks, and the current Karma/account system allows the staff to monitor and police these sorts of actions. I've seen player accounts with nothing but 'Human Merchant' as options for play. Why? Because they proved to the Staff that they couldn't handle any other roles realistically. Additionally, LoD makes some excellent points about the dissassociation between PCs who "game" vs. PCs who "Play The Game".

So, I think that the game strikes a pretty good balance. The code provides a real-world setting which (usually) behaves in a predictable and logically structured maner. There is gravity. These things can kill you. Weather can be a bitch. Where the code fails, the Staff can - and often do - step in and assist. I've seen PCs wish up to climb through windows that were only virtual. I've seen PCs hide under virtual cots to try and stage a jailbreak. For me, the game presented it's great potential while I was playing my 3rd PC: the day my character was standing on a rocky road, and I wished up to ask if I could pick up a rock..and one got handed to me. That PC carried that rock for the rest of his life.

The code prevents your dwarven warrior from allowing you to become a feathered kank, name himself Kanklequatle and live on Floof, the Elemental Plane of Downy Feather Pillows. Does this mean code gets in the way of your RP? Not at all: you're welcome try...and you might even succeed. It may be unlikely, as the game presents structure to make that hard, but therein lies the best part - and the reward - of roleplaying.


feel a shining burst of reassurance and joy along with the undesirable urge to log in and play right now.
You feel a shining burst of reassurance and joy along with the undesirable urge to log in and play right now.


It's not really a fallacy... but it definitely tends toward a false dichotomy.  These conversations tend to gravitate toward extremes, as I'm sure we're all aware. At the heart of it, I'm talking about mechanics encouraging or discouraging certain behaviour, nothing more extreme than that.  I also agree with previous posters that the game has a considerably higher standard of rp than many other examples that could be cited.  But I think we can also agree that it's still a long way from perfect, and I do not see a discussion of those mechanics and how to motivate players and reduce frustration is in any way harmful.  

In a lot of ways Tlaloc you just demonstrated why I think the staff can and should be heavily involved in the day to day affairs of the mud... and it is certainly possible that a properly designed code base could allow them more time to do that kind of thing, if that's something they see as desirable.  It may be the most elegant and effective solution, hopefully the staff already thought of that and have intended as much all along.

QuoteI agree with Synthesis that the game strikes a nice balance between the two; code heavy characters can impose their will to some degree, but without any RP - they aren't really contributing to the story, and the lack of socialization and interaction with the PTB (powers-that-be) will curb them from achieving anything of substance.

I don't disagree with this statement by LoD, but I think it in fact reinforces what I'd identify as a problem. Code heavy characters can impose their will to a LARGE degree, and can often be a detriment to plots and other players. I have been a victim of and seen many instances and abuses of this - from twink thieves and burglars to people subduing characters in the middle of the street as soon as they enter rooms.

An example comes to mind of a time back when I played a Borsail noble. One of my character's cousins was very new to his role and had forgotten to bring a guard with him when we went to the Trader's. Another player (apparently a brand new warrior with high strength) took notice of this, and walked into the Trader's Inn, subdued the noble from his table, and proceeded to drag the guy out the inn, down the street, all the way to the rinth, where he proceeded to throw the noble down a well. I don't exactly think this is a realistic situation, yet the code allowed it. I don't even have good suggestions on how to prevent things like that. The only two options I see are much, much more detailed code, (to represent rooms spatially so that you can't subdue a guy from across a tavern, and maybe to make NPCs think "Hey, here's a screaming noble being carried down the street, maybe I should do something.") or much more proactive staff intervention, including retroactively undoing things that don't make sense. But it is an example of how coded skills reign supreme, regardless of if their application is valid or not.

So while you're right, LoD, that code-heavy characters can't achieve anything of substance to the extent you or I have, they can still contribute to the story - to OOC detriment. I think for the game to move towards what it claims to aspire to, that sort of thing needs to be mitigated as much as possible.

Lastly,

QuoteUntil then, it may help your feelings of frustration by developing characters whose concept abides by the actual state of the game, rather than whatever you might perceive as its intended state.

I find that statement pretty condescending considering you likely have no knowledge of whatever characters staggerlee, I, or anybody else may be developing.

---------

Tlaloc:

This post is getting long, so I won't quote things back at you, but I really do feel like your post illustrates some problems with the system as well. If we want roleplay and story to come first and foremost, it is silly to rationalize, apologise, and make excuses for the game when it falls short. Armageddon is not the real world and while we want to emulate real life, I think the purpose of the game is to create a believable world for storytelling purposes, not imitate the real world exactly.  There are differences between tragic, pointless, heartbreaking deaths, and deaths that are just plain purposeless and stupid. This is Real Life, and it's sad how Elvis and Heath Ledger died, and no amount of wishing can change it. In Armageddon, though, if a character dies by a stupid accident, with no one else involved or aware, and that death kills plots or stories in development, I see no reason they shouldn't come back. I'm glad you say you've seen that happen. I just wish it was the rule and not the exception. My responses to the weather and twinking comments would go along the same lines. It's great if staff are proactive and fix things like that. However, that's not a 100% solution, and as staggerlee said in the thrust of the OP, the staff seems to want to be LESS proactive. If that's the case, we either need far superior code, or we need to examine the philosophy behind the game some.

Quote from: staggerleeIf the intent of the game is for story and roleplay to color a game that is primarily about combat, exploration, skill advancement or other coded functions - then I'd say the future looks very promising.

That about sums up how I feel. If the intent is something else, I'm not nearly so hopeful.

Quote from: ale six on December 02, 2008, 08:36:57 PM

QuoteUntil then, it may help your feelings of frustration by developing characters whose concept abides by the actual state of the game, rather than whatever you might perceive as its intended state.

I find that statement pretty condescending considering you likely have no knowledge of whatever characters staggerlee, I, or anybody else may be developing.

This is the reality that I adhere to, and merely suggest it to anyone else that may find themselves frustrated over what they perceive as a disconnect between what "is" and what they think "should be".  I have been similarly frustrated, believing that work I've put into a plot or want was sufficient to see it moved forward only to have it stalled completely.  I wasn't intending to direct the statement toward anyone in particular, but to the general public.

It's been an understanding that has helped me cope with my own issues, and I thought I'd share.  Take it for what it's worth.

-LoD

Quote from: staggerlee on December 02, 2008, 07:17:15 PM
In a lot of ways Tlaloc you just demonstrated why I think the staff can and should be heavily involved in the day to day affairs of the mud... and it is certainly possible that a properly designed code base could allow them more time to do that kind of thing, if that's something they see as desirable.  It may be the most elegant and effective solution, hopefully the staff already thought of that and have intended as much all along.

I've always thought that the degree of staff presence in day to day affairs is mostly limited by their other responsibilities.  There seems to be a trend toward streamlining some of those things, so that should only help.

There's also the issue that code is impartial, whereas human beings are subject to perceptions of bias and favoritism.

Having said that, I love it when the staff step in and help make the world come alive.  I remember one time I had a magicker who faced a situation where no coded spell would have helped, but I wanted to try something that was perfectly in keeping with her element.  Basically I wanted to manipulate some things in the room a particular way that needed a coded result, but there was no way code was going to get me there (without staff help).  So I wished up and explained what I wanted to do, and sure enough, it happened.

On the flip side, I greatly dislike the sentiment that if the code allows something, it's okay.  Or that the code is the ultimate trump card. I think that attitude leads to a lot of problems, where people rationalize unrealistic skill advancement and resource hoarding because the code permits it.

I believe the code allows elves to ride.  The game docs supersede that.  The code allows characters to spar endlessly, zip back and forth from city to city, craft dozens of silk dresses in a day, rob an apartment building of all its furniture, and so on.  That doesn't make those things okay.

It's basically in the hands of the 'Dungeon Master' really. And in this game, the DM has generally decided to give us the rights of the Player's Handbook all the while expecting us to use these rules in a characterful fashion.

I know I could run an Eberron game with only the world, without the 'game of failure' methodology that diceroll chances entail. But that's why this is a MUD and not a MUSH. It elects to use unsubjective rules as an overseer. (Subjectively) fair or not it's simply how it must be.

The code does indeed reward RP.
If we didn't have it, every character would be the best at what they do and noone could prove that they were better. I would walk up to you and this is what would happen:

The Delstro punches you in the face.
You punch the Delstro in the face.
(Repeat until we tire of it)

We both walk away.


Boring.

Quote from: ale six on December 02, 2008, 08:36:57 PM


An example comes to mind of a time back when I played a Borsail noble. One of my character's cousins was very new to his role and had forgotten to bring a guard with him when we went to the Trader's. Another player (apparently a brand new warrior with high strength) took notice of this, and walked into the Trader's Inn, subdued the noble from his table, and proceeded to drag the guy out the inn, down the street, all the way to the rinth, where he proceeded to throw the noble down a well.

It boggles the mind that someone would have that much moxy...To go in, grab a random unguarded noble, and then deliberately drag him all the way to the rinth well. It was a terribly twinky thing to do, but you can't help but admire the sheer bloody minded gall to do something so straightforwardly brutal and yet, somehow creepily deliberate, with a brand new warrior. Talk about carpe diem...