Armageddon General Discussion Board

What problems do you have when you play a leader PC? What is difficult for you? What was fun? Would you do it again? No recent character mentions.

Edit: I'll start us off.

I played a GMH Merch quite a while ago. It was difficult for me to not be bothered by the political fallout created by prior PCs. Otherwise I really enjoyed the role.

One of the best things about playing a leader is being that enabler for PCs.

Because I tend to play antagonists I might be better suited to beta roles in clans.

I always battle between having to spend time recruiting/training/patrolling/hunting, and my desire to create fun and interesting new things to do so people don't get bored, run off and die to a scrab. Usually I just get stuck in a rut of just following the schedule and recruiting folks. I also battle between wanting to do me stuff and have me time, and devoting my roleplay time to helping others.

I've found I enjoy playing the right hand man more than the person with all the power and responsibility.

I've really only been in any sort of leadership position once. Although I still enjoyed the leader character itself and didn't fall into the rut some other people talk about when they play leaders, I felt I was pretty bad at the actual... leading parts of the role. It seemed to me like I was unable to personally drive plots forward and create interesting new ones like the role requires. I still enjoyed my character's interactions and whatnot, I just didn't feel like I was really doing much at all leadership wise. The clan functioned more or less the same with or without my character's attempts to influence it.

I'd probably keep my characters more on the periphery, in the future. Just what I'm suited to, I guess.

I very rarely play clan sponsored leaders. Almost all of my leaders are independent group leaders. When I am leading a group, I want to really be the one leading the group. I don't want anyone above me telling me how to play my PC and telling me what path I am required to follow. I want to hold the reins, so to speak, and not just be led around on the horse. I want to be the guy building the tracks and not just the guy riding the train.

The times that I take an interest in playing a sponsored clan leader are extremely rare for this reason. Maybe once every five years, if that.

I would have to say the hardest part about playing a sponsored clan leader is satisfying staff's desire to control what I'm doing (and thus their clan they are responsible for), and my desire to create new and exciting things for my players. It has little to do with my own enjoyment. When I take on a clan leadership role I go into it with the mind of a Dungeon Master. I want everyone who played under me during my reign to walk away saying, "I never experienced that clan like that before. That was an amazing ride while it lasted.".  If I've decided to take on the role, I've got some ideas already in my mind that I'm bringing to the table. This can be harder than it sounds. I personally end up walking a tight rope of me trying to do new and exciting things outside of "the schedule" and not making staff hate me on a personal level for being a thorn in their side and the storyline they want to present. Sometimes I do alright with it and sometimes I fall off the rope.

(This is the part where I thank staff for putting up with me over the years for trying to change all of their clans. This is also the part where I thank them for introducing the IC indy clan building structure that was just put in, which seems tailor-made for my play-style and my leadership style.)

With my independent group leaders the hardest thing for me is always keeping my people alive when I'm not online to hold their hand. I can't think of any of my people I've had die when I was online. All of them just seem to vanish when I'm not around doing whatever it is that they do when I'm not watching. This can get very frustrating for me as I tend to invest a lot of time and IC resources into my underlings. I think the introduction of in-game compounds for independent groups is going to go a long way with helping reduce this issue. Having a communal place to train/socialize within your clan will likely make members of that indy clan less likely to spend so much time out hunting spiders alone.

Something I see players struggle with--and this certainly affected me when I first played leadership--is the idea that their PC needs to be ICly good at things. That is, combat-capable; good at desert navigation; good at politics; good at recruiting or training; good at thinking up grand plots; etc. It's really difficult to be good at all of the things that players think are critical for any given role.

But from my perspective, actually, it's not necessary to really be ICly good at anything. That's what minions are for. And it's totally OK to play a leader who ICly sucks; in fact, it's extremely entertaining and engaging for both players and staff. Yes, this might mean that your PC gets yelled at by their boss, plotted against by peers, and betrayed by minions. All of that is not just OK, it's awesome. Being bad at stuff opens up opportunities for other PCs to contribute positively (helping your PC or clan out) or negatively (murder corruption betrayal!).

I've never seen a single player who is good at all the things that players seem to think are required to be good in a leadership role. (I include myself and everyone else on staff in this assessment.)

I'd love to see players in general sort of throw perfectionism to the wind (ICly) and just get in the game and start stirring shit up. Make other PCs hate you or love you. Then deal with the consequences as they come.

OOCly, there are good ways to be as a leader and not-so-good ways. E.g.: Not communicating (positively, collaboratively) with clan staff is OOCly not good. Not logging in doesn't work really well for a leader. Teaching your crew how to abuse the code is also not good. (I am not saying that any current leaders that I know of are doing these things, they are just examples of how to suck OOCly.)

I've had difficulty trying to come up with new and interesting things for employees and others to get involved in within the constraints imposed by the fact that pretty much every PC leader is at the bottom of the barrel in their organization.

That, and recruiting enough minions/keeping them alive long enough for them to become anything other than a meat shield.

As with my normal roles, I have a hard time with the documentation and keeping things interesting for both myself and staff. Bios usually help to cover the spread  on the more important things.

I think the hardest thing is when a situation seems or feels time sensitive. "Well go talk to that merchant and find out where he got it" or "I need you to find this thing that, unfortunately, requires a staffer to be around and supervise" are some of the harder things to work with because with limited staffers and a sense of urgency, often times it feels like you aren't good enough because people are waiting.

I find it best, as a leader, to think of a long term goal like "breed fire kanks" and then, as a dwarf, break it down into smaller and smaller achievable goals. Find two kanks. Figure out how to tell if they are male and female. Learn about breeding process. Afford your own breeding stable/build contracts to rent one out. Hire a breeding master. Secretly make friends with a fire magicker. etc etc etc. Unfortunately, the good leaders have 3 of these goals going on, and I can barely maintain half of one.

I find the most important thing for my leadership PC's is to give them flaws -- Like Talia mentioned, playing the Uber Sergeant or Uber Templar just isn't as satisfying as the one with hubris and pride, or the one who will never view X or Y as a problem, or who always favors House Blar because of that one time they did him/her a favor.

Flaws make the PC more real to me, rather than a vending machine with a question mark over their head.

I have a hard time making time for the Leadership PC, and balancing my RL goals. You need to spend quite a bit of time on a leadership PC to make them pop, and to be around for people to get a hold of you. I find my RL suffers when i'm playing a leadership PC, but I also now set aside days where I hang out with my wife exclusively, or times of the day where I pursue my RL goals so that Armageddon still fills the role of 'hobby game' not 'second job'.

It's difficult when realizing that staff time is different from PC time, and the PC world moves at a much quicker pace than the Staff world. Character Reports take five days roughly, and some questions don't get answered completely in just one request -- Meaning some of the longer term goal stuff can take months to fulfill, and during that time, the PC landscape may have shifted completely. Some people die, new people come aboard, and the ability to juggle the Short Term with the Long Term is definitely a skill. I've gotten better at it over the years, but it was hard when I started out on my first few leaders.

I've found myself making leaders that aren't concerned with time-constraints, because removing that variable from their personality makes it much easier to deal with PC's on an OOC level. Having a PC who wants everything 'now' creates OOC/IC headaches that I easily avoid by just removing that personality trait. They might be impatient in other ways, but not over orders with a GMH or over matters I know will take Staff/Other Players some time to figure out. Just a waste of time.

Quote from: Talia on January 05, 2015, 12:15:19 PM
Teaching your crew how to abuse the code is also not good.

allofmywut.jpg  :'(

I've found leadership roles in Armageddon to be frustratingly restrictive compared to what I could pull off with relative ease on other RPIs. Character reports are a whole big bundle of meh. I'll do them and try my best with them if/when I play a leadership role on Armageddon, but it doesn't stop me from disliking them. They, along with other things, create a definite sense of needing to fill out a stack of forms and wait for two real life weeks to do something that isn't just "Kill X kryl" or "Collect Y scrab shells". Playing a minion, I can at least pretend the smoke and mirrors of there being a functional economy (economy should be a huge driving factor behind conflict) and interesting politics beyond pretty minor squabbles (PCs are usually minor characters at the bottoms of huge organisations) are "real".

Also, there are just too many clans, the clans themselves are too large and powerful on a vNPC level, and there are restrictive clan size caps. I feel that mentioning these things is basically opening Pandora's Box as is, so I won't say any more.

I guess Desertman's onto something.

Quote from: Delusion on January 05, 2015, 02:12:19 PM

Also, there are just too many clans, the clans themselves are too large and powerful on a vNPC level, and there are restrictive clan size caps. I feel that mentioning these things is basically opening Pandora's Box as is, so I won't say any more.

I don't know about too many clans, but I'd agree that the clans that exist are on average far too powerful. The least influential clan that is openly available to players is a worldwide mercenary organization with enough military might under its control to sizably effect the outcomes of major wars. A few clans like this are fine and necessary, but if players and leaders in particular want to feel like big fish, they need the option of having smaller ponds to play in.

This said, I'm hoping that opening up a clear and straightforward process for players to create their own clans is going to gradually diminish this imbalance as, pretty much by definition, player created clans are going to be smaller and significantly less influential. This will allows PCs in those clans to be far more in charge of their little piece things. I think this will draw a sort of player that might be a great mover and shaker otherwise, but shies away from traditional leader roles.

Quote from: Delusion on January 05, 2015, 02:12:19 PM
I guess Desertman's onto something.

Different strokes for different folks. I wouldn't say I'm entirely right, but I don't think I'm entirely wrong. There are a lot of things I really enjoy about playing in/leading a staff-sponsored clan/group.

Staff tend to give these groups a bit more attention, since they are in charge of them after all, and some of the plots and adventures they have sent me and my people on will be some of the most fun and exciting times I have had in the game. The in-game animations of my superiors in the clans I have been in has always been enjoyable for me. I love when staff brings those NPC's to life for me. I wish I could have all of my interaction with staff in regards to my IC actions through these IC means, but I understand that isn't always possible. The overall atmosphere associated with a longstanding legitimate clan with hundreds/thousands of backers provides a playing experience you will never get by/with running an independent group.

Let's not forget that my independent groups wouldn't have much, if anything, to do if these staff-sponsored clans and their players weren't around for us to interact with/hire us/be our enemies. I don't like the idea of leading a group that has nobody to play with outside of our group.

I'm not saying I dislike the way staff-sponsored clans are handled, I'm just saying I prefer to do things a bit differently personally most of the time and I'm glad there are more avenues opening up to allow people like me to spread our wings a little. I'm sure every now and again I will feel like jumping back into clan-sponsored leadership positions as well. I'm not shunning them, I'm just explaining my mindset I guess.

The hardest part of being a leader is feeling responsible for others' enjoyment of the game. I guess I'm responsible and self-sacrificing by nature so I kept trying at it, but I'd much rather be the nobleman's bodyguard than the noble next time. For a long time I felt a tension that my idea of fun was just radically different from others', so I would force myself to do less fun things for the sake of them.

As far as plots go, I found the most rewarding and achievable plot I could pursue was stopping others from pursuing theirs.

I feel like I have a big quest marker over my head.

People who beg to join then never log, clogging space for ppl who do want to play.

Fighting my mother-hen, white knight tendencies.

Having to be staff's voice in shooting down player ideas. Struggling to find something to do that matches docs, is fun, and that staff will approve.

The impatience of players who expect something now or every day.  I've had a few days in my arm career that I played 6+ hours, but I'm not usually that guy who lives for the MUD, and sometimes, some roles feel like that's a requirement. 

One of the hardest parts for me when I'm playing leaders is to cut short or tell people "no" when they want to interact.

Playing a leader is 6 days of waiting for minions to report back and 1 day of furious tasking.

Quote from: Kismetic on January 05, 2015, 04:50:56 PM
The impatience of players who expect something now or every day.  I've had a few days in my arm career that I played 6+ hours, but I'm not usually that guy who lives for the MUD, and sometimes, some roles feel like that's a requirement. 

After reading back over this, it sounds like I'm saying all players are this way.  It's just a few.  And really, most of my complaints about being a leader are directed at my own limitations.  Thought I'd clear that up.

Hey!  I've never been a leader, but I've been a minion, and I think this could be a pretty awesome thread to get some ideas out there on how to be a good leader.  A lot of it has focused on the negatives, but what are some ideas for the positives?  What has worked as a leader both for you and crew?  I'll toss out four things I -really- liked in the leaders I've had:

1. Spontaneous.  Throw caution to the wind.  You get a report that there's some crazy crap on the sands.  Well, let's roll out and check it out.  Sure, you might die, but whatever.  It'll be fun.

2. Trusting.  There's a tendency to be sure to not trust the initiates with insider information until a little later on - to leave them out of plots - because let's face it: that's more variables and more chances for them to betray.  But I sure did have a lot of fun with a leader who just trusted us all - after all, staff can police folks who sign in to steal all of Salarr's precious weapons or whatever.

3. Non-bottlenecks.  Be a non-leader leader.  Try to offload as much of the plot stuff to the minions as possible.

4. Mingle.  Get out there.  Don't just sit in the compound and way or sit at the bar and way.  Do stuff that might get you and me killed. 

Dunno.  One day I'll be a leader, I swear.  What are some other ideas?

Quote from: nauta on January 05, 2015, 05:14:49 PM
I've never been a leader, but I've been a minion, and I think this could be a pretty awesome thread to get some ideas out there on how to be a good leader

This is a sentiment that makes leaders hate minions.

Then again, I've often wished I could straw poll my minions OOCly just to see if the players are actually having fun.

Nauta: This is a thread for players that have played leaders to express their difficulties and share experiences. It's not meant to be a criticism thread for players who haven't walked the walk and aren't familiar with the challenges associated. I think that sort of posting will lead down a path of passive aggressive judgment rather than what I'd like to encourage: thoughtful reflection with lessons learned to help future leaders.

You're welcome to start your own thread, though. I understand you're just trying to contribute.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on January 05, 2015, 05:20:37 PM
Then again, I've often wished I could straw poll my minions OOCly just to see if the players are actually having fun.

Oh, I had fun playing under you.  Epic fun.    8)

Quote from: Is Friday on January 05, 2015, 10:40:33 AM
What problems do you have when you play a leader PC? What is difficult for you? What was fun? Would you do it again? No recent character mentions.

Problems - Taking staff "no"s graciously.  Reading GDB vaguebooking as comments on whatever I'm currently playing in the moment.

I used to have a huge problem communicating with staff, because they would do things like tell me "no" and I'd get all frustrated and upset, or I'd feel like they weren't responding in a timely fashion to something I need resolved NOW.  Now I'm something of an over-communicator.  I'm sure there's a balance in there somewhere, but I'm probably never going to find it.

Difficulties - Coming up with things for minions to do.  Not feeling weighted down by responsibility.  Trying to get anything "done" in game.  Not taking setbacks to things that I want to get "done" personally.

But most of all, getting back into the game when I haven't logged in for a while.  It's hard to want to take on "catching up," and sometimes, I feel like by taking a break I have let my minions down.

Fun - Not having to skill up.  Not having to make money or starve.  Making enemies, plotting against enemies, winning or losing.  Being corrupt or being betrayed.  Making things happen in game.  Laughing at the stupid things my character does.

Would Do Again - Yes.  I'm kind of a serial sponsored role player.  One thing I'd love to do again is a blooded merchant house member.  I think I could do it a lot better now that I'm much better about communicating with staff and care a whole lot less about what other people think of me as a player/leader.

Advice - Have fun.  Your "leader" should be a character who happens to be a leader, not a leader character.  It's very important to your fun and the fun of others to be playing a character.  Try not to get weighted down in peoples' frustrations and expectations.  Don't rely on others for your personal fun.  Try not to paint yourself into a corner: allow for character growth, changing interests, a friend to become an enemy, an enemy to become an ally, etc.  Give yourself some fears and things to exploit.  Have fun.  When you're not having fun, figure out how your character is broken and come up with some off the wall way to fix it.  Have more fun.

As simple as it sounds, I usually just ask myself one question.

"If I was playing under a leader, what is something awesome I would love to see them doing/trying to do that they could include me in?".

Then I start planning on how to do that.

Then you get to the harder questions.

Is this even possible?

Can this be completed with minimal staff involvement? (since they don't have time and shouldn't be expected to be my personal quest tool)

What are some good ways to include my underlings in this process and not only include them, but make them integral to the success of the plan?

How can I make sure my underlings feel like they are actually making a difference and being a support beam and not just a building block in this wall?

How do I make my less skilled underlings still a part of this process or get them to a point that they can be a part of this process?

How do I make my entire group feel a sense of responsibility for each other and/or a sense of unity, especially in terms of the more skilled members aiding with the progression of the less skilled members?

What are some good tools to offer rewards to not only the PC's involved but a sense of accomplishment to the players of those PC's along the way?

It is extremely important to make sure you are considering not only IC rewards to the PC's, but keep in mind, the players of those PC's want to feel a sense of accomplishment too. It is like going to a northern bard event where your PC would love the songs being played, but as a player they are just boring and you can't wait for the event to be over. Don't create plotlines where the PC's would of course be having a great a time, but OOC'ly they are a snore-fest. This is also harder than it may seem. I've had some events that lasted hours where I could tell my entire group was just thinking, "Ok, my character would be all for this, but, damn, it's time for this to be over because this is boring on every level imaginable.". When you are creating reward structures and concepts for your underlings, try and make the rewards things that not only the PC would appreciate, but things the player would appreciate and find useful. Bonus points if you can make the reward tool both practical in application and sentimental in nature. Don't make the rewards to the PC's things that the players are going to have roleplay really liking but OOC'ly they could care less. You aren't playing a leader to make the game fun for the PC, you are playing a leader to make the game fun for the player of the PC.

How do I keep my players interested and feeling a sense of accomplishment for the duration of this plot/task?

What is the measurable IC gain that is going to be achieved once this is completed that will actually be needed/make sense for the game world?

That last one is likely the most important part of the puzzle. It is fun to "do things", but if you are doing things just to do them, and there is not a final goal that has a measurable and needed affect on the game world....your plotline and accomplishments will feel empty at the end. You will end up, "Sure, we did this, but why did we do it? The product isn't really IC'ly useful, so meh.". If you end up with, "Yeah, we did this, we created this, and it is useful or it was needed on an IC level and it makes sense.", you did it right.


A major rule of thumb. People like to be useful. They want to feel useful. It is important to make them actually useful. Don't just give them the illusion of being useful. Make them truly useful to the role and the plot and you will see them not only participate, but become a driving factor in the process.

The last one there is the difference between being the guy who gives the order to charge or to retreat in a battle, and being underling number 58 in the staff ran battle with the pre-determined outcome regardless of what actually happens in the fight. They can both be fun in their own way, but you have the power as a player leader to give your players the experience of the former instead of the latter. The former is far more fun in my opinion.

Give your underlings things to do and chances to fail. Don't just ramrod everything yourself into success. Sometimes your people are going to fail and sometimes they will succeed. Give them chances and opportunities to do both and have the previously discussed reward structure waiting on them for when they do pull through.

Some people THINK they'd be good leaders but really are the kinds of people who's enjoyment of the game rests solely in the hands of whatever their leaders tell them to do.  Heh.

Anyway on point.

I hate, hate, hate HATE having to depend on staff for anything so when I play leaders I try to come up with things that I don't really NEED them for so they too can enjoy (either watching or putting a wrench in my gears). That said, sponsored roles are completely dependent on your doing what your house finds acceptable so that's always been hard for me because plots depend on participation and little every day things aren't as exciting as, you know, war, or annihilating an entire race. My Sun Runner (non-leader) had a plot to steal the flame sculpture in the Sanctuary, even siddled up to the Akai even though she was racist as hell and looked down on them. Managing that one was going to HAVE TO be staff supported. My Borsail wanted to invent a new race and while I tried to get it to be player done (rather than just virtually use npc slaves for testing) it was still going to have to take staff involvement at some point. As a leader (outside of master crafting shit) I'd rather not make more work for staff.

On the flip side, if you can't get shit done on your own and your plot REQUIRES staff then you better be ready for, no, you better EXPECT it not to go exactly how you envisioned it. That's much funz.

Recruiting has never been an issue for any of my leaders, what's hard is hiring that one you know oocly is gonna suck/fuck you and letting it play out anyway.

Delegate - as a leader I am less present than my minions. I have to trust my minions to bring me what I need to make heads roll. I want to pay off the templar cause he caught my minion fucking up. I want them taking the fall/dying for me. I want them fleeing cause they know they won't make it.  This one's HARD for me because I'm usually the tavern sitter befriending everyone and getting ALL the gossip.

I'm going to disagree with Talia and say that I'd really like to see a little more love thrown to sponsored roles.  I don't want to make a Byn Sarge and get my ass kicked by a Runner. This is actually a pet-peeve of mine. I don't want to have to ask my cousin for sid to bribe someone, I should have X amount of starting cash AND a banging wardrobe. I shouldn't be fleeing a 'tok or duskhorn while taking my hunters out. I want my starting stats to reflect the fact that I've spent 18/20/30 years trained and conditioned by my family/organization to be the best that I can be when it's warranted. Noble roles excluded on that coded skills thing. This is NOT to say all skills should be maxed out but you shouldn't be an embarrassment to your faction.

Conflict. I don't give a fuck if you're an agent, you're still not getting that escort until I can fit you in. Your order is late? Kill me, see how much LONGER it takes for my replacement to serve yer ass. Talk about that person you hate, steal their man/woman/job, make enemies!


I'd like death to be easier like it was in the old days. Not a fan of the whole "imagine the possibilities if you DON'T kill them" philosophy. Lost your three REAL year played PC on some nooble's enthusiasm? Oh well. Murder, Corruption, Betrayal. I'm kinda heartless.

What you absolutely MUST do in a sponsored role imo?

You must communicate.
You must log on.
You must be patient.
You must NOT feel it's your personal responsibility to keep a balls to the wall constant funhouse extravaganza going for other players and forget your enjoyment in the process.
You must hire a newbie and turn him into an Armageddon addict.


Tongue in cheek, my opinions are mine.  

Jesus Christ planning and executing RPTs and then say... a third as many people as you expected show up.

Quote from: Talia on January 05, 2015, 12:15:19 PM
But from my perspective, actually, it's not necessary to really be ICly good at anything. That's what minions are for. And it's totally OK to play a leader who ICly sucks; in fact, it's extremely entertaining and engaging for both players and staff. Yes, this might mean that your PC gets yelled at by their boss, plotted against by peers, and betrayed by minions. All of that is not just OK, it's awesome. Being bad at stuff opens up opportunities for other PCs to contribute positively (helping your PC or clan out) or negatively (murder corruption betrayal!).
.....

I'd love to see players in general sort of throw perfectionism to the wind (ICly) and just get in the game and start stirring shit up. Make other PCs hate you or love you. Then deal with the consequences as they come.

I did this once (with Talia as my staffer, oddly enough).  While not my favorite PC, I have never had more -fun- playing Armageddon than I did with him.  Of course, I've never played a more OOCly stressful or nerve-racking role either. :D

While playing a leader PC, the biggest challenge for me by far was recruiting and maintaining an effective group of minions. Because of the way the playerbase tends to wax and wane in terms of our interest in clanned RP in general, or even our interest in a specific clan, or area of the game, there were many times where there were no employees coming in despite the best efforts in recruiting, and even a few times where there were so many employees and so many more wanting into the clan that some had to be turned away.

Recruiting is only a relatively small part of the challenge. Maintaining a base of employees once you have them is difficult for a myriad of reasons. In practically any city clan, no matter what clan docs or general docs say about going out alone, people will go out alone, thinking they're "safe", and then die. Now all of a sudden the leader lost money, armor, a uniform and whatever else, all because of what amounts to impatience, or an inexplicable need to train skills, or moonlight. And it's usually not easy for leaders to recoup the losses. Some clans have some things the leader can get for free, but usually there is at least some monetary cost involved in losing a clan member. Certainly a loss of time as well.

It's also extremely difficult to hold to the idea that working for most clans should be like a dream job for commoners, because of the lack of supply of people willing to join. Simple economics plays out here: short supply, high demand. On an OOC level, is practically suicidal for a clan to be picky about the members it accepts, sometimes (besides obvious race restrictions or whatever).

For the rest, it can be difficult to assign tasks that need doing without sliding into the realm of "Bring me 20 gortok asses" type of quests. Sometimes as a leader, the group went for RL weeks without nothing to really do besides train and talk to other people, because the clan environment and the environment of the general location did not have enough going on to warrant assigning a task. The clan caps were never a problem because the group was rarely at the number where it needed to be capped. The few times a cap did have to be put in place, it was clearly to make sure other clans had a chance to survive, and as a leader PC of one clan I felt it was worth holding to the cap so that I could have other clans to interact with.

My personal biggest frustrations of leadership are two:

• Keeping character-minions alive for the years necessary for some plots.
• Having my deep-laid, world-altering plots run afoul of others' deep-laid, world-altering plots.

#1 frustration for me = inheriting someone else's minions. I just don't have the patience for that kind of drama. I'd rather hand-pick one or two PCs to work for me, and maybe have a half dozen non-employees who do tasks for me, than have to handle the entire crew of my predecessor.

Other than that I think I'm pretty good with coming up with "stuff to do" and plotlines. Most of them are things that I want my character to accomplish, and have people helping me get it done. Sometimes it involves a lot of convoluted crazy shit, and sometimes it's as simple as "go kill that gortok on the road so I can ride past without breaking a nail."

My biggest peeve is people leaning on me hard for things to do. It bothers me a lot because when I'm not in charge, I don't tend to rely on people who are, or if I do, try to never ask them for their time just to entertain me. I don't mind it from my clannies or 'my people', but I mind it from minor affiliates and random people. That said, I try. Making plots is not hard though. Having your own goals and demands of others to meet them should be a key tenet of all roleplay, not just a couple of sponsored roles.

I don't mind the time things take, or losing minions. It happens.

Staff saying 'no' is fine. I probably try do it anyway.

I've found the best way to be a PC leader is to take risks and let your superiors catch you up about them later. The better you are at taking them, the better you look and more support you have, plus it's fun and interesting. Getting in trouble as a PC leader is also a great way to change and grow as a PC.

I don't think everybody's cut out to be a leader, and to be honest, it is a job to be one. I find that enjoyable for some reason. Others having fun around me makes me have fun. Feeling like I'm driving things makes me have fun.


Also, recently, an impromptu scene I had was one of my most favourite scenes ever, and came from trusting a minion to lead it.

Biggest difficulty to playing a leadership role is the feeling of guilt, when you cant log on for weeks on end and dont know when you will have time this month.

One of the issues I consistently run into is planning and moving ahead with my plot for a furious 2-3 weeks only to be told "we can't support this plot". Inevitably, I then have to approach everyone involved in this now "dead" plot with my proverbial dick in my hand.

That's the risk I take with my spontaneous play style, though. Oh well.

I've been thinking about my experiences with this and what frustrated me at times. I've had a couple of sponsored GMH roles (and one noble which I don't count, because it was a totally different experience and a relatively quick storage on my part).

I would play another sponsored leadership role, but every time I've had one, I definitely need a break from that kind of responsibility for a good long while.

It seems to me what makes these roles enjoyable is also what can make them frustrating. I like that there are all kinds of challenges, often unexpected. That can be a lot of fun, but when it means your plots get derailed again and again, it can also be aggravating. I like working with a mix of different characters, and depending on them to get things done for me. Again, that can be great, but it can also be terribly frustrating. It's a bit like group projects in school, without the option to just do it all yourself.

Going back to Lizzie's point about inheriting minions, I totally understand that as a source of frustration, even if I don't completely agree. A related issue I've run into at times is minions (whether inherited or not) who are just not "on board" for whatever plots/goals have come in with new leadership. (Of course, having played minions often, I can sympathize with what they go through with leadership changes.) I've also noticed an odd phenomenon of some people who join a clan while seemingly having no interest in actually being involved in clan life. At all. With my last sponsored role I came to the realization that if my PC concluded someone was only going to be in the way there was no reason to keep them around. It's a simple thing, but having the authority to just remove the bad eggs from the clan can really help in getting things done with the rest of the clan.

Side note, about the original post: I do think it is possible to be an antagonist and a leader at the same time, although I'm not sure a lot of Armageddon players want an IC boss that they despise. Some inspiration (profanity, if you mind that):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kZg_ALxEz0 (from Glenngary Glen Ross)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Je8Y-4VFQ0E (from Damages)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuTt8VljniU (from Swimming with Sharks)

Flurry: Oh don't worry. I play leader antagonists like I'm paid 6 figures to do it.

I thought that was probably the case, and that's good because I think the game needs them. Sometimes I get the impression that some people only want permissive bosses who just let everyone do their own thing, which personally I wouldn't want to play.

I tend to ask first, and do second.

I find this leads to less butthurt, involves Staff more in the plans from the get-go rather than half-way through (which also leads to less butthurt) and allows them to have agency with the project (which typically means it has more likelihood of getting off the ground). Also, if Staff doesn't agree with the project or idea, I can let them know if my PC will pursue it anyways (to their detriment), or if there is an alteration or caveats that can allow the plan to go forward.

This isn't true of all projects -- But long term projects I know will involve Staff, I at least give them an OOC heads up, even if that will be before the IC heads up. I figure it's common courtesy.

Taking risks and doing things that are stupid are definitely a forte of my PCs -- But catching Staff off-guard in the past usually leads to a negative interaction down the road, which is something I try to avoid now if I can.

A little bit of staff perspective:

It's not necessarily preferable to always ask first before doing, but it can also be a really good idea.

In certain clans, there may be pre-approved plot ideas available to leaders. For example, as we've worked on revamping the southlands clan documentation, we've added short lists of "things you could pursue to get this mini-promotion or reward." Or, sometimes when we're working with leaders, we might brainstorm with them a list of things they could be working on. If the leader is picking up something staff has suggested, or something substantially similar, then just running with that idea is probably not going to present an issue.

Other times, plot ideas are obvious and well-supported by documentation, so asking before going ahead isn't necessary. For example: You want to murder, corrupt, or betray someone. Or your elf wants to elf someone and/or test them. We are basically never going to tell you not to do this. We might have additional suggestions for you about how to play your elf, or bad stuff to do to other PCs beyond PKing them, but we're not going to say "Nope, you can't MCB anyone, what is this, Armageddon?!?!?!"

And yet other times, the thing you want to ask to do is pretty dumb or unrealistic and you just ought to re-think it before asking it or doing it. For example (and this is totally hypothetical, I don't see this level of derp from current leaders): "My noble is gonna go down on the Arena floor and single-handedly fight the gaj, cool idea, right?"

The type of plot idea you might want to ask about before pursuing is anything that's not in the above categories, and/or anything that will require staff involvement (which, for good or ill, is a lot of types of plots). If you don't mind hearing "no" eventually, then you don't have to ask first, of course. (I'm not saying that if you don't ask you will get an automatic no, I'm just saying that no is more likely if you're not consulting with staff first and tweaking your idea in response.)

yarp.

I'm a teambuilder and task-oriented.  My biggest problem with leadership positions in RPIs are those PCs who exist solely to create contention among my team.  I like the conflict to be -outside- my clan, us against them.  It's hard for me to enjoy the ever-present clannie who simply wishes to destroy whatever I'm trying to accomplish, or to tear apart the team I'm trying to build.

Some of them are just griefers but some of them are really well done!  I struggle with them nevertheless.

My personal leadership philosophy is that it's my #1 job to engage my underlings and give them things to do, keep them busy, give them things to RP around.

Quote from: Refugee on January 06, 2015, 01:50:58 PM
I'm a teambuilder and task-oriented.  My biggest problem with leadership positions in RPIs are those PCs who exist solely to create contention among my team.  I like the conflict to be -outside- my clan, us against them.  It's hard for me to enjoy the ever-present clannie who simply wishes to destroy whatever I'm trying to accomplish, or to tear apart the team I'm trying to build.

Agreed on troublemaker PCs. So just kill them. I'd get butthurt PMs when I'd dump someone from the clan but never when I executed them.

I think I wrote it more contentiously than I meant. I don't mean kicking off things that would be rude not to ask first or give a heads up. There are so many political or personal risks you can take as gambles, and those are what I mean. Some are pretty big. Your character's bosses are too busy to hold your hand.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on January 06, 2015, 01:53:29 PM

Quote from: Refugee on January 06, 2015, 01:50:58 PM
I'm a teambuilder and task-oriented.  My biggest problem with leadership positions in RPIs are those PCs who exist solely to create contention among my team.  I like the conflict to be -outside- my clan, us against them.  It's hard for me to enjoy the ever-present clannie who simply wishes to destroy whatever I'm trying to accomplish, or to tear apart the team I'm trying to build.

Agreed on troublemaker PCs. So just kill them. I'd get butthurt PMs when I'd dump someone from the clan but never when I executed them.

Ha!  Really?  I always tried to avoid the executions.  I will keep this in mind!

Well, I can recall personally killing like two minions and ejecting one, and it was the ejected who sent PMs. To be honest I didn't kill nearly as many of my minions as I should have.

It's important to remember that you're not just playing for your minions' enjoyment, you're playing for yours too. If they're going to be annoying little shits in your clan, remember that is YOUR clan. You have no obligation to put up with them.

In addition, killing your subpar minions reminds the playerbase that Clan-life is a privilege, not a right, and that their characters should be grateful and striving to belong within that safety net.

Very solid points, BadSkeelz.

Of the 5 clanned PC's I've played in the last 12 months,  one died to a crimcode quirk, one was a delf and therefor was unlikely to get booted/betrayed by clannies anyway, one kicked it in a hrpt, one got killed by her boss, and one was booted and subsequently killed by clan dudes anyway.

So, in my experience, clans do kill off  their own people.

And just to put Skeelzikins at ease, I'd like to note that no murdering/booting people were saddled with complaints.

Quote from: Talia on January 06, 2015, 01:24:38 PM
For example: You want to murder, corrupt, or betray someone. Or your elf wants to elf someone and/or test them. We are basically never going to tell you not to do this. We might have additional suggestions for you about how to play your elf, or bad stuff to do to other PCs beyond PKing them, but we're not going to say "Nope, you can't MCB anyone, what is this, Armageddon?!?!?!"

I believe it's more frequent to be told "no" in game by animated NPCs, or through IC reponses to requests. I only had a MCB plot refused once, and it was through an IC-reply to a request, so it might not be a big deal generally, but if you're playing a leader you should not take all planned MCB activity as being ok by default. Run it by staff first if at all possible, and yes, it might be turned down.

I understand that the IC "no" isn't necessarily the staff saying no as much as it is the game world (your bosses etc) and that you can go ahead and try... but you'll also have to suffer the consequences. Usually, going against your v/NPC superiors is not advisable.

If there was one thing I was good at as a leader, it was causing the deaths of my minions. It's one of my big regrets of being a leader, since I think a lot of those minions had more potential for the job than I did. Watching your minion PCs grow and advance is one of the better things about being a leader.

I do think it's important that, for your character to remain enjoyable, you have to carve out time where they can STOP being a leader. Have days where they're on leave or just not giving a fuck, find some other friends and relax. These are great times to delegate tasks to minions, to let them get some experience and independence.

I didn't address one of IsFriday's questions, I realized as I reread this thread.  What do I enjoy about playing a leader?

1.  Most of all, I like the relationship you can form with the comrades you lead.  The few trusted at the top that you surround yourself with.  I like sitting and working out plans with them, figuring out problems.  This is just as good for me if I am not the leader, but one of the trusted comrades.  I love loyalty RP.  Either side, leader or follower.  This is the best by far of all RP, in my opinion.

2.  I like really knowing what's going on!  Leaders get to know the whole story.

3.  I like having control over myself.  I don't like schedules that force you to spar with the same person every 90 minutes or leave a fun scene to have to play alone just because it's noon... and if I'm the leader I don't have to follow them unless I want to. 

4.  I'm a natural planner, and I like figuring out ways to accomplish things.  Ways to keep followers busy, ways to keep them interested, that's enjoyable to me.  It's cool when people are having fun because of what you did.  It's very satisfying.

5.  I like being able to build my crew into something I really like playing around.  Sometimes, for a short while, you can build a group of friends where everything is perfect, and you all click, it's magical.  It's rare and it's fleeting, because someone's gonna die... but it's like that big bass that jumps out of the water and thrashes around in the air trying to throw your hook...  Might happen five times in your life, but it still makes all the trying worth it.

What do I enjoy?  Having more tools/trust to make the world come alive.

I enjoy having tools trust me.

Quote from: MeTekillot on January 06, 2015, 06:54:22 PM
I enjoy having tools trust me.

I enjoy killing your PCs.

Players who flake on their role the moment they have been recruited; players who flake on their role a week after they have been recruited; players not taking initiative to be part of a clan's (or individual clan leader's) goals and objectives; the struggle to coordinate online times with multiple characters at once; the struggle to keep things interesting for underlings; having to wait at length for the resources needed to run a plot.

Just some of the things that really burn my britches when playing a leadership role :)

The real nightmare is the minion guy/girl that plays Armageddon 18 hours a day and complete all the "goals" you give them within a day :(

Not really on topic, but it's kinda why I prefer to associate with people who are not in the game 18 hours a day, they don't make you feel like you should be in the game 18 hours a day as well and you don't feel as guilty when you don't feel/can't log in for a while (that goes for minions/lovers/partners in crime etc..)

I love that player. They just got elected to be my right-hand man/woman. That is the one I can utilize to basically be my eyes, ears, and even voice if I trust them enough when I'm not available....because they always are.

Quote from: Malken on January 07, 2015, 10:47:26 AM
The real nightmare is the minion guy/girl that plays Armageddon 18 hours a day and complete all the "goals" you give them within a day :(

Not really on topic, but it's kinda why I prefer to associate with people who are not in the game 18 hours a day, they don't make you feel like you should be in the game 18 hours a day as well and you don't feel as guilty when you don't feel/can't log in for a while (that goes for minions/lovers/partners in crime etc..)

Quote from: Desertman on January 07, 2015, 11:09:52 AM
I love that player. They just got elected to be my right-hand man/woman. That is the one I can utilize to basically be my eyes, ears, and even voice if I trust them enough when I'm not available....because they always are.

Thou shalt not penalize addicted players for their IC efficiency.

When you're twinking to get things done, I'll abuse the shit out of you. OOCly.

My first ever leadership PC.

Introduced to new clan members, shown around amazing skytop fortress.

Let loose - "Ok gang let's go do X!"

Head outside with entire clan following me.

Head west - fall off of long drop - everyone knocked unconscious in a place where you don't want to be unconscious.

Good times.

My first leadership PC lasted 2 RL weeks, before leading half a band of Mercs into the silt-sea ('cus the shield walls overrated!) he also whipped an underling to death by accident, and had to wish up to get him rezzed. Don't think the player was too happy about the situation, I personally felt embarrassed/amused, and I think the staffer who handled it thought it was hilarious and annoying at the same time.

I honestly believe I suck at leadership roles. I generally die too quick to make any lasting impact, or see any real political action. I did have real fun with my last one though, flawed as hell, pretty stupid in political matters, and an all-round bumbling idiot. Can't wait until the years up, there's some good stories there.

The main problems I've found though are pretty much the same as other people, keeping minions alive/interested is a struggle, making sure everyone's having a good time and keeping yourself entertained can be a slog, and managing to find or create plots large enough to include everyone, or other clans either ends in failure, a dead end, setbacks or just gets shot down.

That being said, I have respect for anyone who manages to make a leadership role stick, make a real name for themselves, and keep their particular group alive long enough to do big things.

Last leader I played: main gripe was being unable to find a single useful, interested minion outside of my own group. I had all the money and prestige one could want. In talks with prospective minions, I heavily insinuated that I was a generous benefactor to the loyal, and that I had plans within plans for them to assist me in completing.

I was stunned at the amount of people who fobbed me off with a thinly-veiled IC communication of the OOC desire to remain independent. There were 3 or 4 separate nobody PCs who essentially told me that they'd rather remain poor. Really?

The few I was able to find who were interested had mush for brains either ICly or OOCly, or had the personalities of plain oatmeal, ICly or OOCly. The one guy I recruited died instantly outside the city walls despite my warning him it would happen.

I was unable to find one singular dependable minion after over a month of trying every day. Sadly, that experience showed me that a lot of people who play this game would really rather play Rich Indie Mudsex Simulator than Armageddon MUD.

I'm a newb to Arm but I've played plenty of rp-oriented mu*s.

From an OOC minion perspective, just offering huge rewards (whether it's gear, coin or anything else that might constitute a huge reward in a text game) isn't enough to keep a player interested or even to bait the hook with. Any character you get to jump with pure coin probably isn't going to be worth the time.

It may work if you're recruiting a newbie, but it's going to work a lot better for you to offer a job that sounds interesting and present your character as someone who will be interested in the character's wellbeing rather than the fullness of his wallet. I can't speak to how much of plot-in-plot was insinuated, of course, but it does help to ask what the potential minion's goals might be.

Basically, there is a lot to be said for the natural charisma of a leadership character, or the amount you can round your leadership character's tics and recruiting spiel out for the initial half an hour you sit down with a character for the first time to try to snag them.

When playing my Byn sergeant, I learned the best way to get people to want to join you is to shout at them constantly, tell them that if they fuck up you're going cut off their eyelids and hang them by their toes with a rope made of their entrails while flaying them alive, then rip out their lungs from their chest to dangle (making sure to imply that they would live to feel their last, horrifically painful breaths). Pretty sure that was the only reason I had so many damn people joining every day.

>.>

Definitely wasn't just because it's the Byn and that's to be expected.

<.<

Definitely.

My first ever leader was a Byn Sergeant named Rellion.

The something something white-eyed man as I recall.

Damn good times. This was back before the big ranger nerf of doom. I fought Paryl in the arena once and lost because I decided to surrender because our fight was taking so long the crowd was starting to boo. I fought him again in the arena a couple of IC years later, and screw the crowd...I stayed until I won that one. I got "crowned" Champion of Allanak and staff did some fun little room echoes of children following me around in a little fan-gaggle. Good times.

So many gith battles. Armies of gith. More than once.

One gith battle was a mini reenactment of the story about the gith sieging the T'zai Byn's fort in the Red Desert. They actually sieged us while we were there and we spent a couple of days shooting them and fighting them off from the wall before storming out to clear them. (I thought up and arranged this event with staff ahead of time back when you could still kind of "Dungeon Master" your own Byn RPT's as a Sergeant.)

I led my unit against the blue dragon worm thing that was attacking Allanak at the time. The exploding balls of glass were particularly awesome. I went toe to toe one on one with the white-armored figure who was leading a band of magicky minions in the mines of Allanak against the militia/the T'zai Byn. I don't think staff wanted me to actually attack him in retrospect. He died almost instantly. I think we were intended to wade through his minions first. Screw him. I won.

I fought salt golems on the salt flats summoned up by the previously mentioned gent with my unit. I also had the templarate gift to him a certain shield item that was pretty freaking sweet for, "Leading the defense of Allanak.".

Back when a horde of undead wanted to roll out of the rinth complete with child suicide bombers using the now long gone flash powder in backpacks....those were particularly good times. I recall seeing a couple of PC's getting blown to bits. Rellion didn't die, but I lost a Runner in that one in glorious Runner-bits fashion. Awesome RPT.

And a lot of other things I just can't recall now.

He died to a huge horde of spiders when he kept rescuing his underlings and taking all of the spiders on himself...and that is when I learned when you are surrounded by a ton of creatures, the code DOES make it realistically hard to flee, because you are surrounded.

Good times.  :)

Quote from: BadSkeelz on January 06, 2015, 02:01:39 PM
To be honest I didn't kill nearly as many of my minions as I should have.

Sometimes the trick to utilizing minions is to get what they want and what you want to be the same thing. I think sometimes leaders try to make their minions fit into a narrow plan and that's not always the most effective way to make things fun or make things happen. Compromising the plan is sometimes better because the resources (other players, time, staff, in game resources/opportunities) may not be available to make the original plan happen. If you're a leader you should have or be looking for a plan, also don't be a victim. If some of your minions aren't a part of the plan, change the plan or get rid of them.

Quote from: Talia on January 05, 2015, 12:15:19 PM
Something I see players struggle with--and this certainly affected me when I first played leadership--is the idea that their PC needs to be ICly good at things. That is, combat-capable; good at desert navigation; good at politics; good at recruiting or training; good at thinking up grand plots; etc. It's really difficult to be good at all of the things that players think are critical for any given role.

And I would say it's attitudes like this that make leadership roles hard for me.

As a leader, I need to be able to do something.  Because that's leadership.  It's doing something beyond merely telling people what to do.

I agree that there's no reason to follow a leader who is bad at ALL of the things. They'll probably be rightfully killed for it, because Zalanthas can't afford to waste time on people who are completely useless.

However, I don't think Talia is saying that leaders should settle for being good at none of the things that make for being a good leader. Recognizing, accepting, and playing to character flaws AND strengths are what make well-rounded and interesting PCs.

Being a new sergeant who routinely gets schooled by runners still sucks. And since that's a problem that wholly rests on the code, in defiance of in game logic (unless every new sponsored combat leader got to the position by sucking up and shirking all the duty that should have turned them in to competent combatants by now), it's fair to ask that Staff lend a hand in correcting it.

It would be neat if, in keeping with the same logic behind the buffed combat skills for templars/combat leaders, other sponsored roles accumulated 1 boost point per IC year or something.

I don't quite see how that logic follows. I don't necessarily think leaders should get buffs as they play, I just think they should be as good coming in as if they had leveled up and been promoted to the position. You seem to be suggesting existing leaders get a boost?

Once you're in game and your skills levels are reasonably set, it should be your responsibility for improving them.

I think they've mentioned the logic behind increasing the initial levels of templars and certain other roles is to reduce the amount of time templars need to spend training and increase the amount of time they spend leading plots and creating interaction etc etc.

There are many sponsored roles that would reasonably have the opportunity to improve on one thing or another but for which it is significantly more difficult to actually do in game for a variety of reasons.

I don't expect a lot of people to agree with me (and I know staff don't) but it's just a sentiment I wanted to voice.

I think there's a difference between 'dude is weak despite years of virtual experience' and 'dude won't branch razors because he keeps having to flay people for lord templar Valika.' In my understanding, the boosts are less about minimising time spent training, and more about representing that any templar has fifteen years of harsh training at the very least, and any sergeant has trained at least two-three years as well.

Having actually managed to run an indie crew for a short while (it was an, interesting one), I think the hardest thing to do is to keep folks from rushing off and dying foolishly (despite your warnings, begging, pleading, offering of rewards). Finding the right talent in the first place possibly shouldn't be trail and error. You shouldn't recruit Amos just because he was sitting at the bar when you walked in. Amos needs a job, sucks to be you. Amos pulls out a flute and does an amusing song and dance, ok, Amos, you're in, now lets get to work before I have to pull your tonsils out of your butthole.

While conflict is nice, I don't like it to be within my group, and I find it important to limit it to things that are necessary. The deaths of my people are an insult to me as a leader, and it's my job to investigate exactly what happened, bribe, question, threaten, and maybe cut a few fuckers until I get answers, there's a plot with some conflict potential. Needless to say, someone's going to vanish sooner or later, and I've experienced this numerous times and I like to think that the reaction, while kind of depressing, was also an exciting experience in some ways.

Other than that, I figure interpersonal interactions are important, establishing your personality with your minions and helping to grow theirs to suit your purposes over time, if they're not willing to do this, well, sometimes you gotta cut a fool, and they knew the risks when they took the job. Tell them stories about a long lost love, sing them songs, discuss your PC's views and philosophy, give and take, share secrets, maybe even share a bed, whatever it takes to make people loyal is worth the effort. When one wanders out and gets scrabbed, screw it, write a song about "Tha Dumb Fuck What Got Scrabbed" and roll with it, or tell it in story form, to everyone you hire, in a memorable and haunting fashion so that they know, hey, don't get scrabbed, because I'll cry, then I'll bang your corpse. Educate them about all the poisons your PC knows about and the cures, the pitfalls and things to watch for that Will Kill You, set clear rules for behavior when you're not around with caution in mind, and eventually you'll see some of them live longer.

Share moments with your underlings, make them feel like valued parts of the team, be willing to comprimise and possibly admit wrongdoing, fuck, hand them the reigns sometimes if they've demonstrated enough understanding. I don't think you can ignore the schedules in clans, so that makes all of the above hard to do. And, if you can convince your underlings to actually pay you for all this, well, I think you just won the game. Then again, I play PCs that prefer to make their coin inside the walls, or as short a distance from the gate as possible, as opposed to charging into the Pah to trample elves, so, my perspective may differ a bit.

I feel it's important to take responsibility for one's own mistakes and be willingly to openly admit it (I never shoulda hired Amos just cuzza that flute business, fecker was some kinda crazy necromancer), and use that as a cautionary tale as well. Groom your minions to replace you and carry on your work (because yes, one day you ARE going to die), and when they're competent enough in the group's philosophy, methods, and practices, think of them more as team members now, equals. Grow your group into something sustainable that will have lingering effects for many IC years after the last member finally dies. There will be the potential to butt heads with your fellows, but this kind of conflict risks degrading into some unhealthy disrespect between both parties and leaves unhealthy questions in the minds of your minions, it's important to avoid that, and to know how to prevent such escalation by identifying escalators early and working to temper that into something controlled.

Is this what a realistic Zalanthan leader would do? I don't know, I just know how I like to play, and I prefer to build rather than destroy, although I will result to the latter as needed. I like to see a group grow and thrive. I don't have enough experience actually playing a ranger to handle the task of navigation, it's on my to-do list soon, but I've seen a number of the hazards of the game-world first hand, and would personally rather avoid them if possible, while having my group trained and ready to respond as needed.

But to me, sparring, training, comes second to a compelling story, to interaction and bonds that really inject meaning and substance into the daily life of a PC, and I'm fully ready and willing to set aside all the training and what not to sing the song about Amos leading an army of undead rats around to the sound of his flute, or what have you, or let an underling do something else if they have to, which is why I really try to avoid clan life. I don't like being unable to say "no" to a proposition, I don't necessarily like big stories with big fireworks, I just like our simple little tasks, spiced up with the occassional unexpected animation, and I like keeping those folks I can trust to be loyal around, so maybe one day we CAN accomplish something more.

Quote from: HavokBlue on January 16, 2015, 07:21:13 PM
I think they've mentioned the logic behind increasing the initial levels of templars and certain other roles is to reduce the amount of time templars need to spend training and increase the amount of time they spend leading plots and creating interaction etc etc.

There are many sponsored roles that would reasonably have the opportunity to improve on one thing or another but for which it is significantly more difficult to actually do in game for a variety of reasons.

I don't expect a lot of people to agree with me (and I know staff don't) but it's just a sentiment I wanted to voice.

I agree, mostly because I loathe training. I never train, unless I'm in the Byn, or another clan that's heavy on the combat. And even then, I don't know how to excel greatly at it.

I guess you could always request a boost? Isn't that a thing?

Nah, as far as I'm aware, the current stance is that beside whatever you get at chargen, everything else has to be done yourself.

Oh. Mrr.

I don't think one little boost a year would hurt. It's not like the leaders we play just diddle around when they're vNPCly leading their lives. And it wouldn't grant some huge advantage over people who actually *do* play to win.

Since it seems people want to derail again, this needs to be quoted again, important parts bolded:

Quote from: Is Friday on January 05, 2015, 05:24:17 PM
Nauta: This is a thread for players that have played leaders to express their difficulties and share experiences. It's not meant to be a criticism thread for players who haven't walked the walk and aren't familiar with the challenges associated. I think that sort of posting will lead down a path of passive aggressive judgment rather than what I'd like to encourage: thoughtful reflection with lessons learned to help future leaders.

You're welcome to start your own thread, though. I understand you're just trying to contribute.

I don't feel like much of the last page was derailing from the topic. Could you please specify? I think mine and HB's discussion was legitimate, especially for those playing leaders on a time limit. I couldn't, when playing a leader, snub legitimate meetings and RP in lieu of sparring unless my character wanted to piss their peers off. Maybe I'm in the minority, but having to log in, having your time (gladly) taken up by being social and plot moving shouldn't mean the coded lack of skill in said leadership role (dependent upon the role, mind you). I didn't mind having my Fale being bad at everything. But having a leader in charge of a military organization, like a Templar or a Sarge, or a dual merchant hunter leader in a merchant house that's BAD means instagank, or instalack of due respect.

The posts before mine seem pretty legit, too. So I guess I'm curious as to what the derail is.

Quote from: boog on January 22, 2015, 06:25:54 PM
So I guess I'm curious as to what the derail is.

not enough bitching about minions

Honestly, I'm still skeptical of this "leaders should get bumps after character generation." A sponsored role leader should come in to the game with all the elevated skills you'd expect of someone in that rank and (virtual) experience. Afterward, responsibility should be yours alone for leveling them up. The best way to go about that is to play in the way you want to play. Blow people off for meetings because you want to go do something that'll raise your skills. You're a leader, fuck them! Do what you want to do. If you want to be a social plotter leaving you without time for coded exercise, well, that's the trade off.

Getting skill bumps just because you've stuck around seems indulgent.

Leaders are often denied some of the benefits that would come with their station.  A Salarri merchant who aspires to be a capable swordsman could hire a master to train them, or utilizing virtual resources of their house to gain that skill.  That employee would be at that merchant's beck and call, but instead, in a "find one IC" situation, you're stuck to coordinating playtime schedules for that to work out.

That isn't to say that when you logoff you should have infinite virtual time to spend pursuing training, but if it were up to me, I'd be okay with a leader picking one skill they're virtually training and give them skill bumps after a reasonable amount of time.  This would cost resources to get, dependent on what skill they're trying to train.  

Example:
Want to learn mirukkim?  A leader can pay for a virtual linguist to train them.  It'll cost 10,000 coins and take two IC years.  It takes 2 years because it's only casual training, as a Salarri has lots of other virtual responsibilities that take up their time.   It goes without saying, the same Salarri couldn't be training anything else virtually at the same time.

If they wanted to learn something more obscure, such as Tatlum, that would have to be done ICly.

That sort of thing.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on January 22, 2015, 06:55:19 PM

Getting skill bumps just because you've stuck around seems indulgent.

I'd agree with you on the "Just for sticking around" part, but if you're trying to utilize virtual resources that should be at your disposal i think it's a different story.  For instance, a Templar can't just go spar with random people.  But they could purchase a gladiator slave to teach them.  That sort of thing.

And I don't think one bump an IG year would be too much.


But I'm okay with my leaders sucking for the most part! I just thought it might be an okay point to consider and I'm appreciative of opposite viewpoints!

Having played leaders but never having been allowed to play a sponsored leader, I don't really like even more preference being given to sponsored roles.
Having worked your way up the hard way, you're just a little bit nastier.

I mean it seems like everyone is wanting skill bumps for sponsored leaders who are already been shown some favor by being given the role without having to survive 6 months in the game. Now let's make their skills go up because they are too busy socializing. The people who worked their way up? Fuck em? If it was an option to all 'leaders' than maybe.

For that matter why couldn't any character have a skill bump they do on their virtual off time?

That's why I was asking about that skill bump thing you used to be able to request.

And again, one bump a RL year in one skill? I had posted above that it would be fairly innocuous, and would still give people that codedly work hard the code advantage. I would never want to take away from that.

But again, I'm the sort that would try to hire someone to do my dirty work for me! At least, when I play and specifically don't train, train, train.

I know. It's an unpopular opinion! :x

And... I've survived plenty in the game. I don't think that statement is fair to make, KW.

I like being skilled but I hate training, can I just do all my training while I'm not logged in?

Yeah, sorry, I'm not a huge fan. Maybe if it was available in a limited fashion to everyone, not just sponsored roles.

Quote from: KankWhisperer on January 22, 2015, 08:25:54 PM
I mean it seems like everyone is wanting skill bumps for sponsored leaders who are already been shown some favor by being given the role without having to survive 6 months in the game.

The "without having to survive 6 months in game" is exactly the point: that character HAS survived six months in the game. They're only now being animated as a PC. It's jarring and unfair to everyone when your Sergeant is far and away the weakest member of the group. Combat leaders are expected to be able to fight, along with other stuff that relies on the player more than the code. Combat leaders who start with no combat ability have limited options for what they can do with their clan. They're going to have to devote large chunks of time to skilling up their character instead of devising larger things for their clan to actually do that isn't sparring.

That's assuming they don't somehow die during their skill-up period. New leaders are easy to assassinate and they're difficult to respect. They're just runners who have a magic patch that lets them yell at you, but can't pull their weight in fights (no matter how much they may want to). What's to stop my 20 day warrior from just ganking them out in the desert and blaming it on a raptor? Better hope that player is charismatic and interesting to follow around, because otherwise they're just well-dressed meatshields.

Sponsored Leaders in combat clans should come in to the game with skill levels reflecting the fact that that character is an experienced member of the organization. Thinking of them as new people who just poofed in to existence is conflating OOC and IC and failing to acknowledge the characters' previous virtual existence. They don't need to be as strong as a 60 day warrior, but they should be more skilled than your average runner.

Quote from: Delirium on January 22, 2015, 08:42:10 PM
I like being skilled but I hate training, can I just do all my training while I'm not logged in?

Yeah, sorry, I'm not a huge fan. Maybe if it was available in a limited fashion to everyone, not just sponsored roles.

CGP, buy your skills bumps up front. Work it in to your background.

Ideally though, combat clan leaders are raised up through the ranks. Continuity of leadership styles and passing on traditions is one of my favorite things about clans.

The only time my Runner whipped the crap out of a sponsored Sarge in recent history (little over a year) was when my PC was actually three years played, all three years in combat clans.

Quote from: Delirium on January 22, 2015, 08:42:10 PM
I like being skilled but I hate training, can I just do all my training while I'm not logged in?

Yeah, sorry, I'm not a huge fan. Maybe if it was available in a limited fashion to everyone, not just sponsored roles.

I'd agree to that, actually.

And yeah -- CGP. CPG! WHATEVER! I completely forgot about its existence.

Just ignore me! Noob rolling through.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on January 22, 2015, 08:44:07 PM

Quote from: KankWhisperer on January 22, 2015, 08:25:54 PM
I mean it seems like everyone is wanting skill bumps for sponsored leaders who are already been shown some favor by being given the role without having to survive 6 months in the game.

The "without having to survive 6 months in game" is exactly the point: that character HAS survived six months in the game. They're only now being animated as a PC. It's jarring and unfair to everyone when your Sergeant is far and away the weakest member of the group. Combat leaders are expected to be able to fight, along with other stuff that relies on the player more than the code. Combat leaders who start with no combat ability have limited options for what they can do with their clan. They're going to have to devote large chunks of time to skilling up their character instead of devising larger things for their clan to actually do that isn't sparring.

That's assuming they don't somehow die during their skill-up period. New leaders are easy to assassinate and they're difficult to respect. They're just runners who have a magic patch that lets them yell at you, but can't pull their weight in fights (no matter how much they may want to). What's to stop my 20 day warrior from just ganking them out in the desert and blaming it on a raptor? Better hope that player is charismatic and interesting to follow around, because otherwise they're just well-dressed meatshields.

Sponsored Leaders in combat clans should come in to the game with skill levels reflecting the fact that that character is an experienced member of the organization. Thinking of them as new people who just poofed in to existence is conflating OOC and IC and failing to acknowledge the characters' previous virtual existence. They don't need to be as strong as a 60 day warrior, but they should be more skilled than your average runner.

Quote from: Delirium on January 22, 2015, 08:42:10 PM
I like being skilled but I hate training, can I just do all my training while I'm not logged in?

Yeah, sorry, I'm not a huge fan. Maybe if it was available in a limited fashion to everyone, not just sponsored roles.

CGP, buy your skills bumps up front. Work it in to your background.

Just because you are the same rank doesn't mean you came up the same way. Even in real life a group of people with the same rank or job title have huge differences in skill and competence. Some came up through hard work and sheer skill, others were just good at politics and talking their way into it.

I suppose that the above is my biggest concern with playing sponsored leaders.

That and it's hard to find the right fit in terms of people to play with or against. But it can be fun trying to find said people. The reasons I've stored my sponsored roles have all been ooc related: lack of time, most notably, and how to remain relevant with lackluster play times.

Quote from: KankWhisperer on January 22, 2015, 09:08:23 PM
Just because you are the same rank doesn't mean you came up the same way. Even in real life a group of people with the same rank or job title have huge differences in skill and competence. Some came up through hard work and sheer skill, others were just good at politics and talking their way into it.

Then what you're basically saying is that no one should be apping for Lyksaen characters at all. I don't agree. You shouldn't be limiting yourself to the "incompetent politik Sarge" if you app in. Your role is to train and lead in mil clans, not make friends because you're too codedly weak to enforce any form of discipline or accurately represent the role.

When you app into a mil role and you want to provide people with the means to accomplish coded goals, you simply can't do that without some form of boost unless you plan to be "afk skilling" for a while. Which is not why you were accepted to perform the leadership role.

With that being said, CGP makes up some of the difference -- but I think it's a drop in the bucket from my own past experiences. Perhaps sponsored mil roles are treated differently nowadays.

edit:
These don't have to be "incredible" boosts. But I've had a Byn Sarge killed with sparring weapons by a Runner who had mercy off. Yes, that happened.

Quote from: Is Friday on January 22, 2015, 10:05:55 PM

Quote from: KankWhisperer on January 22, 2015, 09:08:23 PM
Just because you are the same rank doesn't mean you came up the same way. Even in real life a group of people with the same rank or job title have huge differences in skill and competence. Some came up through hard work and sheer skill, others were just good at politics and talking their way into it.

Then what you're basically saying is that no one should be apping for Lyksaen characters at all. I don't agree. You shouldn't be limiting yourself to the "incompetent politik Sarge" if you app in. Your role is to train and lead in mil clans, not make friends because you're too codedly weak to enforce any form of discipline or accurately represent the role.

When you app into a mil role and you want to provide people with the means to accomplish coded goals, you simply can't do that without some form of boost unless you plan to be "afk skilling" for a while. Which is not why you were accepted to perform the leadership role.

With that being said, CGP makes up some of the difference -- but I think it's a drop in the bucket from my own past experiences. Perhaps sponsored mil roles are treated differently nowadays.

edit:
These don't have to be "incredible" boosts. But I've had a Byn Sarge killed with sparring weapons by a Runner who had mercy off. Yes, that happened.

They should have considerable boost. It just seems that some are saying that these sponsored role's skills should continue to be boosted for just being around after the initial boost so they don't have to bother training because training is boring. I don't agree with them getting this special treatment on top of their special treatment.

To be honest I can say that being a leader and having low skills is annoying and when a leader reached 150 days with journeyman or below weapon skills, I actually asked the Staff if my skills were capped or could be boosted because it didn't make sense to me either. I was also tired of sparring/training after so long of no improvement. They said I would have to raise it like everyone else more or less. I'm just terrible at skill raising I guess.  But if my character who actually bothered to go to training for all that time can't get boosts I'd probably get pissy if sponsored roles get it just for being sponsored.

Well, I actually have something to say about this! My first character was pseudo-leadership in a clan, pseudo meaning it was one step below being an 'actual' leader in the clan. I felt that I had a lot to do with rebuilding that clan, actually. It seemed that once my character was around and present and being her vivacious self, she managed to recruit a lot, and follow the schedule set out, but in a way that tried to encourage others to explore themselves and pursue interests other than the normal in a controlled environment.

The downfall to the role, specifically, was lack of forward momentum once she got to the spot she was in. There were leaders in two ranks above her, who, simply, weren't around much, and yet weren't going to get removed any time soon. It started getting frustrating, because all she wanted was to be considered an actual leader with actual responsibilities, since she was doing all the work anyways.

For what it's worth, that character got a lot more responsibility and recognition that someone of their rank 'should' have had ;) Had to do with abilities. It is easy to hit those glass ceilings in clans, though. It's why I'm a firm believer in rewards other than promotions. Badges, favors, cool items, that sort of thing. Promoting someone in recognition of their ability sadly isn't always possible or practical.

I'm a fan of lateral promotions. Promotions in title and maybe minor status with some obscure RP facet as the focus(Calvary, Records, Strategist, Navigator, Archery,  Physician.. etc) Sometimes clans seem to feel like armies of Aides and Recruits and then level 1 troopers/privates/hunters/crafter's/. Every once in a while you get a Corporal/First Hunter/First Trooper/Merchant But those are very linear progressions.

So, instead of turning that other promising corporal and turning them into yet another Sergeant, maybe make them Chief Physician. Instead of having a Trooper just be a Trooper for 3 years straight, maybe make him First Navigator. That recruit who is already kicking all the Sergeants asses? Turn that annoying mouthy bastard into the new Apprentice Cook to take him down a few notches, nobody looks cool dropping fruit in the dust.

That already happens, and to some extent, some clans now have that built in (lateral promotions).

It does, and I'm a fan of it, it's been a more recent thing(past year or so?), and I'd love to see more of it. And more people able to survive and get into the positions would always be nice. Which is probably part of why I don't see it as often as I'd like.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on January 23, 2015, 01:38:24 AM
That recruit who is already kicking all the Sergeants asses? Turn that annoying mouthy bastard into the new Apprentice Cook to take him down a few notches, nobody looks cool dropping fruit in the dust.

I am Apprentice Cook of the T'zai Byn, and you will fuckin' respect me, or I will crap in your goddamn stew!

Quote from: Fujikoma on January 23, 2015, 01:52:57 AM

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on January 23, 2015, 01:38:24 AM
That recruit who is already kicking all the Sergeants asses? Turn that annoying mouthy bastard into the new Apprentice Cook to take him down a few notches, nobody looks cool dropping fruit in the dust.

I am Apprentice Cook of the T'zai Byn, and you will fuckin' respect me, or I will crap in your goddamn stew!

Quit your yammering, worm. Apprentice Cooks only cook for themselves. And you're damn well eating every charred and burnt piece of food your fumbling hands fuck up, otherwise it's coming out of your measly pay on contracts. Keep mouthing off and you'll be promoted to Physician Apprentice, where you'll be wiping Bone's brow as he works and scrubbing up the blood, piss and shit puddles from his next victims.

I haven't thought this through. May be stupid. What about adding more  ranks? Nothing is as encouraging as recognition. Promotions are a great way to that.

I'm a fan of it.

I'm a fan of the little pins and ribbons a few clans have for ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED.


I'm not really a fan of free skill bumps for "leaders".  I don't think its unrealistic that a leader would have to split his time between his own personal training and leading.  The "virtual training" argument doesn't make much sense to be either because there's also probably just as much virtual leading to be done offline.  The only exception might be for leaders like templars and maybe some nobles, where training isn't really available in-game due to social strata.  Highborn would be trained by other highborn and/or slaves, I imagine.

We have been working toward building in lateral "promotions" (or titles) and other forms of recognition and reward for leaders in many clans. It's not an easy thing to figure out, document, and roll out, so it's slow going. (For context: I put the first of these in place for Borsail and Tor in 2012. It takes time.) We do understand that players want to achieve and be recognized. Most of the noble clans both north and south have this already, as well as the northern templarate. This is the direction we're moving in.

And it's a good direction, indeed. I can imagine lateral promotions for some clans have to be pulled out of thin air, because they are either a meritocracy (tribes), or simply don't have it written in to their documentation (or have quite the opposite written into their documentation). I know some clans have very few ranks for a reason, so I can imagine that is annoying to re-write and figure out.

Lateral promotions aren't the end all be all, though. I recall from Dark Sun D&D 'Alternative Rewards' which provide an interesting RP reward for an otherwise combat-based leveling system. They included things like 'You can be a gladiator whenever you like, at the arena in Draj!' or 'The Sorcerer King's boon, Templars won't question you every step of the way from now on!' and other silly stuff that wouldn't apply to Armageddon. However, things like granting favor/a favor, if you are a Templar or Noble, or allowing someone access to an area they didn't have access to before, or even approving one of your minion's ideas, can be a huge reward beyond simple rank in a clan.

Quote from: Talia on January 23, 2015, 12:14:51 PM
We have been working toward building in lateral "promotions" (or titles) and other forms of recognition and reward for leaders in many clans. It's not an easy thing to figure out, document, and roll out, so it's slow going. (For context: I put the first of these in place for Borsail and Tor in 2012. It takes time.) We do understand that players want to achieve and be recognized. Most of the noble clans both north and south have this already, as well as the northern templarate. This is the direction we're moving in.

Not a criticism, but a suggestion, people feel better about moving up than they do about me ving over.

It's not always practical to move everyone up, especially in larger clans. If you have a long-lived troop of Bynners who are all generally awesome in their own ways, you still can't make them all Sergeants.

The interesting thing about Armageddon is that we (the players) have this "vision" that a rank like Sergeant is super high and important in the hierarchy of both the city and its army/House. The fact is that Sergeant is not a high rank at all and was pretty common In Ze Real World. I think you start getting into an 'important' role (virtual-wise in the reality of Armageddon) where the player ceiling begins.

I'm not really familiar with the Templar PC roles on Arm but I have a feeling that they are mostly just at the bottom pit of the Templar hierarchy as well.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that no matter how important you think you are, you're still a nobody in the grand scheme of hierarchy.

But of course I understand the need for that sort of ceiling, I mean, a guy that can barely hold his crappy minimum wage irl isn't going to make a great Red Robe or a Commander of His Legions.

It's my personal feeling that they are roles that only a very tiny fraction of the playerbase could ever possibly dream of RP'ing properly.

I don't know where I'm going with this.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on January 23, 2015, 01:41:44 PM
It's not always practical to move everyone up, especially in larger clans. If you have a long-lived troop of Bynners who are all generally awesome in their own ways, you still can't make them all Sergeants.

I was thinking more of sponsored roles. Templars. Nobles. Things to compete for.

Lateral rewards with things like "You get an extra bodyguard" or "you can hire more people" or "you can get 1 custom item this one time" or "here's a fat stack of free money" or "here's a bigger room for your shit"  or "that Red Robe is now your BFF" would be dope.

Quote from: HavokBlue on January 23, 2015, 01:56:52 PM
Lateral rewards with things like "You get an extra bodyguard" or "you can hire more people" or "you can get 1 custom item this one time" or "here's a fat stack of free money" or "here's a bigger room for your shit"  or "that Red Robe is now your BFF" would be dope.

I think it already sorta works that way with the Junior and Senior model, noble and merchant-wise.

Quote from: Barzalene on January 23, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
I was thinking more of sponsored roles. Templars. Nobles. Things to compete for.

I suppose. Templars already have some of that in place, though it might not be obvious to someone outside of the clan. In Allanak for example, a Templar isn't going to get promoted to Red Robe rank no matter how good they are, but they might get a fancier title. Sub-commander to Lieutenant-commander Extraordinaire, or something. They also get copious amounts of recognition swag. And more leeway to fuck up, which is a huge perk.

Nobles have a bit of this as well, but since there's rarely ever more than two nobles per noble house active at a time, room for in-house competition is kind of shallow.

Overall I'm less interested in giving Templars and nobles more ranks and perks than I am in giving clans that employ the largest amounts of players perks. Not because I'm anti-authority or anything, it just makes more sense economically. A City is only going to have around 5 or 6 noble and templar PCs at any one time. A GMH, militia, or Byn troop can easily employ that many PCs on their own. Give nobles all the fancy ranks and promotions and docs you want, less people are still going to see them. Meanwhile the rest of us are wallowing in larger clans with fewer docs and less things to work for. You have to make those clans fun and engaging and rewarding to be in, otherwise that noble with all the rewards in the world isn't going to be able to do shit because no on wants to play in his clan.

In general I think the documentation (for clans primarily, but also overall) needs to be streamlined and in many cases simplified, not expanded.

There's some documents that basically take 3 pages to explain a few paragraphs worth of a concept.

It's a bit much for players to try and soak in, especially newer players who are trying to get a handle on a specific area of the game.

I like the idea of non-rank swag. I remember when my Kuraci Sergeant way back when got a custom-pull 3-room bow just for her, IIRC after she won them some big battle with minimal lives lost - that was really cool. Used sparingly, it was a way to recognize my character's service without necessarily promoting her further (especially since she was a dirty halfbreed). Things that can generate stories and bragging rights.

I'm fine with documentation becoming more easily accessible, in the sense of docs that have priority/outline basic things becoming pointed out clearly.

That said, I love reading documentation something fierce. Everytime I play a nonhuman PC I go and read the racial docs on the old website for a better idea of proper RP. One of Arm's strong
er poits is its rich, detailed setting, and I'd hate to see it being simplified under the guise of streamlining simple because it's so harrrrrd.

There's a difference between making documentation detailed and making documentation overly verbose. Detailed is great, to a point, so long as you're not forcing players into lockstep.

I get the clear impression from some of the more recent documentation updates that it was written as if trying to anticipate every single scenario or loophole.

That's just self-defeating and ends up limiting creativity more than it fosters it.

I'm sure it's hard work to write documentation and I get that, but my honest opinion is that it needs a proofreader who is not afraid to go Strunk & White on that shit.


Self-moderated to remove bitchiness. Ahem.

Quote from: Delirium on January 23, 2015, 02:19:07 PM
lazy corporate assholes looking for loopholes in The System

Well, after seeing some characters mill about..

Regardless, I'm sure there is documentation that needs revamping. I just can't think of any right now, and I'd hate to see information being gone.

Quote from: Barzalene on January 23, 2015, 01:23:19 PM
Not a criticism, but a suggestion, people feel better about moving up than they do about me ving over.

PCs can be promoted to senior nobility or higher-ranked templar jobs, but that's when they get stored. It's still achievable, and it's still not playable, and that's not going to change for reasons that have been previously explained.

I hear what you're saying about players preferring to move up, but we're not going back to having Red Robes et al be playable roles.

That being said, getting recognized by one's House/organization with an additional title (which some PC nobles and templars have done) is definitely an "I'm better than you are, so there" thing for nobility and the templarate. It does not carry the same weight as making Red Robe, and that's by design.

Quote from: HavokBlue on January 23, 2015, 01:56:52 PM
Lateral rewards with things like "You get an extra bodyguard" or "you can hire more people" or "you can get 1 custom item this one time" or "here's a fat stack of free money" or "here's a bigger room for your shit"  or "that Red Robe is now your BFF" would be dope.

We already do some of this. We will be doing more of it in the future, depending on the clan and the role. This is part of documentation revamps.

Quote from: Delirium on January 23, 2015, 02:19:07 PM
I get the clear impression from some of the more recent documentation updates that it was written as if trying to anticipate every single scenario or loophole.

I assume you're referring to recent documentation such as what was produced for player-clan creation.

We're not trying to anticipate loopholes; we're trying to make sure we've thought things through beforehand so that when players have questions or problems, we don't have to internally debate and rework for extended periods of time. Thus, players get answers sooner and can move forward. Not having thought things through leads to response-time problems and delays stuff that players want to do. Thinking things through and being clear with ourselves and with players means that we can move more rapidly and facilitate player actions.

Quote from: Talia on January 23, 2015, 02:40:59 PM

Quote from: Barzalene on January 23, 2015, 01:23:19 PM
Not a criticism, but a suggestion, people feel better about moving up than they do about me ving over.

PCs can be promoted to senior nobility or higher-ranked templar jobs, but that's when they get stored. It's still achievable, and it's still not playable, and that's not going to change for reasons that have been previously explained.

I hear what you're saying about players preferring to move up, but we're not going back to having Red Robes et al be playable roles.

That being said, getting recognized by one's House/organization with an additional title (which some PC nobles and templars have done) is definitely an "I'm better than you are, so there" thing for nobility and the templarate. It does not carry the same weight as making Red Robe, and that's by design.

Quote from: HavokBlue on January 23, 2015, 01:56:52 PM
Lateral rewards with things like "You get an extra bodyguard" or "you can hire more people" or "you can get 1 custom item this one time" or "here's a fat stack of free money" or "here's a bigger room for your shit"  or "that Red Robe is now your BFF" would be dope.

We already do some of this. We will be doing more of it in the future, depending on the clan and the role. This is part of documentation revamps.

Quote from: Delirium on January 23, 2015, 02:19:07 PM
I get the clear impression from some of the more recent documentation updates that it was written as if trying to anticipate every single scenario or loophole.

I assume you're referring to recent documentation such as what was produced for player-clan creation.

We're not trying to anticipate loopholes; we're trying to make sure we've thought things through beforehand so that when players have questions or problems, we don't have to internally debate and rework for extended periods of time. Thus, players get answers sooner and can move forward. Not having thought things through leads to response-time problems and delays stuff that players want to do. Thinking things through and being clear with ourselves and with players means that we can move more rapidly and facilitate player actions.

Oh. I hear that. No one is going to play a red robe. But if there were Junior Blue and Senior Blue (for example only) there is a feeling of progress.

I, personally, can dig why people aren't allowed to play ranks past a certain cap, they already get more than enough power to really ruin everyone's day as it is.

Quote from: Barzalene on January 23, 2015, 04:20:01 PM

Quote from: Talia on January 23, 2015, 02:40:59 PM

Quote from: Barzalene on January 23, 2015, 01:23:19 PM
Not a criticism, but a suggestion, people feel better about moving up than they do about me ving over.

PCs can be promoted to senior nobility or higher-ranked templar jobs, but that's when they get stored. It's still achievable, and it's still not playable, and that's not going to change for reasons that have been previously explained.

I hear what you're saying about players preferring to move up, but we're not going back to having Red Robes et al be playable roles.

That being said, getting recognized by one's House/organization with an additional title (which some PC nobles and templars have done) is definitely an "I'm better than you are, so there" thing for nobility and the templarate. It does not carry the same weight as making Red Robe, and that's by design.

Quote from: HavokBlue on January 23, 2015, 01:56:52 PM
Lateral rewards with things like "You get an extra bodyguard" or "you can hire more people" or "you can get 1 custom item this one time" or "here's a fat stack of free money" or "here's a bigger room for your shit"  or "that Red Robe is now your BFF" would be dope.

We already do some of this. We will be doing more of it in the future, depending on the clan and the role. This is part of documentation revamps.

Quote from: Delirium on January 23, 2015, 02:19:07 PM
I get the clear impression from some of the more recent documentation updates that it was written as if trying to anticipate every single scenario or loophole.

I assume you're referring to recent documentation such as what was produced for player-clan creation.

We're not trying to anticipate loopholes; we're trying to make sure we've thought things through beforehand so that when players have questions or problems, we don't have to internally debate and rework for extended periods of time. Thus, players get answers sooner and can move forward. Not having thought things through leads to response-time problems and delays stuff that players want to do. Thinking things through and being clear with ourselves and with players means that we can move more rapidly and facilitate player actions.

Oh. I hear that. No one is going to play a red robe. But if there were Junior Blue and Senior Blue (for example only) there is a feeling of progress.

These ranks already exist.

They are called earning and asserting your IC'ly derived clout in game.

You have to become the leader of leaders. This is harder than it sounds. Basically, the idea is that even though you are the same rank as the other leaders in your clan....they all know you are truly in charge. Through your deeds and your clout you have earned their respect/fear and they listen to you.

When you get to that point, you are already a Senior Blue Robe, or a Lieutenant, or whatever other "title" you want. So what if staff hasn't codedly given it to you? Who cares? Every other leader PC follows you and listens to you....you are already playing that role in every way that matters. The rest is just "words".

Quote from: Barzalene on January 23, 2015, 04:20:01 PM
Oh. I hear that. No one is going to play a red robe. But if there were Junior Blue and Senior Blue (for example only) there is a feeling of progress.

I don't think it's too IC to say that the northern templarate already has something like this, and a revamp of some stuff for the southern templarate is in the works as well. In addition, some noble houses both north and south do have these possibilities, and at least the south will all have these in the future. It just takes time. We know that players want rewards and recognition (of various forms), and to know how to get rewarded and recognized, and that's where we're headed.

Quote from: Talia on January 23, 2015, 05:15:32 PM

Quote from: Barzalene on January 23, 2015, 04:20:01 PM
Oh. I hear that. No one is going to play a red robe. But if there were Junior Blue and Senior Blue (for example only) there is a feeling of progress.

I don't think it's too IC to say that the northern templarate already has something like this, and a revamp of some stuff for the southern templarate is in the works as well. In addition, some noble houses both north and south do have these possibilities, and at least the south will all have these in the future. It just takes time. We know that players want rewards and recognition (of various forms), and to know how to get rewarded and recognized, and that's where we're headed.

Awesome! That's really good.

I'll take a wicked ass custom mount over a title any day of the week, if I'm wholly honest.

Bear with me for being relatively new to the scene, but I think of one application of Barzelene's suggestion about vertical rather than lateral moves is worth mentioning in the clan I've mostly had experience with: the Byn.
We've kinda-sorta implemented lateral moves that feel like vertical by producing titles like "First Runner", "First Trooper" as sort of the Sarge's #2. One thing that I think would be interesting would be to open to LT to players which would make longer-played PCs feel like they had a future in the Byn besides being that one rank they got after the first year and are pretty much forever until Sarge dies or stores, since Sarge might move up and they could take his stripes, etc.

There are two downsides to this that I can recall being mentioned in previous staff responses that might make this actually not a good idea. The first is that there's little point in being LT when there's only two of you Sergeants [and of course there's a long established staffer LT, but that NPC could always get promoted, eh?]. It would make more sense to have a LT PC over perhaps four sergeants, and there are plenty of ready-made [and vnpc-existent] troops already that could come to life. However the concern here is the clan cap, since if the Byn grows too big, then other clans would be too starved for players. I haven't had the experience of watching how these things play out over the years as an admin, but my impression would have been that the life or death of a unit is very dependent on the hours the SGT PC can throw in [tying this in to the main subject, I swear], which can lead to burn-out, and lots of "See Sarge lately?" questions from newbs, including actual newbs to Arm who tend to get sent to the Byn. I would have thought that an uncapped Byn that had enough players to always have something happening would curb the "no one's here" boredom that can affect retention rates of new players coming in from TMC who get bored trying to find RP before they appreciate the beauty of this world in its own right. I almost had that experience, but was lucky enough to find the helper chat to talk their ears off for tips on what to do. I'd think that you might starve the other clans, but you'd reap the rewards over the next few months with the higher true-newb to dedicated ARM fan conversation rate. ICly those PCs will graduate and be looking for jobs, and OOCly those players will get their PCs killed on contracts since that's the raison d'etre of the Byn ;) and if they had a good time with a popping, active clan, they might enjoy the game enough to branch out into other clan roles. But like I said, I'm fairly new here and it may be that this has been tried and the end result wasn't a big help to newbie turnover rates [aka the 'haven't logged in in weeks' rate] and the cap was still needed.

The second downside is the code. In my experience working with another DikuMUD [and I don't know which code was common and which was inherited], the ranks are hard-coded and while that part is easy to fix, the real headache is on the builders who have to adjust NPCs and programs. I believe I heard this mentioned by staff earlier, so I think it would apply here as well. Let's suppose, just to be concrete, that the Byn rank structure expanded vertically as follows. By being concrete, by the way, I risk derailing this thread into a nitty gritty about one clan, so please take it as more of a illustration: Runner -> First Runner -> Trooper -> First Trooper -> Sergeant -> LT.  Now what would happen is the script that prevents people from under the rank of Trooper from entering certain areas would now permit First Runners to enter, since it's based on the rank's # in the progression, not based on the wording that that position translates to. So the second rank and up, whatever it's called, would have access to that room now. This requires staff time to come and edit the script to make it now the THIRD rank and up, which corresponds to the new Trooper. Similarly the areas for Sergeant and up would have to be edited to use the 5th rank and instead of the 3rd. I haven't played around with 'order'ing NPCs much, but if they have orderable NPCs, on the other Diku-derivative it was based on a simple clan rank comparison. So you'd have the same problem if you had NPCs that were allowed to be ordered around [or could be ordered around by bored people playing with the code] where you might have to tweak their clan ranks to make them correspond to the newly expanded scale, or they'd start obey orders from lower rank folk than intended. So if that is sort of accurate for what kind of work would be involved here, then that would be an investment of staff time that might not be worth it, with so many other things they have on their plate.

One major, major perk that I could see would be being able to give a rank that permits recruitment into the clan to a new rank between Trooper and Sergeant, something which could benefit other clans if they converted as well. The idea being here that when only one PC can induct, the clan lives or dies on their play times, and that causes stress and sometimes guilt, as all mentioned here in this thread. So one way to alleviate this is to allow a #2 man, like "First Trooper", to be able to handle all that is necessary command-wise for recruitment. And they might be given permission to do things like lead patrols without the Sarge, though this doesn't require any coded support, but which would also help the "everything's on me so I have to log in" frustration that I hear in this thread.

Recruitment privileges in a clan aren't based on rank, they are based on the PC being given that role by someone who can give them that role (either staff or another PC). So that is already possible to do, and it does happen in some clans at some times.

Quote from: Talia on January 23, 2015, 06:11:43 PM
Recruitment privileges in a clan aren't based on rank, they are based on the PC being given that role by someone who can give them that role (either staff or another PC). So that is already possible to do, and it does happen in some clans at some times.

Ah, cool.

Sometimes I feel like playing a sponsored role is request tool tag.

You ask another sponsored role a question, and they ask their staff for approval, but then they have a question, so you ask your staff for approval, so on and so on.

I feel like it's a side effect of PC sponsored roles all effectively being nobodies, but players want to do big things.

Quote from: HavokBlue on January 31, 2015, 12:10:22 AM
Sometimes I feel like playing a sponsored role is request tool tag.

You ask another sponsored role a question, and they ask their staff for approval, but then they have a question, so you ask your staff for approval, so on and so on.

I feel like it's a side effect of PC sponsored roles all effectively being nobodies, but players want to do big things.

This is one of the reasons I want PC created independent Houses so much...  You don't need to ask for approval, its your House, make your own decisions and bare the consequences.

Well, if you're making weighty enough decisions, you'll still need staff to have the world react. At least until we have enough players to fill out the ranks of the upper tiers of power in the world, with the code to support it, too.

Even then, I hope.

I can't see an independent head of a house being anything more than the level of a senior agent for a GMH though anyway? So I don't think there needs to be any reaction from the world by staff to counter such people's decisions. There might not be alot of senior agent PC's about, if any, but if these independent heads are above mid-level GMH, that could prove interesting. Nobles, Templars would be well above the independant clan leaders. Right now, there's the most nobles in the North than I've seen, ever. It's fantastic! We just need more GMH and I can't believe I'm going to say it, independents! I'm too lazy to compare how long ago the new system went in place to the time that has passed IG, but I'm hoping to see the independent system kicking off in it's next stages soon. I hope people are working on it!

Quote from: wizturbo on January 31, 2015, 12:42:43 AM

Quote from: HavokBlue on January 31, 2015, 12:10:22 AM
Sometimes I feel like playing a sponsored role is request tool tag.

You ask another sponsored role a question, and they ask their staff for approval, but then they have a question, so you ask your staff for approval, so on and so on.

I feel like it's a side effect of PC sponsored roles all effectively being nobodies, but players want to do big things.

This is one of the reasons I want PC created independent Houses so much...  You don't need to ask for approval, its your House, make your own decisions and bare the consequences.

Go for it!

Quote from: Nyr on February 02, 2015, 11:32:17 AM

Go for it!

I see lots of activity of this sort right now.  I'm excited for them to come to fruition (or to explode in a ball of dramatic failsauce).  I've been participating in the small ways I'm able to in order to help spur things along.

A quick plea to henchmen/clannies,

Never assume you are being presumptuous in telling your leader what your playtimes are going to be like.

They want to know.

They always want to know.

They will happily listen ad infinitum to you explain about the inner workings of your irritable bowel syndrome if it means they get to know for sure whether or not you're character will be around for a planned event, or whether your playtime is sufficient to accomplish some task they want to give you. So if your playtime is going to be changing, please consider taking 2 minutes to drop your leader a message about it. You will be their favorite person.

I wish there was a way that the karma given out for communicating with staff could be extended to "communicates with staff and leaders," though I have no idea how that would work.

Quote from: Narf on February 03, 2015, 12:34:35 PM
I wish there was a way that the karma given out for communicating with staff could be extended to "communicates with staff and leaders," though I have no idea how that would work.

We don't give karma out for communicating with staff--rather, for good communication (which may well be communicating well with staff).  The karma categories are generalized and we have staff-side documentation elaborating on each area.  See this post (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,48694.msg864400.html#msg864400) for an example.

I feel bad when my underlings do not seem to realize that they are free to tell me when they need to log off.

I think some people are afraid my PC will punish them ICly for having to log out when I am in the middle of asking them to do something or briefing them or whatever. That's not the case. I will always, always let you log out when you need to leave. It can be really hard to get off the game in a timely fashion and I have no desire to make it worse for you. Even if you make a crap excuse that my PC really shouldn't accept, I will turn a blind eye to it because I am not here to ICly punish you for OOC stuff, period.

Because people tend to behave as if they believe I will punish them for having to log out, I often feel like I have to guess when they have to leave based on their usual playtimes or subtle, ambiguous clues they may or may not be dropping in their emotes. Guys, please don't make me do that. Just tell me when you need to log off. I'm sure your other leaders will also be happy to let you go when you need to take care of RL stuff or sleep, and if they aren't, well, frankly I think that's complaint territory.

I mostly never know when I'm going to log off. Usually I just get bored at some point, or overwhelmed by a stressful/annoying situation like subordinates falling off their mount 15 times between Storm and Allanak, for instance, that can really sap my energy for roleplay. And then it's a sudden "Yo, I've got to use the latrines." and run off.


Then a while later I'll feel refreshed and ready for more.

Nothing like making contacts that play primarily in a timezone 6 hours ahead of yours.

Quote from: MeTekillot on February 05, 2015, 05:43:18 PM
Nothing like making contacts that play primarily in a timezone 6 hours ahead of yours.

<3

I'd love to be in charge of a patrol of like 6 recruit PC's, deep in the Grey or Red, then just say "Sorry, I gotta piss", emote wandering off, and then quitting out. Or, just ride off on them, as a test to get them to figure their own way back IG. That's a fun idea too.

Being in charge of 10 PCs on an adventure is not as fun as you think it'll be.

PC #1: I have decided to go link dead.

PC #2: I have decided to to go AFK.

PC#3: I need to log out immediately in terrible situation!

PC#4: I've decided to role play a complete moron for attention, when previously I was competent.

PC #5: I've gotten lost.

PC#6: I was starving and dehydrated before we left and I don't have any food or water.

PC#7: I never practiced riding before now.

PC#8: I'm Late!

PCs#9,#10: Hate other PCS. Begin thinking murderous thoughts.

This:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8)

Answer:

(https://gs1.wac.edgecastcdn.net/8019B6/data.tumblr.com/d8d485c56e7244c73df8967a9d2b7c89/tumblr_inline_nb38bbDHvR1t031at.gif)

PC 1's situation would suck.
PC 2 needs to quit OOC if they are going to be AFK more than a handful of minutes; the gameworld will not wait on them and "being AFK" is not an excuse for a resurrection; if they die that's on them!
PC 3 can and should quit OOC.
PC 4 can be executed in the field.
PC 5 can be left in the field and punished if they ever find their way back to camp or wherever you left from.
PC 6 can be executed in the field.
PC 7 can walk, then be left in the field and punished if they ever make their way back to camp or wherever you left from.
PC 8 can be punished when you get back.
PCs 9 and 10 can be devoted towards punishing the PCs that need to be executed or punished later.

That leaves you with two effectives to kill 2 ineffectives and punish 2 more ineffectives when you get back, providing an RPT all by itself.  Woo!

You could also force the innefectives to fight to the death for you and PC 9 and 10's amusement.

Lol. Next impossible step, trying to get them all together for that RPT  ;D

Quote from: Fujikoma on February 07, 2015, 12:38:41 PM
You could also force the innefectives to fight to the death for you and PC 9 and 10's amusement.

Oh yeah you reminded me..

PC #11: I'm an elf.

It'd be nice if someone would implement 'follow wagon' as well for wagon adventures.

Quote from: KankWhisperer on February 07, 2015, 04:48:27 PM

Quote from: Fujikoma on February 07, 2015, 12:38:41 PM
You could also force the innefectives to fight to the death for you and PC 9 and 10's amusement.

Oh yeah you reminded me..

PC #11: I'm an elf.

Hey now! That elf could've taken those other four PCs at the same time, maybe. :P
Don't blame me, blame the docs. :)

Leadership 101

Login:
Welcome to armageddon!

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

Amos sends you a telepathic message:
"Hey bob is dead"

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A templar sends you a telepathic message:
"I need to talk with you."

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A noble sends you a telepathic message:
"i like silk."
A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

A noble sends you a telepathic message:
"Are you coming to the party?"

Another Noble sends you a telepathic message:
"Don't go to the party."

A Templar sends a telepathic message:
"Did you hear there's a party?"

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

Amos sends you a telepathic message:
"Sup."

Quote from: Down Under on February 08, 2015, 01:28:23 PM
A foreign presence contacts your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

A noble sends you a telepathic message:
"Are you coming to the party?"

Another Noble sends you a telepathic message:
"Don't go to the party."

A Templar sends a telepathic message:
"Did you hear there's a party?"

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

You sense a foreign presence withdraw from your mind.

A foreign presence contacts your mind.

Amos sends you a telepathic message:
"Sup."

ftfy

QuoteA foreign presence contacts your mind.

You think, "Amos, from the great LUIR. Go."

Feeling agitated, you think, "Amos, go."

>expel

Quote from: Delirium on February 24, 2015, 02:04:04 PM
That stagnation largely sets in because often you realize that there's not much you can really DO once you've made it in your specific niche.

That's clans for you. Punch down. Get punched from above. You can't change anything.

Watch indies get to go stupid stuff. The only way you can get involved is to be willfully stupid and forget about House documentation and your job sometimes. Let's go adventuring because uhm..yeah to adventure!

Talia's said that she and maybe other staff likes it when you stir shit up. I really don't find that to be my experience. They like it when certain people stir things up. If you are not one of them they'd rather you just plod along and don't make more work for them.

You get an idea, you filter it through your character's personality, then documentation, then staff, and by then it is nothing worth doing.

You get staff attention and sometimes it is great, but it's hard sometimes to have a meaningful encounter. They send a challenge at you and it won't wipe you out. It will just wipe out the new players. Then the older players get to rebuild again. Yay.

With our stagnant status of most clans in the world, they are boring. It is a struggle for me to find something that makes sense to do that is actually fun and not out of character or just stupid.

And the request system is just terrible sometimes. I'd rather have a scheduled and logged chat session or something.

As a reward for being clanned, you get less coins, less fun, less skill, and less conflict.  Clans need a purpose other than to exist.

You're on a roll with the negativity today.

Quote from: KankWhisperer on February 24, 2015, 03:36:51 PM
And the request system is just terrible sometimes. I'd rather have a scheduled and logged chat session or something.

This would be really nice, even if it was like a once a RL month thing supplementary. Requests have a sort of message in a bottle feel to me sometimes. You never really know when they're getting read.

Quote from: Kids
I'm blowing off steam on the GDB. 

Kids these days.  At least you have a request tool to make requests with.  And you get to prioritize your stats.  And you can use the 'stop' command because it exists now.  And you can see your skill levels?  (lol wot)  And you get game-breaking extended subguilds.  And you get to play on Saturday.  In myyyyyyy day...

   ...uphill through the sandstorm, both ways!

  AND WE LIKED IT.

"game-breaking extended subguilds"

(http://forum.duelingnetwork.com/uploads/profile/photo-64230.jpg?_r=1380423659)

Quote from: Mook on February 24, 2015, 05:53:50 PM

Quote from: Kids
I'm blowing off steam on the GDB. 

Kids these days.  At least you have a request tool to make requests with.  And you get to prioritize your stats.  And you can use the 'stop' command because it exists now.  And you can see your skill levels?  (lol wot)  And you get game-breaking extended subguilds.  And you get to play on Saturday.  In myyyyyyy day...

   ...uphill through the sandstorm, both ways!

  AND WE LIKED IT.

I lol'd.  You forgot the part where if you lost your throwaway character, it was still a huge loss because you probably wouldn't get your next throwaway character approved for days.

Deleted.

Does anyone else ever daydream about a violent coup where your underlings throw you out of power and force you to serve them in the new organizational order?

"Please underling, don't take all of my responsibilities away! I will fight you until my dieing breath... or until vaguely winded... Or tea time, which actually is about now isn't it? Whelp, guess you win. Here's the crown."

Quote from: Harmless on February 25, 2015, 07:25:09 AM
Dunno if I'm a "leader" by the elitist definition of such in this thread

This thread isn't really for opinions of folks that haven't been tapped to be a leader IG. If you want to start a thread for folks that want to encourage or nitpick leaders who haven't been leaders themselves, you're more than welcome to.

Quote from: Delirium on February 24, 2015, 02:04:04 PM
That stagnation largely sets in because often you realize that there's not much you can really DO once you've made it in your specific niche.

In my opinion, the staff just need to get busy fucking with people more.  Random stuff, without some large over arching plot line.  Zalanthas is a dangerous place, random unexpected horrible shit should happen often.  Once you're in your niche, it shouldn't be easy to stay there and coast.

A Salarri merchant role might be dull, acting as an item dispenser and people manager...except when you take that wagon out and Gith raiders attack.  Kadian hunters who ride out to kill some carru for their hides might be routine...except this time a tribe of desert elves has declared these hunting grounds part of their territory and wants revenge!  Shit like that.  Random encounters would spice up the game tremendously, and give leaders some thing real to deal with once in a while. 

It's dull because what you can feasibly achieve is somewhat underwhelming. No one wants to play keepy-uppy in order not to lose all their hard-earned pittances.

In my experience, staff are generally willing to get behind most things that involve more than just your small circle of PC buddies, make sense in the game world, and don't function solely to kill PCs.

You want to use clan money to bankroll raiders to kill off hunters who won't work for you? You are probably going to get a stern look. You want to use clan money to fund an excavation of a mostly arbitrary location in the hopes that you dig up some lost ruins or treasure? You could be in luck, if you bring other clans into it, and you communicate regularly about your in-game efforts.

The question shouldn't be, "How can we kill as many people as possible."  It should be, "How can we create an intriguing plot with some tangible impact/outcome, but high risks."

The incentive here being PC goal/story progression and possibly notoriety in exchange for said risks.  Just my opinion.

Quote from: Tetra on February 25, 2015, 09:13:11 PM
The question shouldn't be, "How can we kill as many people as possible."  It should be, "How can we create an intriguing plot with some tangible impact/outcome, but high risks."

The incentive here being PC goal/story progression and possibly notoriety in exchange for said risks.  Just my opinion.

The problem with 'High Risk' plots is that they actually have to be 'high risk'. Going about these kinds of things are well and good, but if you can't keep yourself from feeling the burn of your 'high risk', you're going to likely die.

Quote from: bcw81 on February 25, 2015, 11:26:57 PM

Quote from: Tetra on February 25, 2015, 09:13:11 PM
The question shouldn't be, "How can we kill as many people as possible."  It should be, "How can we create an intriguing plot with some tangible impact/outcome, but high risks."

The incentive here being PC goal/story progression and possibly notoriety in exchange for said risks.  Just my opinion.

The problem with 'High Risk' plots is that they actually have to be 'high risk'. Going about these kinds of things are well and good, but if you can't keep yourself from feeling the burn of your 'high risk', you're going to likely die.

Be the change.

Quote from: ShaLeah on January 05, 2015, 06:32:19 PM
Some people THINK they'd be good leaders but really are the kinds of people who's enjoyment of the game rests solely in the hands of whatever their leaders tell them to do.

It's easy as hell to say "leaders should do XYZ!", the thing is every situation is different and every leader is different. Even within the guidelines of whatever clan you're running there's no guarantee that your vision will be the vision of your peers. And when you're an independent you still have to follow MUD rules that aren't in place yet because you don't have a clan and maybe you don't realize that what you're doing or thinking about doing is stupid and would never fly in a million years.

Be the change people!

Quote from: wizturbo on February 25, 2015, 06:00:38 PM

Quote from: Delirium on February 24, 2015, 02:04:04 PM
That stagnation largely sets in because often you realize that there's not much you can really DO once you've made it in your specific niche.

In my opinion, the staff just need to get busy fucking with people more.  Random stuff, without some large over arching plot line.  Zalanthas is a dangerous place, random unexpected horrible shit should happen often.  Once you're in your niche, it shouldn't be easy to stay there and coast.

A Salarri merchant role might be dull, acting as an item dispenser and people manager...except when you take that wagon out and Gith raiders attack.  Kadian hunters who ride out to kill some carru for their hides might be routine...except this time a tribe of desert elves has declared these hunting grounds part of their territory and wants revenge!  Shit like that.  Random encounters would spice up the game tremendously, and give leaders some thing real to deal with once in a while.

It seems to me this is one limitation of the player-driven approach. When it comes to environmental threats (wildlife hordes, etc.), players can respond to what's there, but generally don't have the power to create those kinds of problems. Of course I understand staff still do stir things up this way, and players can initiate other kinds of plots.

Quote from: wizturbo on February 25, 2015, 06:00:38 PM

Quote from: Delirium on February 24, 2015, 02:04:04 PM
That stagnation largely sets in because often you realize that there's not much you can really DO once you've made it in your specific niche.

In my opinion, the staff just need to get busy fucking with people more.  Random stuff, without some large over arching plot line.  Zalanthas is a dangerous place, random unexpected horrible shit should happen often.  Once you're in your niche, it shouldn't be easy to stay there and coast.

A Salarri merchant role might be dull, acting as an item dispenser and people manager...except when you take that wagon out and Gith raiders attack.  Kadian hunters who ride out to kill some carru for their hides might be routine...except this time a tribe of desert elves has declared these hunting grounds part of their territory and wants revenge!  Shit like that.  Random encounters would spice up the game tremendously, and give leaders some thing real to deal with once in a while. 

This is interesting. I'm not someone who would extol my leadership skills or roleplaying ability, I think I am qualified to say leaders need to take hits for their team to make shit happen sometime, and honestly I see a lot of times they aren't willing too.

When I played my Salarri sponsored role I was in a super fucked up political situation and it wasn't getting any better. It was one of my first roles as a 'leader' and it was pretty sensitive both due to staff expectation (I might be able to find an e-mail where a staffer literally told me they hadn't been on board with me getting the role) and IC circumstance.
I literally did what you said above once. I even missed the gulch the first time I tried to find it in a sandstorm blind in a wagon! But I was gunning to have our wagon go overboard. There was an RPT going on elsewhere, so I knew staff were around lurking, I had a couple clan members with me. So I said YOLO.
Now the next part is luck, it would have been kind of stupid had staff not gotten involved. I am pretty sure, despite the dangers, that the players involved probably enjoyed some of the interactions that followed. Wouldn't have happened if my testicles were still in my butt. Just do stuff. Nyr will dock your Karma and yell at you later.
Obviously there's limits. Everyone knows what I am talking about. Yes, do unorthodox stuff ; No, that does not mean using your clan or NPC bodyguards to wipe out a tavern.

But the idea is leaders need to make extraordinary situations to spice things up sometimes, just using their own creativity. (This has paid off massively, and also gotten me killed, but still paid off massively) And it needs to be at their expense. Right now, staff HAVE to be involved or its too difficult. PC leaders don't have the juice like that. I already mentioned elsewhere I really think glass ceilings need to go. Its simple progression ; The best example I have is a certain PC player who played a PC templar for YEARS. Their achievements even if they had slow time over those years and vanished from time to time would have merited them substantial recognition. But because of glass ceilings and the fear of 'ostracizing' a player we dont do it? Come on. Reward your long-standing players. This is apparently the Karma system, but it seems kind of flawed to me.

I didn't get a karma for four years and then I requested my notes, got a karma. I had tagged in a message something politely akin to (wtf guys am I that bad after many years? No roleplay where I might get a karma here?) --> The response was something like 'No request in 4 years, expected to request' .... Ok... what is the review flag for? I must have missed the part where I only get rewarded when I put my monthly request in asking to be rewarded. Cool, there are gaps of updates because I take long breaks, I can miss things.

Boring, because i know exactly how every conversation with my staff will go ; the same way they've gone over the past couple years if im trying to make permanent changes (or often just do something new). I'm sure i'm not alone in saying that the GDB community would LAUGH at some of the staff e-mails i've sent back and forth trying to get stuff done and some of the reasonings and responses I got in return. It would get to the point where i would almost type a message back and say things like "Just tell me it doesn't fit into YOUR plot next time so I don't have to read a page bs on why the answer is 'no'." At one point i was practicing argumentation with a staff member on economics trying to justify something and ultimately was just like ; "Wtf am I doing? These guys obviously have something they want to see...." So I just dropped issues in the end. Killed my want to be a leader past just contributing to the player base enjoyment.

Then again sometimes my clan staff would do animations and roleplay with us like 3-4 times a week, and I had 0 complaints. But that was really rare, and apparently consistent interaction is frowned upon.

So, in retrospect ; (TLDR)

1. Be spontaneous as a leader within reason
2. Glass ceilings need to go and would probably give long-standing players more incentive to play leadership roles.
3. Karma system seems a bit off to me. Granted, I barely toy or play with the roles I have already acquired (Waiting for those level 8s, you know) but sponsored and leadership roles need more motivation than exposure for karma. Karma has never been a driving reason to play this game. Just an interesting one.
4. Long-standing players in leadership roles need to be trusted and given more opportunity and progression. I'm cool with this being case-by-case because I trust my staff to act fairly (Since we HAVE to trust this anyways, I mean we don't have a choice ultimately). Its fun making a character because of the possibility. Its boring when you know you're a junior noble for life for 5 RL years and just intend to play the same plots with different names involved over and over. Aint nobody got time for that.

For what it is worth:

We have no fears of ostracizing a PC.  We do have fears of PCs having as much power as a staff member in terms of influencing plot and the rest of the game without the same oversight that staff have, so they generally won't (i.e. no Red Robes or their equivalent, no senior nobles).  Instead of raising the glass ceiling, we have provided other options.  See:  player-clan progression (you don't like the glass ceiling, then make your own house).  Still limited, to a degree, but you are ultimately answerable to yourself and a reasonable gameworld rather than a clan structure that is (let's be honest) way bigger than your PC.  We also are willing to work with long-lived PCs in leadership roles (sponsored or otherwise) to bring their role to an acceptable end, with the understanding that it will be an end.  That may mean promotion into a role that is not PC playable (so you play it out for a short while and then are stored).  That may mean a plot that, if successful for you, works out in the aforementioned promotion--and if a failure for you, works out in death or disgrace.  That may simply mean us making a cool death for your PC, which further helps out the gameworld.

Yes, it is important for you to request account notes if you have not received any karma and expect your account to be reviewed.  You might slip under the radar otherwise.  No, the review flag doesn't really mean much (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,43564.0.html) because we have account notes requests, which is you soliciting staff for review (at most often, every 6 months).

Even with the existing glass ceiling we've already talked about how clans are being restructured in many cases to have more upwards mobility, and not just have lateral options and perks.  It is a slow process and will tend to be that way--normal staffing stuff comes first.

When we have a lot of staff we have a lot of animations.  When we have fewer staff we have fewer animations.  Animating and helping plot in one's clans are both very important goals for staff; it is not frowned upon, but we are limited sometimes by our workload.  This is something we've been discussing on the Producer side of things.

Quote from: Nyr on February 26, 2015, 10:20:21 AM
We do have fears of PCs having as much power as a staff member in terms of influencing plot and the rest of the game without the same oversight that staff have, so they generally won't (i.e. no Red Robes or their equivalent, no senior nobles).

Why? Those sorts of PCs are as powerless as any other sort to influence the world, since it still takes staff to as much as tweak a room description or add an NPC or whatnot. But their presence would at least add to the illusion of PC actions mattering somewhat to affect more than just other PCs - ultimately, pof a Red Robe would still have to ask staff for things.

As is, a person can roll a ranger, have them be able to earn more money through a few hours of salting than a junior noble's stipend for an RL week, get combat experience (and skills) far more quickly than most clanned military-type PCs are allowed to, and probably join in with or form a crew that can quite easily end up more powerful than the PC element of either city's militia, gemmed and groups of rogue magickers notwithstanding. All that without the requirement to pretend such things as "Look at how rich that noble is!" (they're poor) or "Wow, that veteran soldier sure is buff." (not compared to that 2 RL month old hunter) or even "Yeah, this person's going places, I should support them." That last one's the worst. Knowing that a character's guaranteed storage if they achieve promotion past a point - helping them to achieve that promotion is basically supporting them into non-existence.

Eh. I don't post much and already feel like a broken record. I'll leave that there.

Edited to make my wording clearer.

I've found that trying to actually "change" the game world and expecting staff to go along with that is almost always going to fail. If it requires a lot of direct staff effort your chances go down exponentially. Apparently these guys act like they are volunteers with a lot going on...which is silly amirite?

What I have found is staff is entirely willing to go along with almost anything you want to do so long as you are the one driving the wagon. If it doesn't require staff putting in direct hours to make it happen, and basically just amounts to them telling you to, "Do what you think you can do IC'ly.", they will work with you.

I'm fine with that. I've put in changes where they've told me straight, "This is not going to live past the life of your current character most likely, but have fun with it.".  No problem, I'm on it.

I'm fine with that because mostly the only thing I want is for people to step back, give me the reins, and let me drive. I don't expect you to upgrade my wagon or pimp my ride, I just want to be the one steering for as long as it takes me to wreck this shit in a horrible glorious fireball.

So my advice...make as many changes as you want, but make sure your changes are something your PC can do with minimal or no staff help and they will almost always tell you to go wild...unless you start breaking the game, they don't like that.

I believe, and it is definitely so in my own case, that some of the glass ceiling frustration comes from the fact that the policy to restrict higher ranked PCs (Red robes, High Templars, Senior Nobles etc) was put in place before there was a solid replacement in terms of lateral promotions and rewards. I would have an easier time accepting that I can't be a Senior Noble ever, unless it's promotion into storage, if there's a clear but not hewn in stone structure to handle the "five years of junior rank boredom" mentioned above. Hopefully there will be such structures for all applicable clans in the not too distant future, and perhaps also with a splash of the upwards mobility Nyr mentioned.

I've posted it before and I'll post it again.

I really don't see the problem with glass ceilings. You can still exceed them functionally if not codedly.

If your Blue Robe Templar is so influential, successful, and powerful that you would be promoted to a Red Robe without the issue of the glass ceiling, you WILL be able to do pretty much anything a Red Robe PC would be able to do anyways, minus the stuff that would require staff intervention (which is why the glass ceiling is there to begin with).

A Blue Robe might not be able to call up an army like a Red Robe could if staff were online and willing to help them call up said army. Anything outside of that, I don't see the issue.

If your Blue Robe is strong enough and influential enough to be promoted to a Red Robe in practice, then you will still get the same respect and command the same power over other PC's you would with the coded rank anyways.

The only thing Armageddon is, is player to player interaction. Your player to player interactions determine your level of power up until the point that staff steps in to animate NPC's from higher ranking organizations.

If you are playing a Byn Sergeant that WOULD be promoted to a Lieutenant without the glass ceiling, and you've earned that promotion in game, you are going to get the same respect in game from other players as if you had already earned that rank.

The only difference is staff can still animate Lieutenants or above to dick you or help you. As for your PC to PC interactions, there really won't be any difference if you have actually earned that promotion even if you don't codedly have it.

If you are playing a noble who has earned the prestige, rank, and notoriety that would otherwise allow you to be a Senior Noble without glass ceilings, you are going to get the same respect from other players as if you were a Senior Noble.

The only difference is staff can still animate Senior Nobles to either dick you or help you. If you have earned the accolades required to get the promotion, you will get the respect as if you did have it from the other players in the game.

Basically, the glass ceiling rule only affects your PC to NPC interactions and your ability to change/affect the static game world which would require staff assistance anyways. It doesn't really affect your PC to PC interactions in my opinion because PC's are still going to give you as much respect, fear, and loyalty as you have earned regardless of your coded rank.

I've absolutely interacted with some nobles that I feared a lot more than other nobles and gave a lot more respect to than other nobles because of what they had accomplished and achieved. For any meaningful PC interactions, they were Senior Nobles in practice, if not in rank. The same goes for some Templars I have known. The list goes on an on for pretty much every organization with a glass ceiling cap on the rank structure.

Quote from: Delusion on February 26, 2015, 10:55:03 AM

Quote from: Nyr on February 26, 2015, 10:20:21 AM
We do have fears of PCs having as much power as a staff member in terms of influencing plot and the rest of the game without the same oversight that staff have, so they generally won't (i.e. no Red Robes or their equivalent, no senior nobles).

Why? Those sorts of PCs are as powerless as any other sort to influence the world, since it still takes staff to as much as tweak a room description or add an NPC or whatnot. But their presence would at least add to the smoke and mirrors of PC actions mattering somewhat to affect more than just other PCs - ultimately, pof a Red Robe would still have to ask staff for things.

I imagine it is also very difficult to properly represent the power of PCs with a lot of non-coded influence. Great Lord Templar Hardnoose would have immediate access to resources that are largely virtual and only available to Blue robes through requests/work etc, which would require a lot of staff hours put into supporting one PC. Allowing high ranked PCs and leaving them with just the existing coded benefits and none of the often largely virtual perks would feel kinda meh and result in watering down the importance of the role. At least in my opinion.

I'm still glad to hear adjusting upwards mobility is being discussed because the prospect of clan rank is sometimes very compelling.

Palomar, you page rolling so and so!!!

Quote from: Delusion on February 26, 2015, 10:55:03 AM

Quote from: Nyr on February 26, 2015, 10:20:21 AM
We do have fears of PCs having as much power as a staff member in terms of influencing plot and the rest of the game without the same oversight that staff have, so they generally won't (i.e. no Red Robes or their equivalent, no senior nobles).

Why? Those sorts of PCs are as powerless as any other sort to influence the world, since it still takes staff to as much as tweak a room description or add an NPC or whatnot. But their presence would at least add to the smoke and mirrors of PC actions mattering somewhat to affect more than just other PCs - ultimately, pof a Red Robe would still have to ask staff for things.

Sure, for building.  I was referring to a specific thing:  influencing plot and the rest of the game without the same oversight or even self-imposed restrictions that staff members would have.  But I don't want to sound like a broken record, either, here's what was written about it before.

Recently:
Related to sorcerers / the glass ceiling / Templars /etc (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,48060.msg842945.html#msg842945)
part 2 (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,48060.msg843039.html#msg843039)
part 3 (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,48060.msg843048.html#msg843048)


Many things have changed since this time, but here's an older thread and some posts regarding it:
Policy discussion / 2011 (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,40747.msg587913.html#msg587913)
part 2 (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,40747.msg588302.html#msg588302)
relevant part 3, from Adhira (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,40747.msg588472.html#msg588472)

Quote
As is, a person can roll a ranger, have them be able to earn more money through a few hours of salting than a junior noble's stipend for an RL week, get combat experience (and skills) far more quickly than most clanned military-type PCs are allowed to, and probably join in with or form a crew that can quite easily end up more powerful than the PC element of either city's militia, gemmed and groups of rogue magickers notwithstanding.

So if that is your thing, feel free to roll with it, that's absolutely fine.  Staff will animate and empower the virtual world as appropriate to ensure that said group is not, in fact, more powerful than virtual groups that are more powerful. 

The rest of the examples provided seem hyperbolic though.  Nobles aren't poor (we revamped their pay in the past couple of years), a veteran soldier does indeed probably have more skill than a 2 month hunter, and there would indeed be multiple steps along the path to promot-a-storage, especially if you start helping at the beginning of someone's career.

Quote from: Desertman on February 26, 2015, 11:08:57 AM
I've posted it before and I'll post it again.

I really don't see the problem with glass ceilings. You can still exceed them functionally if not codedly.

If your Blue Robe Templar is so influential, successful, and powerful that you would be promoted to a Red Robe without the issue of the glass ceiling, you WILL be able to do pretty much anything a Red Robe PC would be able to do anyways, minus the stuff that would require staff intervention (which is why the glass ceiling is there to begin with).

A Blue Robe might not be able to call up an army like a Red Robe could if staff were online and willing to help them call up said army. Anything outside of that, I don't see the issue.

If your Blue Robe is strong enough and influential enough to be promoted to a Red Robe in practice, then you will still get the same respect and command the same power over other PC's you would with the coded rank anyways.

The only thing Armageddon is, is player to player interaction. Your player to player interactions determine your level of power up until the point that staff steps in to animate NPC's from higher ranking organizations.

If you are playing a Byn Sergeant that WOULD be promoted to a Lieutenant without the glass ceiling, and you've earned that promotion in game, you are going to get the same respect in game from other players as if you had already earned that rank.

The only difference is staff can still animate Lieutenants or above to dick you or help you. As for your PC to PC interactions, there really won't be any difference if you have actually earned that promotion even if you don't codedly have it.

If you are playing a noble who has earned the prestige, rank, and notoriety that would otherwise allow you to be a Senior Noble without glass ceilings, you are going to get the same respect from other players as if you were a Senior Noble.

The only difference is staff can still animate Senior Nobles to either dick you or help you. If you have earned the accolades required to get the promotion, you will get the respect as if you did have it from the other players in the game.

Basically, the glass ceiling rule only affects your PC to NPC interactions and your ability to change/affect the static game world which would require staff assistance anyways. It doesn't really affect your PC to PC interactions in my opinion because PC's are still going to give you as much respect, fear, and loyalty as you have earned regardless of your coded rank.

I've absolutely interacted with some nobles that I feared a lot more than other nobles and gave a lot more respect to than other nobles because of what they had accomplished and achieved. For any meaningful PC interactions, they were Senior Nobles in practice, if not in rank. The same goes for some Templars I have known. The list goes on an on for pretty much every organization with a glass ceiling cap on the rank structure.

I agree with the sentiment of this post -- Player to Player interaction is key, and existing within the virtual construct of the world as well. Samos is looked back on as 'pretty awesome', but it also presented quite a few problems. First and foremost, just that you could/would have to interact with a Red Robe on a (potentially) daily basis. It demystifies the power of the Red Robe, when you see them hanging out at a tavern. Secondly, that decisions they make are reviewed by peers, not by superiors. I like the system of checks and balances -- I like having Staff get the final say, and have a conversation with me about what is possible, what isn't. The game wouldn't function well if a bunch of us had PCs that could do whatever they wanted. Sorry, I wouldn't even want to play a game inhabited by PC Red Robes and Senior Nobles. In a world of "I Me Mine", I fear that people just want those positions so they can say they got them, and then they would store in 2 weeks after they realized how boring it was.

Quote from: Desertman on February 26, 2015, 11:16:29 AM
Palomar, you page rolling so and so!!!

Hah!

I gotta say I agree with a lot of what you wrote about being able to do stuff and that it's mostly PC/NPC interaction where the coded rank and ceiling plays in.

I'd like to add that even with accomplishments and non-coded influence, it can be difficult to get that through to others PCs (players). My point being that sometimes people, and not always the uninformed, treat the 1-day PC and the 100-day PC the same because they have the same "general" rank in the organization.

Nyr ; By ostracize, as in something like;

'We wouldn't want a Precentor/Black-robe because you'd be isolated, it wouldn't make sense for you to be around regularly as a player." --> Disregard if you already knew i meant it in this fashion.

You make a good example, the player created clans. Just keep in mind that when I was playing regularly, I literally e-mailed you specifically about something similar. Probably more than once, and not just to you but to all my clan staff ;
My response, was not staff support and a GDB update, it was a lot of back and forth that amounted to ; (Merchant houses will kill them. And then you will be in trouble.) I was actually okay with this after I threw some tantrums at my computer desk at the time.
But now? Now we've got it! its structured and everything I don't even have to figure it out how it will work its mapped out for me.

I bring this up because I'm sure I wasn't the only person to ever think or talk about that idea, and I am quite sure I certainly wasn't the first. However, if it had been allowed earlier because a PC leader was trusted to try it out as they were long-standing, functionalism might have given us that awesome game addition long ago, not just recently.  
There seems to be a trend where players consistently want to see something over a long period, and the staff ultimately make those changes.

Desertman ; I agree with you on many of the things you said.

However, qualms ;

-Rank doesn't matter because influence comes from recognition regardless -> I do not agree.

Things like ranks can lead to plot, competition, murder. Nobles fighting over singular titles. Shit like that.

Also, I'm super high so this should be friendly banter, if this sounds like a gripe or picking a bone I am not articulating well enough to let on I am under the impression we are having a friendly conversation.

Quote from: Aruven on February 26, 2015, 11:38:51 AM
There seems to be a trend where players consistently want to see something over a long period, and the staff ultimately make those changes.

There's another trend where staff consistently want to see something over a long period, it requires vetting and work on top of normal, existing staff duties, and staff ultimately makes those changes.  I personally think the two trends are related.  :)

Quote from: Nyr on February 26, 2015, 11:40:56 AM

Quote from: Aruven on February 26, 2015, 11:38:51 AM
There seems to be a trend where players consistently want to see something over a long period, and the staff ultimately make those changes.

There's another trend where staff consistently want to see something over a long period, it requires vetting and work on top of normal, existing staff duties, and staff ultimately makes those changes.  I personally think the two trends are related.  :)

(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/a7/a71b4dc44341e617adb96853143abf17911b1d205c5527c9eddb0e344813629d.jpg)

Quote from: Nyr on February 26, 2015, 11:40:56 AM

Quote from: Aruven on February 26, 2015, 11:38:51 AM
There seems to be a trend where players consistently want to see something over a long period, and the staff ultimately make those changes.

There's another trend where staff consistently want to see something over a long period, it requires vetting and work on top of normal, existing staff duties, and staff ultimately makes those changes.  I personally think the two trends are related.  :)

There's also a third trend where people ask, beg and plead for things and those things never happen.


ALL I WANT IS MY MASTERCRAFT FONDUE SET, NYR!! >:(

Quote from: Nyr on February 26, 2015, 11:28:16 AM
The rest of the examples provided seem hyperbolic though.  Nobles aren't poor (we revamped their pay in the past couple of years), a veteran soldier does indeed probably have more skill than a 2 month hunter, and there would indeed be multiple steps along the path to promot-a-storage, especially if you start helping at the beginning of someone's career.

I chose ranger and said that because that was pretty much my experience of playing a ranger not too long ago. That character could rake in enough money to put a current noble's stipend to shame, but I stopped because it felt silly. That character was also capable of - sometimes literally - eating things for breakfast that longer-lived, clanned PCs kept warning were very dangerous. The same character even bailed longer-lived, clanned PCs out of somewhat sticky situations on a couple occasions.

I really don't have the energy to debate anything more subjective, but I did do the above with a character without even fantastic stats. Coded power's wobbling off at a tangent from this thread, I guess.

Generating enough player-vs-player conflict that will not end up destroying the other party or getting some crazy backlash out of no-where. OR, even finding enough PCs to generate that kind of conflict. Or getting the resources (or minions) to put up any kind of fight...

When it gets hard for me, eventually I just have to rely on player vs environment interaction and that's not usually possible with a staff-sponsored role.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on February 26, 2015, 11:49:05 AM

Quote from: Nyr on February 26, 2015, 11:40:56 AM

Quote from: Aruven on February 26, 2015, 11:38:51 AM
There seems to be a trend where players consistently want to see something over a long period, and the staff ultimately make those changes.

There's another trend where staff consistently want to see something over a long period, it requires vetting and work on top of normal, existing staff duties, and staff ultimately makes those changes.  I personally think the two trends are related.  :)

There's also a third trend where people ask, beg and plead for things and those things never happen.


ALL I WANT IS MY MASTERCRAFT FONDUE SET, NYR!! >:(

FYI really means "fondue-it-yourself" except like "fondue-yourself-it" or something

be the change

Piggybacking on Delusion's part of the debate.... That is part of the clanned vs non-clanned problem, and I'm sincerely hoping that current staff are looking into their implementation to make these roles a little more juicy.

As mentioned, an indie ranger can muck up coin and influence and combat skill, go create their own Minor House based on selling old artifacts to interested History Buffs, but a clanned Merchant can barely make 10% off sales, and only has the path to House Coin-Op, or "Master Crafter" which, by the time they reach that, it holds little meaning (due to many other factors).

However, more on topic for leadership...

Desertman has it right that part of the game is player interaction. Some may argue its the ONLY part of the game (except that would make us a MUSH). It is unfortunate that as part of a "Sponsored" role, leaders often do not feel sponsored at all. Aruven mentioned anecdotally that his staff wasn't on board with him getting the role.

Sponsored means to introduce and support (someone in this chosen role) but I don't know that the support is entirely fleshed out. How many templars have told underlings to "go question that NPC Merchant, find out who sold that Military-only weapon" only to find out it takes more than a wish, and about 2 RL weeks worth of question requests in the system?

I understand "everyone is a volunteer" except you didn't just volunteer, you went through a rigorous process of proving yourself over years playing the game to earn trust from current staff to do a JOB. If I volunteered for the Red Cross, and never went out for emergency response and used the excuse "Well, I'm a volunteer, so I don't always have time" they would fire my ass.

I imagine staff as volunteer firemen. They aren't always running around putting out fires, they also have jobs and family and lives too. But they volunteered to be Firemen even if it's a very demanding job because they love what the job entails.

Maybe I was just lucky with playtimes, but I found staff much more available than not for animating things like "the NPC merchant who's selling a militia weapon illegally." Usually when I had underlings along that I was trying to get involved, but sometimes even just for my own self. Sometimes I'd have to file a report to set up larger things like an apartment raid, but harassing a merchant or beggar could usually be accomplished with a Wish command and some patience.

Maybe staff didn't just want me continuing to murder NPCs who got on my PC's bad side. When beggars started dropping the random items they picked up because they heard my PC was coming, I was admittedly flattered.

Or maybe Staff were just willing to do favors like this for me and my clan because I rarely asked for anything else. I had the advantage of being a mid-tier leader with PC leaders over me who I could rely on to cook up crazier RPTs. I focused my leadership mostly on just playing a character and trying to bring the world around us alive. Having things like goals and plots always seemed like a hassle; keeping the clan a decent size to foster interaction was hard enough.

Whatever happened to My 2 sids ? Talked about player-created clans in 2006 that one did. A prize needs be arranged.

Something about the idea of a leadership PC makes people feel like they should be able to accomplish bigger, better, more with that PC than with other PCs.  I feel like the eyes of a lot of leaders start with eyes that are bigger than their stomachs.  It's only natural to enter a role with a list of things you think would be cool to do.  But there is a gap between "this is what I want to do" and "this is what it is possible for me to do given the amount of time and energy I've devoted to trying to get it done."

My advice for wanting to "do" things in leadership roles:

1) What do you want to do?  What would it take realistically to get it done?
2) Is it a major change or a minor change?  As a general rule, asking to have anything added to the game, or change any existing game structure, is probably going to be a major change.

3) If it's a minor change, does it require staff support?
4) If not, tell staff that you're going to do it, and then do it.*  Take IC consequences if they come.
5) If so, think about how much time you think it will take to do it, multiple that number by 5 or so, and then consider yourself doing well if you're half way done when you thought you would be done.  If at all possible, try to avoid things that need staff support.

6) If it's a major change, work out exactly what you need from staff and what you can do yourself. 
7) Tell staff what you think you need from their end. Expect staff to tell you 'no' if you ask them out of the blue if you can have something or present them with an idea that you haven't really thought through.*
8 ) Decide whether it would be IC for your character to pursue your major change (anyway, if you've already asked and been told no).
9) Tell staff that you want to pursue it (anyway, if you've already asked and been told no).  Pursue it to the extent you can without staff support.  Keep staff updated about what you're doing.
10) Visit or revisit the issue after you've put a significant amount of work into it.  Staff might decide that it is worth putting the work in if you've already put the work in yourself.

*) Any time you think staff are telling you not to do something, ask them whether they are really telling you not to do it in an OOC sense, or if they are just telling you that it will be hard to do or that there may be consequences for doing it.  Unless staff tells you that you absolutely should not do something for some game documentation reason, do whatever your character would do.  Try to have fun doing it.

Overall, I've found that staff are very receptive to helping with small things when I'm willing to put the work in, have clearly established and realistic expectations for what I need, and I'm willing to be patient and flexible.  The more thought and in-game hours I've put into an idea, the more supportive staff is.

I don't usually try to make major changes though.  I've been shot down and frustrated plenty.  Still, I've found that "I want this thing" is a lot less persuasive than "look at all this work I've done toward this thing, what else would you need to make it happen."  Zalanthas is pretty much in a medieval stasis (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MedievalStasis) enforced by sorcerer kings anyway, so it sort of makes sense why change isn't embraced and doesn't happen that often.  That's what I tell myself, anyway, and I'm sticking to it.  ::)

Just want to jump in and keep it as brisk as possible, and direct as possible.  I get Nyr's perspective on the glass ceiling topic.  I really do.  But from a PC perspective, glass ceilings: .  At least this player's.  

Its rare that someone does well enough to hit the ceiling, as most of the world really is out to get you.  But getting to don that Red Robe, or <sekrit stuff>, is a kind of knock your socks off experience that sticks with people for life when they're involved in a hobby they love.

Quote from: Kryos on February 28, 2015, 11:37:22 AM
Just want to jump in and keep it as brisk as possible, and direct as possible.  I get Nyr's perspective on the glass ceiling topic.  I really do.  But from a PC perspective, glass ceilings:

SUCK

.  At least this player's.  

Its rare that someone does well enough to hit the ceiling, as most of the world really is out to get you.  But getting to don that Red Robe, or <sekrit stuff>, is a kind of knock your socks off experience that sticks with people for life when they're involved in a hobby they love.

I agree.

I really feel like there SHOULDN'T be caps on players reaching high level, influential, powerful PCs because, unlike the days of high level PCs all being STAFF AVATARS and subject to *gasp* OOC corruption (think Ishahn and Pearl era), we're a different group of players and staff alike.  A player who's a fuck up and twink isn't going to be able to get to Red Robe, even if Nyr/Morg/Adhira/ness like them, why? Because they're not like that which means everyone below them will be caught/questioned if THEY do, be it favor or persecute a player.

Back when Tuluk was liberated an aide I played got seduced by a noble. I (the player) wasn't aware of that new no noble/commoner hoopla, the player of the noble WAS and even informed staff in reports BEFORE doing my PC. My PC fled Tuluk with their Capitan of the Guard and they were both assassinated right after getting to Allanak. That noble wasn't force stored after doing that and yet there's a black mark on MY account notes about it, and I didn't even KNOW about that rule. That noble lived a while after that as far as I know.
Now Chosen/Templars get immediately force stored when they break that rule. I agree with THAT %100 cause you know the limitations going INTO the role. 

Not too long ago there was a player driven sorcerer that got uber powerful. In my opinion that sorceror's longevity, influence and game world power were too much and probably led to the changes in the sorceror guild which RUINED that guild for anyone playing it from here on out. Now, having been involved in a plot with that group of scoundrels I can tell you first hand that there is no fucking way just anyone playing that sorcerer guild could have gotten away with half the shit that PC got away with.  He lived too long, in my player opinion, giving thought to the reality of the game world I don't know that the BIG powers that be would allow a potential threat to even get close.


You have the people who codedly get to the max mechanical wise with their PCs, you have players who twink and take advantage, you have people who dance the line but I really think forcibly retiring PCs because they can't get any higher is sad. I'd rather be bitchslapped/killed/shamed IC'ly (like happened not so long ago to a pc that got a bit too big for their britches that TONS of players were able to watch and participate in - how awesome was THAT?!) than to disappear into the estate/heart/temple/sands as an unremarkable.

At the end of the day it's what's best for the game. I would just rather HAVE the chance to really impact the game rather than be denied the chance because some assholes in the past took advantage/weren't stopped in time.

There is ALWAYS someone above you and that's always gonna be staff, no matter what rank you reach as a player. Always.

It'd be nice for the trust to be individually based. Not past transgressions based.

Quote from: ShaLeah on February 28, 2015, 03:03:00 PM

Quote from: Kryos on February 28, 2015, 11:37:22 AM
Just want to jump in and keep it as brisk as possible, and direct as possible.  I get Nyr's perspective on the glass ceiling topic.  I really do.  But from a PC perspective, glass ceilings:

SUCK

.  At least this player's.  

Its rare that someone does well enough to hit the ceiling, as most of the world really is out to get you.  But getting to don that Red Robe, or <sekrit stuff>, is a kind of knock your socks off experience that sticks with people for life when they're involved in a hobby they love.

I agree.

I really feel like there SHOULDN'T be caps on players reaching high level, influential, powerful PCs because, unlike the days of high level PCs all being STAFF AVATARS and subject to *gasp* OOC corruption (think Ishahn and Pearl era), we're a different group of players and staff alike.  A player who's a fuck up and twink isn't going to be able to get to Red Robe, even if Nyr/Morg/Adhira/ness like them, why? Because they're not like that which means everyone below them will be caught/questioned if THEY do, be it favor or persecute a player.

Back when Tuluk was liberated an aide I played got seduced by a noble. I (the player) wasn't aware of that new no noble/commoner hoopla, the player of the noble WAS and even informed staff in reports BEFORE doing my PC. My PC fled Tuluk with their Capitan of the Guard and they were both assassinated right after getting to Allanak. That noble wasn't force stored after doing that and yet there's a black mark on MY account notes about it, and I didn't even KNOW about that rule. That noble lived a while after that as far as I know.
Now Chosen/Templars get immediately force stored when they break that rule. I agree with THAT %100 cause you know the limitations going INTO the role. 

Not too long ago there was a player driven sorcerer that got uber powerful. In my opinion that sorceror's longevity, influence and game world power were too much and probably led to the changes in the sorceror guild which RUINED that guild for anyone playing it from here on out. Now, having been involved in a plot with that group of scoundrels I can tell you first hand that there is no fucking way just anyone playing that sorcerer guild could have gotten away with half the shit that PC got away with.  He lived too long, in my player opinion, giving thought to the reality of the game world I don't know that the BIG powers that be would allow a potential threat to even get close.


You have the people who codedly get to the max mechanical wise with their PCs, you have players who twink and take advantage, you have people who dance the line but I really think forcibly retiring PCs because they can't get any higher is sad. I'd rather be bitchslapped/killed/shamed IC'ly (like happened not so long ago to a pc that got a bit too big for their britches that TONS of players were able to watch and participate in - how awesome was THAT?!) than to disappear into the estate/heart/temple/sands as an unremarkable.

At the end of the day it's what's best for the game. I would just rather HAVE the chance to really impact the game rather than be denied the chance because some assholes in the past took advantage/weren't stopped in time.

There is ALWAYS someone above you and that's always gonna be staff, no matter what rank you reach as a player. Always.

It'd be nice for the trust to be individually based. Not past transgressions based.

This is well said, and while im still a newb, i couldn't agree more. In the Rp  i come from aside arm, there was no such thing as foricibly retiring a character - they kept going until they died.  I don't know too much about force stores, but for infracions like you said, that sure makes sense, but for achieving something - honestly, if that happened to me, i'd be dissapointed! not just becuase the char's story is over, but because of how that could effect the other PCs they knew. Just dissapearing like that can have a huge effect on a character.

We don't "force store" PCs for achievement. But we don't allow certain high-ranking roles to be playable, either. Sometimes when a PC has lived a long time and done a lot, we allow the player to store their PC (because they don't want to play the PC anymore) and we give them a promotion at that time. The PC has not been "force stored;" they have been stored at the player's choice, and gotten a promotion at the same time.

Very high-ranking roles are not playable because they imbalance the game for other players, not because we don't trust players with them. One Red Robed templar in a city is more powerful than all the Blue Robes and junior nobles put together, and therefore can squash anything that they don't want to have happen. A Red Robe could execute junior nobles with impunity for the most part (at least the first couple), and they could make sure that junior nobles or Blues never got to do a single thing plot-wise. Does that sound fun? Not really. And that's why we don't allow roles like Red Robes and senior nobles to be playable. In addition, high-level roles of this kind tend to be extremely boring for the players, because they no longer have any peers and no one can challenge them. Good players who have the capability to be promoted to these roles want to have enemies and peers, but inherently these roles don't allow for that. No one fucks with a Red Robe, and that's just boring.

QuoteVery high-ranking roles are not playable because they imbalance the game for other players, not because we don't trust players with them. One Red Robed templar in a city is more powerful than all the Blue Robes and junior nobles put together, and therefore can squash anything that they don't want to have happen. A Red Robe could execute junior nobles with impunity for the most part (at least the first couple), and they could make sure that junior nobles or Blues never got to do a single thing plot-wise. Does that sound fun? Not really. And that's why we don't allow roles like Red Robes and senior nobles to be playable. In addition, high-level roles of this kind tend to be extremely boring for the players, because they no longer have any peers and no one can challenge them. Good players who have the capability to be promoted to these roles want to have enemies and peers, but inherently these roles don't allow for that. No one fucks with a Red Robe, and that's just boring.

That's kind of a strange way to see it.  They could also be acting oversight for all said junior nobles and blue robes, the same way junior nobles and blue robes are oversight for those below them.  They don't have to be actively plotting anymore, they're the ones that are getting things passed through them, and discovering the crooked things that aren't being passed through them and making sure that doesn't happen again.  MAYBE they'd just start executing junior nobles, but I've never seen a PC red robe go to those extremes without staff discussion anyway.

Senior nobles, I can be more on the level with that mentality, since they come with an inherent bias and will tip the scale.  A templar, however, comes with the inherent bias that is -accurate-.

Either way, I never planned on having one.  However, I think the upper end of society is very lacking as far as merit/achievement is concerned.  If PC noobles and templars have an entire lifetime of achievement after achievement, of successful project after successful project, maybe they -should- have a little more weight to throw around instead of depending on Jack the New Blue Robe, etc, etc, to recognize it over and over again.

Quote from: Armaddict on February 28, 2015, 04:40:26 PM
Either way, I never planned on having one.  However, I think the upper end of society is very lacking as far as merit/achievement is concerned.  If PC noobles and templars have an entire lifetime of achievement after achievement, of successful project after successful project, maybe they -should- have a little more weight to throw around instead of depending on Jack the New Blue Robe, etc, etc, to recognize it over and over again.

We already have a system of lateral or sub-senior progression for the majority of noble houses in Allanak and Tuluk. There is also a rewards or progression system for both templarates.

Quote from: Armaddict on February 28, 2015, 04:40:26 PM
They don't have to be actively plotting anymore, they're the ones that are getting things passed through them, and discovering the crooked things that aren't being passed through them and making sure that doesn't happen again.

This ends up being fun for the player of the senior noble or templar, and completely un-fun for the players of juniors. New juniors come on the scene and find they cannot engage in murder, corruption, and betrayal without the specific and explicit permission of a higher-ranked PC. We don't animate NPCs to stomp these kinds of plots out, nor do we want PCs doing it.

We've gone around and around on this discussion in the past so that's all I'm going to say about right now. I posted so that a newer player could understand the staff perspective, not to re-hash it.

I can see how having a PC red robe/high templar would mess up things for in-city politics. Every Red robe has a dozen or so blues below him, and I imagine High templars are similarly high ranked. You can't mess with that kind of person. Armaddict makes a good point at least in saying that such people are going to be very unbiased in the sense that they are so above the normal city politics that they can't quite be swayed by them at all.

If Red robe-tier templars are too high of rank for in-city politics and just can't do shit without squashing people, what I think would be the best solution is for said templar to be the go-to person where it comes to plotting actions against the rival city-state. It could be great, if they wouldn't get overzealous and kill everyone who failed a sneak check half the world away instantly. I think there would be many people who'd like playing secret agents and engage in high-level subterfuge under the command of people who really can't functionally play inside their own city anyway.

Or I could be wrong. But next time you say red robes would have nothing to do at all, consider it at least. It could be fantastic.

Quote from: Patuk on February 28, 2015, 04:53:04 PM
If Red robe-tier templars are too high of rank for in-city politics and just can't do shit without squashing people, what I think would be the best solution is for said templar to be the go-to person where it comes to plotting actions against the rival city-state. It could be great, if they wouldn't get overzealous and kill everyone who failed a sneak check half the world away instantly. I think there would be many people who'd like playing secret agents and engage in high-level subterfuge under the command of people who really can't functionally play inside their own city anyway.

These things can already be done by PCs at currently playable levels. Maybe they are being done already? Find out IC!

I know they're being done just fine, and even partook in such things a few times, I just think a red robe would have a far easier time focusing on them. And find out IC really, really overused.

Isn't off-the-richter promotional storage a reward, in a certain sense?  Your PC has reached a level of influence that has them stepping off stage, but they have basically 'won'.

I would much rather see my successful PC be stored, than meet a death that I think might be beneath what they deserved.  But what to do I know.

Quote from: Tetra on February 28, 2015, 05:47:17 PM
Isn't off-the-richter promotional storage a reward, in a certain sense?  Your PC has reached a level of influence that has them stepping off stage, but they have basically 'won'.

I would much rather see my successful PC be stored, than meet a death that I think might be beneath what they deserved.  But what to do I know.

I agree.

I think there are a very small number of PCs to which this ever becomes an issue.

As with many 'issues' on the GDB, there are people who will get butthurt about pretty much anything.

Your reward for game that you play is to. . . stop playing that game in the way you were playing?

By the time you get to that 'Senior Position', you really should consider moving on to a new PC.

Murder, Corruption, Betrayal. Not 'live until you're 90 and win the game by being a Red Robe'.

No my good sir, I am the most righteous catholic, look at how humble I am, I would never dare wish to even go to haven or sit with the Lord.

Maybe we should do a tangent about characters with low stats being the best thing evar and playing crippled mutant celf warriors being the epitome of RP next.

i think you should store if you get more than one combat skill to master because obviously all you want to do is train up instead of murder corruption betrayal

Rough circle is roleplaying

If the point of the game is betrayal, corruption, and murder, getting stored means you outmaneuvered all of your peers.  If you didn't get stored, you're bound to get stabbed in the back eventually.  Not sure what else people expect from the way the game is laid out.

QuoteIf the point of the game is betrayal, corruption, and murder, getting stored means you outmaneuvered all of your peers.

That's not the point of the game, that's the slogan of the game, describing the world your character lives in.  Just thought I'd throw that out there before you continue to use it as a basis for...whatever...it is you're saying.

Edited to add, more in line with the thread:

I wasn't trying to re-argue the glass ceiling thing, it was more just a comment about how the state of the leadership role feels and appears to me, in its current state.  I don't think powerful PC's is bad.  I mostly agree with Desertman's sentiments, but the problem comes in that leadership roles are seemingly having a pretty high turnover rate, which makes it very hard to establish one's self the way those sentiments require.  Structure helps with that problem.  A rule-enforced 'level playing field' doesn't.  Scrabbling your way to the top of the heap is what makes said slogan necessary, and without actual benefit, there's simply too much risk involved in most cases for people to make the actual cutthroat politics.

Or something.  Mostly just a meandering thought process based off of current, arbitrary thoughts.  So there.

I don't know why so many people are worried about the glass ceiling.  The number of leadership characters I've seen live long enough to run up against it is ridiculously small compared to the number of leadership characters that store (or occasionally die) in less than a year.

Quote from: Armaddict on February 28, 2015, 08:13:56 PM
That's not the point of the game, that's the slogan of the game, describing the world your character lives in.  Just thought I'd throw that out there before you continue to use it as a basis for...whatever...it is you're saying.

Your tone seems very pointed right now. 

If the world your character lives in is based on a harsh setting where permanent death is inevitable, it's fair to assume that outliving and outlasting everyone around you to a point of storage is a sign of succeeding in just that --- survival.  You have to let go eventually.  If I have to pick between dying and storage, I pick storage.

Storage is not desirable. Storage is a band-aid on the fact that there's no coded incentive to rise higher in the ranks

Quote from: valeria on February 28, 2015, 08:36:34 PM
I don't know why so many people are worried about the glass ceiling.  The number of leadership characters I've seen live long enough to run up against it is ridiculously small compared to the number of leadership characters that store (or occasionally die) in less than a year.

You're right, RIDICULOUSLY small is an excellent way to put it.
And because they are ridiculously small those people, those proven leaders should be rewarded in game, by his/her seniors in that character's story lines.

No one but you should tell you when your character's been around long enough. Staff ultimately can/should/will tell someone it's time to go. In the case of that sorcerer the end came way too late (just mho). I don't know of any long lived characters personally that were told it's time to retire by staff so I won't make assumptions.
Guess for ME that whole "you won the game, nothing more to do here" leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Not that I'll every get there mind you, all my characters die lol.

Quote from: Talia on February 28, 2015, 03:36:56 PM
Very high-ranking roles are not playable because they imbalance the game for other players, not because we don't trust players with them. One Red Robed templar in a city is more powerful than all the Blue Robes and junior nobles put together, and therefore can squash anything that they don't want to have happen. A Red Robe could execute junior nobles with impunity for the most part (at least the first couple), and they could make sure that junior nobles or Blues never got to do a single thing plot-wise. Does that sound fun? Not really. And that's why we don't allow roles like Red Robes and senior nobles to be playable. In addition, high-level roles of this kind tend to be extremely boring for the players, because they no longer have any peers and no one can challenge them. Good players who have the capability to be promoted to these roles want to have enemies and peers, but inherently these roles don't allow for that. No one fucks with a Red Robe, and that's just boring.

This is why I always assumed the glass ceiling exists. If it's not one bitch about it, it's another. People whine because it exists, but then when it doesn't you no longer have murder/corruption/betrayal you have I win I'm promoted. Things as they are promote plot lines better and keep things in a balance that's easier for players and staff to control. Maybe when your icly reach that glass ceiling you can start up an argument on your own behalf and approach it from that angle, but just wanting it removed in general.. blech. It serves a purpose.

Having been friends with a pretty OP sorceror (and maybe even one or a precursor to one Shaleah is talking about) I can say that... alright. While on the one hand, yes, this happens to so few people its not a huge problem, but its also incredibly shortsighted to think that "Who cares about the needs of the few" in this instance.


If you feel there's little incentive in clans other than "being virtually supported by a group that doesn't give a shit about you in the third place", what is the incentive to wanting to be a Sergeant? A Lieutenant? Why would you want to rise up the ranks, if you know that rising up only leads to a ceiling that says "You might be too powerful"? In the case of Templars, there is (supposedly) now some more lateral advancement, but in the past its basically been "try something and see if staff let you do it" which... really... is pretty dismal. This leaves leadership positions either for the newbies who havn't had any real leadership experience yet, or oldbies who (lets admit) have a tendency to sit in a position and do very little because most oldbies don't have time like they used to.

On storage: Staff won't force store your character, but what they will say is "If you choose to continue down this path (that you've been going down for a couple RL months now) you will get that promotion and be unable to play this character anymore". Force-stored? No. Given the option? Yes. I'll leave it to you how you'd feel about "That plot you're pursuing is completely acceptable, and will end with you being stored."

Leaders are already hard to come by. The staff are volunteers and put up with a pretty good number of requests from players, other staff, and real life combined. This makes it hard for them to support Leaders the way many first/second time leaders think they deserve. And if one staff is REALLY active with the Byn, players begin to expect that behavior in the future. When it isn't a possibility due to new staff, less time, etc. people get rightly disillusioned and cranky. I know I tend to get cranky, and shy away from roles that would, in any way, require staff attention because... frankly... I know I can't trust there to be support when I do need it. Thats not to take away from the staff, thats just to say that I know from my personal history, that they won't always be there.

Quote from: Riev on March 01, 2015, 09:55:21 PM
If you feel there's little incentive in clans other than "being virtually supported by a group that doesn't give a shit about you in the third place", what is the incentive to wanting to be a Sergeant? A Lieutenant? Why would you want to rise up the ranks, if you know that rising up only leads to a ceiling that says "You might be too powerful"?

Enjoy the journey, not the destination.

I personally feel like if your only ooc goal in making a leadership pc is to blow through the "glass ceiling" and reach the tip top of promotional bad-assery you should re-evaluate your drive for being a leader. Icly, pursue those goals and expect pitfalls, expect difficulties and know oocly that the chance of you reaching it is slim to none (this is how it should be icly anyway). This doesn't stop you from icly having that drive for promotion.

Not saying specifically I feel that way, Tony, just saying that there seems to be similar voices saying "Clans suck" as the ones saying "The glass ceiling in clans is the worst".

I'd even be alright if, as an Officer in any clan, other non-Officers (or vNPC officers) are jockeying for your position. Who WOULDN'T want to be over the First in Tuluk? Or the Seventh Sabers in 'Nak? Prominent units, those.

There's always been a disconnect here. At this very moment right here. We agree Glass Ceilings aren't the end all be all but people like the idea of them maybe not being there.

Confession:
I hate reports.

Quote from: KankWhisperer on March 02, 2015, 12:22:57 AM
Confession:
I hate reports.

I love reports, when they're finished and submitted.
I hate reports, when I'm looking at a black notepad and have to begin writing them!

I use linux a lot so I have a habit of using middle mouse button for pasting. Of course I do it by habit and that freaks out request tool, effectively deleting anything I've done.

Here's my thought on the glass ceiling debate:

I hate glass ceilings, but for very different reasons than most of the posts on the subject.  

This isn't about the PC who got promoted to Red Robe. Sure, it's a big achievement to have managed to claw your way up to Red,  but lets be real here...  Anyone who plays a Templar who managed to distinguish themselves enough to warrant the promotion must have had one wild ride.  They're already happy.

No, this isn't about the one, rare and exceptional PC.  The promotion isn't for them.

It's about Amos the private, who saved that would-be Red Robes life during a battle, and now by this stroke of fate has a fucking Red Robe who owes them one.  

It's about the junior noble who helped this Red Robe ascend to their station, and is now eager to bask in all the influence and favor (or lack of gratitude) that comes with that.  

It's about the Templar's aide, that was with them for 10 years when they were only a Blue, and effectively gets an increase in status as well by being brought along for the ride.

It's about the indie merchant who applies to have their trade company ascend to a Lesser Merchant House, and the Templar they bribed for two decades speaks on their behalf in the Senate, now wearing a Red Robe.  

It's about a bitter rival cowers,  fearing for their life, when the woman they tried to out maneuver for all those years ascends to power.

It's about the feeling normal commoners get when they see this Red Robe stride into Red's Retreat, and the entire room goes silent and falls on their knees, and the feeling the players gets when they know this Red Robe is not a staff animation.  That this character must've done something BIG, and maybe, someday, they could do something big too.

Glass ceilings limit the imagination of the player base far more than they protect us from abuse, or protect their single player from a potentially boring role.  Not only that, they limit the world for all the people who help (or try to hinder) these exceptional people come to power.

It's not about 'protecting' said player from a boring role. It's about staff being completely incapable of really making the world accurately interact with a player in that station. When we've had PCs at that level in the past, they weren't really played as representative of what that rank actually means. They still did most of the same stuff, just with fancier bling. But in actuality, Red Robes are orders of magnitude more powerful than the most powerful Blue Robe. They do not engage with the same world that player characters do. They don't stride into Red's Retreat without some epic reason. They don't have any particular reason to care about the folks who helped them on their way up. They interact with senior nobles and with other Red Robes. They plot and scheme at levels completely over the heads of other characters. We, as staff, would basically have to create a brand new game for a player in that position and that is, for obvious reasons, not something we want to do. We're happier with those stories remaining in the virtual world.

This is why we're looking into more options for lateral movement. We want players to have the opportunity to grow and become more influential, but we also want you guys to remain in each others' sphere of influence.

Quote from: wizturbo on March 02, 2015, 02:31:46 PM
It's about the Templar's aide, that was with them for 10 years when they were only a Blue, and effectively gets a significant increase in status as well by being brought along for the ride.

BTDT. It wasn't all that. The result ended up being that I never saw my boss anymore, because he couldn't go out in public. Playing aide to a Red Robe is an exercise in futility, because they will never need you for anything.

What this game needs is more MCB, not more power concentrated in the hands of one or two PCs.

Mostly ignorant on this glass ceiling topic - I've played a few high ranked characters in my RPI days across a couple muds.

I hate when I finally reach the top because my interactions tend to get reduced to commanding underlings around instead of building relationships/enemies/friends/rivals - etc.

The interactions get too one sided, too redundant the higher in rank you go. You may as well be interacting with a wall.

I'm mostly trying to say: I'm all for a glass ceiling.

Quote from: Gimfalisette on March 02, 2015, 02:55:40 PM

Quote from: wizturbo on March 02, 2015, 02:31:46 PM
It's about the Templar's aide, that was with them for 10 years when they were only a Blue, and effectively gets a significant increase in status as well by being brought along for the ride.

BTDT. It wasn't all that. The result ended up being that I never saw my boss anymore, because he couldn't go out in public. Playing aide to a Red Robe is an exercise in futility, because they will never need you for anything.

What this game needs is more MCB, not more power concentrated in the hands of one or two PCs.

I would assume you mean a certain red robe that was already sporadic in activity beforehand (which makes your post misleading), or if it's the other I still saw him around pretty often.  Which would mean not so reclusive as you make it sound, again.  Interesting characters in those positions make for plenty of MCB.  There were not a lot of complaints that I recall during times of Heeth or Boopsiefiel or the couple others who I left out because they were played by a staff member..  I recall being in at least one plot to depose one of those from their position so another could take their place...which seems pretty MCB to me.  I was newer to the game at that time, so I can't say that's infallible, but I wasn't completely oblivious either. 

The assertion seems to be that whenever someone reaches these ranks, they become iron fisted and invincible, which is historically inaccurate, or that they have nothing to do, which is also historically inaccurate (at least in enough cases for me to notice it.  I'm not trying to make broad blanket statements that make this 100% this way or 100% that way).

However, I didn't actually intend to join in on this argument, because it's one I'm not -totally- invested in, either.  As stated, it's kind of a rare thing (rarer as time went on), and I was speaking more specifically in reference to the feeling of the only way to actual, recognized social standing increase being gone.  If this has been solved with said lateral moves and whatnot, that's well and good.  But as stated in my previous threads...saying that this is promoting MCB is actually the inverse of my experience and observation.

I think in-city clan wars need to be a thing.  *emphatic nod*

Edit:  Never mind, no point debating this further.

All I want is to be told when I have hit the glass ceiling. Don't try and come up with IC reasons to not promote my PC unless they are actually performing poorly.

If they are performing poorly IC'ly, please animate an NPC of a higher rank to tell them so and tell them exactly where they have failed.

If you can't do that with a straight face on an IC level, have the courtesy to tell me OOC'ly I have hit the glass ceiling.

One leaves me with a sense of accomplishment as the player. The other leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.

Hotdancer, have to disagree with your experience there.  I have played the literally most powerful being in existence in stuff(not rpi, but role play required pseudo rpi ish things) and I never, ever ran out of problems to deal with, people to piss off/on, and enemies to make.  For some, just being the guy/girl puts a target on your back.  And yes, these characters took their position after starting off as rather lowly creatures and managed to topple the towers.

Quote from: Cavaticus on March 02, 2015, 02:48:37 PM
We, as staff, would basically have to create a brand new game for a player in that position and that is, for obvious reasons, not something we want to do.

I think staff could invent ways of creating a new environment without having to create an entirely new game.  I'm not saying these roles should embody the stereotypical Red Robe or Senior noble who remains cloistered and mingles among each other only.  They could have an unusual role.  It could also be a temporary role, where plots are established well in advanced that will strip them of their lofty rank in some spectacular fashion.

Random examples of how this could work without being disruptive to the game:

A Red Robe could be placed as commandant of a military installation such as Ten Sarak.  They're completely in command of that outpost, and while they're obscenely powerful back in Allanak, they're detached from that power base by being away from the city.  Because of the conditions, that Red Robe might have to deal with lowly soldiers on a more frequent basis, along with the Blue Robes they command.  Events could easily be planned to make the outpost they're in a hot bed of activity.

A Senior Noble could be given a major project they're supposed to oversee, such as a big construction project or commanding a major asset of the House like being the head of the Tor Academy.  As head of the Academy, they might have to mingle with lesser lords or high ranking members of the Militia.  For a Tuluki example, they could be House Kassigarh's chief financier which acts as the key judge on which independent business owners should be permitted to advance into trade company or lesser merchant house status.  Without their support, no independent business owner has a prayer of getting a Trade Company license.  Naturally, some level of interaction with the lesser nobodies is required for the role, to accept the appropriate bribes and exert appropriate pressure to insure taxes (and bribes) are maximized.

I'm just trying to point out that things could be done to make it work, and work well, if staff were so inclined and willing to put a player in a senior leadership role.

The only way I could see roles like that working is if they are sponsored roles that are given a time limit.

Yes, you get to play a Red Robe.

No, it isn't forever. It's for a plot-line, a story, and when that story is done, you are stored.

If the lateral movements give a sense of accomplishment and still allow staff to feel better about not having a SUPRA powerful PC running around, so be it. So long as those movements make sense, and ARE a sense of accomplishment.

We shall see.

I always feel guilty when I spend time on myself as a leader. Obviously you deserve a bit of time to get inside your pc's skin and just sort of do you so to speak, or relax for a moment. Sometimes you do want to idle so you can catch up on your favorite web comic but still throw out some ways. But I feel guilty for every moment I'm not balls deep in a plot and dragging minions around, every single moment.  :-\

Quote from: Majikal on March 04, 2015, 10:24:59 AM
I always feel guilty when I spend time on myself as a leader. Obviously you deserve a bit of time to get inside your pc's skin and just sort of do you so to speak, or relax for a moment. Sometimes you do want to idle so you can catch up on your favorite web comic but still throw out some ways. But I feel guilty for every moment I'm not balls deep in a plot and dragging minions around, every single moment.  :-\

I know how you feel, but don't be. Not letting yourself (or your character) breathe is the fast road to burnout.

I view being a leader selfishly in regards to the fact that my minions are a direct source of entertainment for me as much as I am a direct source of entertainment for them.

I love logging in when I'm playing a leader to have four people hit my head with issues, questions, or new problems for me to solve. I love it. Bring it on minions. If I login and I spend an hour or two with nobody messing with me or providing me with entertainment....it's time to hire more minions....I don't have enough to manage.

Minions are like a constantly evolving and shifting base of sub-quests.

I'll be your huckleberry.
(http://img.pandawhale.com/72888-Im-Your-Huckleberry-gif-Tombst-Xy0t.gif)

Quote from: Desertman on March 04, 2015, 10:42:49 AM

I'll be your huckleberry.
(http://img.pandawhale.com/72888-Im-Your-Huckleberry-gif-Tombst-Xy0t.gif)

Where do I sign up.  :D ;)

Guys, please, I know it's flameday Wednesday, but please.

Moderated a few posts.

Quote from: wizturbo on March 02, 2015, 02:31:46 PM
Here's my thought on the glass ceiling debate:

I hate glass ceilings, but for very different reasons than most of the posts on the subject.  

This isn't about the PC who got promoted to Red Robe. Sure, it's a big achievement to have managed to claw your way up to Red,  but lets be real here...  Anyone who plays a Templar who managed to distinguish themselves enough to warrant the promotion must have had one wild ride.  They're already happy.

No, this isn't about the one, rare and exceptional PC.  The promotion isn't for them.

It's about Amos the private, who saved that would-be Red Robes life during a battle, and now by this stroke of fate has a fucking Red Robe who owes them one.  

It's about the junior noble who helped this Red Robe ascend to their station, and is now eager to bask in all the influence and favor (or lack of gratitude) that comes with that.  

It's about the Templar's aide, that was with them for 10 years when they were only a Blue, and effectively gets an increase in status as well by being brought along for the ride.

It's about the indie merchant who applies to have their trade company ascend to a Lesser Merchant House, and the Templar they bribed for two decades speaks on their behalf in the Senate, now wearing a Red Robe.  

It's about a bitter rival cowers,  fearing for their life, when the woman they tried to out maneuver for all those years ascends to power.

It's about the feeling normal commoners get when they see this Red Robe stride into Red's Retreat, and the entire room goes silent and falls on their knees, and the feeling the players gets when they know this Red Robe is not a staff animation.  That this character must've done something BIG, and maybe, someday, they could do something big too.

Glass ceilings limit the imagination of the player base far more than they protect us from abuse, or protect their single player from a potentially boring role.  Not only that, they limit the world for all the people who help (or try to hinder) these exceptional people come to power.

Apply for staff, knock your opponents out of power. You've articulated better than any, the frustrations of many. Maybe i'm off, I was never really focused on the one player. I think people were discussing that aspect because plenty of people have had staff say things directly involved with a single PC and storage.

Every Noble that ever stored, just saw the demon in the mirror, and chose to close their eyes.

Quote from: Down Under on March 06, 2015, 06:40:33 AM
Every Noble that ever stored, just saw the demon in the mirror, and chose to close their eyes.

(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/L0zxoitUZfM/maxresdefault.jpg)

In the long run - the single-most difficult issue with playing a leadership role - is something I can divide into 3 parts:

a) Getting people to play in your clan.
b) Getting atleast some veteran players to play in your clan.
c) Getting these players to have decently-long-lived PCs.

Most of the clans have been devised to make things easy for clan leaders.

1) Food, shelter and storage is automated and provided.
2) Training grounds and stables are provided.
3) Pay is automated and provided (usually).
4) Gear is provided (past a certain level).
5) Opportunities for RP interaction and training your PC's skills are inherently provided (as long as there are enough clan members playing at the same timings).

All that the leader has to do - past that - is to involve the clan member PCs into his/her plots, or the plots already on-going in that locale. 

If you find yourself getting anxious about not being able to constantly provide "a fun and meaningful time" to all the clan members - you're riding yourself too hard. Yes - you can do that and it'll definitely add more flavor to the group involved, but, it really isn't your "job".

Think of the clan and the role involved - as the basic food - and the leader as the spice that adds to the flavor.

I will add here - that clear communication goes a LONG way in adding to clarity and comfort of play - in clans. As a leader - be sure to let your clan members know what their roles and responsibilities are, and what you expect of them, and how you see yourself rewarding them when they accomplish the jobs they are hired to do. That's 90% of the job done right there. There's nothing more boring and frustrating than joining a clan and not knowing what you're expected to do, and you end up faced with the possibility of doing repetitious RP and training without any direction.

Re: Glass Ceiling Argument #21 (Limited Peers/Power Imbalance)

The next time the situation comes about where you have multiple long lived leaders in most clans, raise the ceiling across the board.
Suddenly, There is an IC opening for a Red Robe (who can promote 1 lieutenant), a High Faithful (who can promote 1 lieutenant), a Byn Lieutenant Senior Agent or Merchant in each GMH and each appropriate desert tribe can have one full sorcerer, demi-elemental, or mundane chief-like role, etc. (I call dibs on the Sandlord's right hand man).

These roles are expected not to store barring a serious real-life conflict with playtime.
Argument #21 is no longer valid, and now more significant changes can happen based on greed, thirst for power, or just an overwhelming desire to see things burn.
Balance, order, and fairness are good things when it comes to running the game from an OOC business/gaming perspective, but ICly this is a world full of murder, corruption, and betrayal, and I think sometimes the "world" should be ran by people with their own motives and desires rather than the OOC perspective of making sure everyone gets the same amount of attention and plays inside their box.  I would like to see big battles and spectacular displays of power to happen more than once every couple years.  Most of the new players that come through are not going to stick around long enough to see a OMG THAT WAS AWESOME moment.  I started playing in the high-magick/pre-end game plots days and got spoiled and it admittedly jaded me a bit.

I mean who here would not love to have a Red Robe/Faithful marching through town with their entourage ordering all faithful citizens who can ride and wield a blade to meet at the gates at dawn to march against the evil forces of the south/north?  Cannon Fodder FTW.


This scenario is hardly different in terms of balance so long as all roles are filled (at least the Red/High Faithful).
One of the reasons I remember my Kadian being so successful years ago, that I was lucky enough to have a long lived group of employees that eventually filled out the chain of command below me. I had a Junior merchant, First Hunter, Northern second hunter and Southern Second Hunter that were all played by competent players, so I was effectively able to drive clan plots from the back seat and spend most of my time interacting with/against other powers-that-be.  As D-man pointed out that it could be done a few pages back, I was essentially playing a Senior Agent, only without the coded rank.  Of course, there were also still a couple High Faithfuls around at the time leftover from the end-of-days days, and Northern Noble roles were reopened for the first time since the rebuilding of Tuluk, IIRC).  The reason I eventually stored was not because of a lack of interactions across my social rank and above, but an overwhelming amount of in-clan drama (and staff had OOCly told me not to knock off any more trouble making clannies which was my characters go-to for such shenanigans. :D )

People seem to want to cause a small amount of trouble, no matter how loyal they are. Most of it is unintentional.. some isn't.

EDIT - Bunch of stuff from the Prettiness Topic that should be here.. Or at least this is more appropriate / on topic.

I think (and in my experience) you simply cannot play a Sergeant role being nice to people, you reward good work, you punish bad work.

People will not take you seriously unless you enforce a degree of order in the unit.

And some people who are indy rangers in all their roles, won't like that and will try and buck the system.. And then complain when they get punished.

It happened in Borsai (Twice in fact)l, it happened in Tor, it happened in Kadius.. hell I'm sure it'll happen anywhere.. It's just a part of the game at the moment.