Quote from: Coda on November 10, 2023, 06:42:16 PMThat's not what a chat is, it requires an actual dialogue because it's a complex system. Also, a good chat wouldn't start off with you furious that I posted my thoughts.

But I'll write something up and throw it in the thread, sure. I'll quote you again when I do. From the framing, response, and inability to acknowledge concerns voiced and held by everyone from mansa to me, I don't have a lot of incentive to put a ton of effort into it. But I'll do my best.

You are again assuming and taking the stance you are being attacked without that actually taking place. Trust me if Usiku was furious, I doubt they would be posting.

They have acknowledged your concerns. They have stated that the things you are concerned over are either within the parameters they expect people to be concerned over, and are already making adjustments to deal with said concerns. Or; are outside the parameters they are aiming this new policy to deal with.

That they have not bent to your demands, does not mean they have not, patiently, acknowledged them. And tried to explain their own perspective. With a returned explanation of why they are making the changes they are making. Which is, what we call...

A dialogue.

Or,

in other words,

by another description,

to use a synonym,

A chat.

At this point you have repeated yourself what I'd estimate to be 15 times, you do not like the changes, but staff, and largely Usiku has already explained why they are making them, and it's for reasons staff has already explained.


But please, do not get distracted trying to respond to my post here. Review Usiku and the other producers posts within this thread and elsewhere on the subject. And see if you can come up with something that fits their parameters, constructively.

Edit: This is replying to Usiku, not the post above

You've listened to players who asked for a few tweaks. You're not engaging with people telling you that they see real issues and want to help you fix them.

I'll hold off on further posting in the thread until I have a write up for you, but I'll tell you right now, one of the main points is one I've mentioned several times.

The imperative need for a cultural shift where staff stop acting like the unapproachable rulers over this shared creative space. That's at the heart of why your proposal will result in the consequences outlined, simply and directly, in my post that you quoted.

Quit viewing me as an antagonist because I mention that. I wouldn't be dedicating my time and effort to this if I didn't care as much as you did about a game we've both been playing, likely together, for 20 years.

Quote from: Usiku on November 10, 2023, 06:49:42 PMI have listened to, acknowledged and addressed a lot of concerns in the replies I have given over the last few days as well as during discussions on the IDB. We have also edited and changed the proposal a few times now and are still working on a few more tweaks based on player feedback from this thread and the Discord discussions.

I noticed you addressed my concern, and appreciate it.

Quote from: Coda on November 10, 2023, 06:59:55 PMThe imperative need for a cultural shift where staff stop acting like the unapproachable rulers over this shared creative space.

I haven't addressed the notion of the staffing team being 'unapproachable rulers' because I don't share that view, and I also concur that we shouldn't act or be perceived as such. I've rarely, if ever, been called unapproachable and Hal is generally known for his openness and friendliness. We're all just nerds who love this game, want to see it continue and enjoy making fun, being creative and telling stories. However, this doesn't mean there aren't moments when we need to set clear boundaries. Ultimately, it's the staff who shoulder the weight of responsibility and put in the work behind the scenes. Decisions have to be made by someone and we're often constrained by limited time and resources. It's actually very important that we accomplish things efficiently. Design by committee doesn't work.

I'm not sure how to alter the karma system so that it reflects more approachability in staff, so if you have actionable ideas then I am open to them.

Quote from: Usiku on November 10, 2023, 07:32:21 PMsnip

This is a quick(er), easy(/ier) to read version that came after I spent too long typing out my thoughts waaay too verbosely.  It's how I think and process, and I probably have more to say on most of these, if it's wanted (I doubt it after this).  As you pointed out, I can be prone to a bit of rambling and repetition.

Proposals with some justification first, then a some bits at the end on the broader topic of From On High Staffing vs. Collaborative Staffing.  Which is the root of this, and why I feel changes need to be made so that this doesn't make it more time consuming for staff.

Proposals on the karma system:

1. Use the karma scale, 0-3, 0-10, whatever, it's frankly immaterial.  The issue is linking the granularity of what you can play to a scale like this.

Change: Be more willing to simply remove options. This is rarely used, but it exists and unless there's some technical challenge in giving that power to more staffers, it seems easy to add.  Why?  Because being good at playing gicks doesn't necessarily mean you're good at leadership, or that you're great at portraying other races.  It also reduces player angst at losing an option if playing a bad half-giant doesn't also potentially mean losing access to Suk-Krath Guile, Suk-Krath Agony, and Spec-apping a full guild Whiran while slowing down your progress toward the stuff on the next tier too.
 
2. Let STs add and remove karma, that's a great idea, I love everything about it- there are more STs, they're more likely to be observing individuals, and they're less busy with 'higher level' work than Admins and Producers. 

Change: The only change here is the manner in which this is handled and communicated. Don't surprise people with a sudden loss when they hit 'O' at the log in screen or go to make a new PC.  Don't just send them a mail with their punishment, as is the current process.  If someone is messing up?  Talk to them.  Schedule a time or pull them aside and talk to them about the spamcrafting or ignoring the vnpc world, or whatever else, and give them a chance to explain while you correct.  This also reduces player angst when they've had the problem explained, and creates a paper trail about why it happened that will reduce staff time if a Staff Complaint comes up later.  You're empowering STs, a ten minute conversation followed by an account note isn't unreasonable to ask. 

Note: This absolutely happens sometimes - it should be policy, not chance.

That's it.  That's all I've really said about the system in terms of what changes should be made.  They're fairly minor changes, really, both aimed at softening the blow of punishment or correction.  Maybe they're workable, maybe they aren't for various reasons.  I don't know and it's not possible to discuss and find a better way like this.

Why suggest them, though?

To save staff time.  The main stated goal of the karma changes.

You save it by making karma reviews come quicker and require less staff side lookup work by focusing on the more recent past.  You save it by letting STs adjust karma when they see good and bad things.  But, as I point out, you're going to lose it all over again because of the more frequent adjustments when karma docks occur.  Things that antagonize a player increases their angst - I don't think it's at all controversial to say that angry players that feel unheard troll more, send more staff complaints which, from a recent thread are huge time sinks, and play both worse and less often.

I've posted quite a bit about From On High Staffing vs. Cooperative Staffing. Both of my suggested changes are aimed at leaning the game toward the latter and away from the former. Make punishments and adjustments less painful, and you won't get as many staff complaints.  Take a moment to explain why what they're doing isn't ok, and briefly reassure them that they'll get another chance, but they need to take a break and re-read/learn before trying again, and you'll make them feel heard and encourage them to try a bit harder. 

Arm has a long history, and at least two major staff shakeups (Nyr and Shalooonsh) have been because bad actors used the obfuscated and distant method of staffing that's developed here to act inappropriately in various ways.  I'm not here to re-legislate those or really even talk about them.  But they color the way staff and players interact.  Especially our longtime players. 

Currently, staff are distant and unapproachable - they disallow Discord messages, DMs, ICQ, AIM (are these even still around?) and literally any means of communication that aren't the request tool, or (rarely outside one way posts) the gdb.  They stay at full invis during things like character setup.  And they whisper about your characters' actions in secret places without ever allowing you to participate and explain until they've already had a while to let their minds be made up (this is natural and human, not an attack) and they're coming to you with consequences.

These are semi-off-topic changes, but they're all the same thing really, especially because the stated goal (one literally everyone posting shares) is to reduce the time staff spends on stuff that isn't telling cool nerdy stories with each other.  I want that too.  Everyone wants that.  Tell some dork ass stories with me people, that's why we're here.

But just look at the way this change was framed:

QuoteWe recognize that significant changes are often controversial, and while there's a possibility for minor modifications, we plan to implement this system soon.

Followed by 8 pages worth of text, if you include the minor updates that you added.

This method does the opposite of reducing player angst, as we can see.  It does the opposite of making people feel heard, as we can see. Why would you start the announcement with that?  It's created an enormous time sink for Moderators because some of us can't help but reply to weirdos that get obsessed with us.  It's a time sink for you because of how annoyed over half the polled players got from the announcement - which means they're posting a bunch. As are those that disagree with them.  It's led to spats and slap fights, admittedly I was involved in the biggest slap fight.  Two stubborn people had a dumb argument.  I'm sorry for my part of it, it was unproductive because posting big back and forths on message boards isn't that conducive to communication and changing minds (ironyyy), and it earned me a rather persistent stalker. 

I'll learn my lesson some day.

Anyway -

In every other arena, large scale changes have a few basic rules.

1. Have a plan - This was done, there's a plan!

2. Understand what the goal is, and make sure the changes align with it.  This was done, though people pointed out potentially unseen issues (not just me, several people, some of them were listened to, some changes were made).

3. Have the process planned out.  This doesn't seem to have been done - not an attack, but if it exists, we haven't seen it. That takes us to 4.

4. Communicate and make people feel heard.  8-page memos with 'we're only making small changes, deal with it' at the top aren't good communication.  A ninety minute player-staff meeting would've likely been much more productive, and cost you all less time.  You absolutely made some people feel heard, Fredd for one, and the people that post 'thank you staff!!!!' to every single thing y'all write obviously still feel heard.  But there's a big group that doesn't.  I'm not posting alone here, even if I've somehow become the focus of this.

5. Be ready for roadblocks - The fact that so many people are disagreeing seems to be coming as a surprise.  I admit I can read text (and have my text be read) as testier than it actually is because of the lack of tone, but even you, Usiku, who is very much known for openness and kindness have come across as snippy and frustrated because there's been a lot of backlash to the plan.

None of this is an attack.  I'd have preferred to have a conversation, not in public, because the public nature of 'hey, I feel you're doing this wrong' can often make it come across way harsher than it's intended.  As does the nature of having to post a big ol' screed like this instead of having a more natural back and forth conversation where we can reassure each other that we're operating in good faith, and we're not forced to confront every single aspect of the disagreement all at once. 

This is a common theme in my suggestions and comments: treating each other like fellow human beings, rather than antagonistic entities (you typically do a good job of this, let's spread that attitude by policy change) goes a long way toward making everything easier.

And yes, again, I realize the irony of posting a huge block of text while calling out the initial post.  But I didn't get to choose how to engage here, and wanted to be sure I explained my reasoning, because I like this silly game.

I'm going to lock this thread for the next day, because it seems to have reached a nice denouement, and it gives everyone time to enjoy the weekend.  Remember to drink lots of water and get your steps in.

I've unlocked the thread again.  Remember these questions when posting:
What am I trying to accomplish by arguing/discussing with another member of the community?

Am I trying to convince someone to change their mind?  Or am I letting them come to the conclusions themselves and letting them change their own mind?  Am I giving them enough time to think about it?

Is that member of the community even acceptable to any argument, or do they just want to vent their frustrations?
(aka - "How to talk with my significant other -> Do they want me to solve their problem, or Do they want me just to be emphatic and listen to their problem?")

Still wondering about this.

https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,60034.0.html

Assuming there is a 10 Karma account:

If someone joins staff with 0 karma, would they have access to all options, or just what their 0 karma account is restricted to?

Thank you, Brokkr!

The historic and current process has been that after probation ends, we bump karma up to max on mortal account.  When Staff could have multiple mortal PCs, there were some additional rules that don't matter now on top of that, now that everyone can only have one mortal.

When staff step down, karma goes back down to original level on their mortal account, although might get assessed for contribution/supporting the game criteria.

https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,60034.msg1100062.html#msg1100062

I'd like to make up some scenarios and examples of "bad experiences" that players might do. 

You'll notice that most of the examples have a Player Complaint involved, or a staff member observing the issue.  This is because I assume most 'corrective action' that the staff members will be doing are actionable items based on a Player Complaint being filed.

The questions being asked are: 
* How should corrective action be applied in these scenarios? 
* Is it enough to lose karma?   
* What does that conversation look like?


And with that framing, here are some scenarios:
Scenario 1:
Player with 5 karma - playing a Byn Sergeant
* Logged into the game drunk, and started barehanded sparring with the NPC gate guards.
* Knocked out the gate guard, and took their weapons.  Eventually logged out.
* No other players involved.  No player complaint.
* Non-clanned staff observed it, and noted it on their pfile.


Scenario 2:
Player with 6 karma - playing a Templar
* Went into Jail, saw a human magicker
* Asked the magicker why they got caught, the magicker said 'fuck you'.
* Ordered NPC soldiers to kill the magicker
* Did not wish up, Did not create a PK Report on the magicker.
* Magicker player created a player complaint about the incident, complaining that their special application was killed by a PK hungry templar.
* No staff observed
* Player was previously told to slow down on killing other PCs, and to always wish up beforehand.


Scenario 3:
Player with 1 karma - playing a Dwarf
* Attacks an NPC in an abandoned building in the Labyrinth
* NPC starts winning, and flees
* Leads NPC into other Labyrinth NPCs who start a brawl
* Dwarf practices backstabs on NPCs fighting
* Does this multiple times
* Is observed by Guild Staff, notes in Pfile
* Another player creates a player complaint report about it.


Scenario 4:
Player with 8 karma - playing a Raider + Magicker Subclass
* Casts a spell that prevents travel in the wilderness
* Creates a maze with this spell.
* Traps PCs in the maze, and taunts them.
* Eventually kills 2 PCs in the maze.
* Does not create a PK Report, does not wish up.
* Staff observed, but did not note in pfile
* All 2 PCs involved create player complaints against the magicker.


Scenario 5:
Player with 8 karma - playing a mul + raider
* Captures a PC and throws them off the shield wall - they do not die.
* PC did not see any emotes besides threaten command.
* PC creates a player complaint
* Mul player wishes up before, and emoted / feel / thought out what they would do beforehand.


Scenario 6:
Player with 3 karma - playing a noble
* Hires an aide PC to help with activities
* Hits on aide PC in game, and gets rejected.
* Fires aide PC in game.
* PC aide creates player complaint.


Scenario 7:
Player with 4 karma - playing a GMH family member
* Templar asks where their ordered item are
* Tells Templar that they are banned from ordering items
* Templar takes GMH player to jail and steals their weapons
* Templar tells GMH player to straighten up or else they will be killed
* GMH player leaves city, and never returns.
* Templar creates player complaint against GMH player.


Scenario 8:
Player with 10 karma - special app crafter + mindbender
* Joins GMH and starts crafting skills for GMH
* Doesn't leave GMH warehouse, only crafts and uses mindbender skills.
* Uses custom craft to create items requested by Merchant Players.
* Creates a report every two weeks about their special application character.
* Gets three player complaints about using mindbending skills incorrectly against other players.


Scenario 9:
Player with 9 karma - playing soldier + mountaineer
* Purposely fights creatures in the wilderness to get skillful
* Enters city, finds a merchant PC, and kills them, and steals their things, and leaves.
* Does not create a PK report
* Merchant PC creates player complaint.
* Investigation:  Player with 9 karma had their last 2 characters roleplay around the merchant PC, 1 was a former lover who was betrayed and killed in their apartment, and another was a competiting merchant who was betrayed by the merchant PC and killed on purpose by a Templar, bribed by the merchant PC.

Quote from: mansa on November 14, 2023, 03:40:47 PMScenario 6:
Player with 3 karma - playing a noble
* Hires an aide PC to help with activities
* Hits on aide PC in game, and gets rejected.
* Fires aide PC in game.
* PC aide creates player complaint.

Let me start by saying I am an anti-mudsex/relationship beyond "That's my homie" type player.

But is this really against the rules?  I thought they had some shit about coercion was allowed from people in power in the rules?

Quote from: Pariah on November 14, 2023, 04:09:03 PMBut is this really against the rules?

The point of having these examples is to ask the question to the staff:

How does the new policy allow for "corrective behaviour" for players when they do things that results in a player complaint.


Karma should be easily gained and easily removed..  What should be done in this scenario?  Is that a correct behaviour?  Should karma be removed?  What communication should be sent to the player?  What if that player replies, 'Why am I being docked karma?  I disagree with this assessment!  This isn't against the rules.  Show me where it says this in the rules!'  How can we follow up with that player, or players in general, so that this doesn't happen in the future?

Regarding @mansa's post: It's hard to say exactly what should be done in each scenario, but I think there are definitely some things worth noting when it comes to losing karma and having tough conversations about it.

1) When in doubt, exercise restraint. With something like Scenario 5, where the player made the best effort to RP and involve staff up to the point of combat, I think a lighter touch is going to work. If the "mission statement" of the game ends up being that the focus of the game is on collaborative roleplaying and storytelling, then I think staff figuring out ways to encourage combat RP happening during combat instead of just before & after is going to be a big part of that. Until they do though, it's hard to hold it against a player when that doesn't happen.

2) Decisions should use precedent whenever possible. If precedent doesn't exist then that should invite internal discussion among staff. If Scenario 6 happens in 2024, and then it happens again in 2025 with a different player, the same actions should be taken (more or less, adjusting for any other differing circumstances, like below).

3) There should be higher expectations of those with higher karma and/or more experience with the game. In a situation like Scenario 9, a 9-karma player made a revenge PC and broke a basic rule of the game. That should invite more scrutiny and penalty than if a 1-karma player had done the same. Similarly, there should be higher expectations of players holding sponsored roles, as well as current and former staff with mortal PCs. These players, having been entrusted to help keep the game running smoothly, should generally be treated like they have more karma than they do when it comes to expectation.

As far as having conversations goes, I think one thing in particular is important: Very few people enjoy being confronted about something, receiving unsolicited criticism, or being talked down to. Players shouldn't feel trapped into player-staff conversations about karma decreases. It shouldn't feel like a lecture or an intervention. At the same time, players should not seek to trap staff into these conversations either through endless litigation or argumentation.
- Staff should state what they observed, why it had incurred a karma loss and what can be done to re-earn it.
- Players should recognize areas of improvement, but also stick up for themselves in constructive ways when they genuinely don't know why they are being messaged ("How is what I did wrong?" vs. "What I did wasn't wrong!")
- The "culture" should shift from one in which karma is used as a carrot-and-stick machine, to one where karma simply represents staff's comfort with a player holding a particular role. This will take effort from everyone, not just staff.

That 6th scenario is pretty notably against the rules, though. From HELP CONSENT:

QuotePower imbalance, leadership and coercion:

In situations where a power imbalance between two characters exists and said imbalance could be interpreted as leverage (sexual coercion storylines are not forbidden) for an adult situation, consent must be sought at the earliest possible juncture along with direction to this help file. This applies to all leadership roles as well as powerful roles such as known sorcerers.

The earliest possible juncture means as soon as you are aware that your PC desires a sexual or romantic encounter with another PC.

This means a leader (/powerful PC) must first obtain general consent to pursue a romantic relationship with another PC and then subsequently consent must always continue to be sought for any sexually explicit scenes, each time they may occur, if the FTB mechanism is not being employed.

So in this case, at the very least, clarity is no issue. It's right there for anyone to read, no doubt about it.

Quote from: mansa on November 14, 2023, 03:40:47 PMScenario 3:
Player with 1 karma - playing a Dwarf
* Attacks an NPC in an abandoned building in the Labyrinth
* NPC starts winning, and flees
* Leads NPC into other Labyrinth NPCs who start a brawl
* Dwarf practices backstabs on NPCs fighting
* Does this multiple times
* Is observed by Guild Staff, notes in Pfile
* Another player creates a player complaint report about it.

That's my armageddon career in a nutshell.

So are we just cherry picking actual in game happenings as scenarios? Lets play Bingo.. I have seen Scenario 3,5 and 7 on a regular basis.

I suppose they seem outlandish but are really hinterlandish once you have played Arm long enough.

If we're being real, there are some skills that can only really be trained, after a certain point, in a manner that would be considered cheating/twinking by many. I think it's fair to wonder if one's karma balance depends upon whether one is spotted doing this by a staff member who knows that's the only way, or one who sees it as horrible roleplay that nobody should ever do, when we all know that certain skills pretty much can't be raised above advanced without doing that thing.

In other words, how much leeway do players have in self-medicating against outdated or poorly-calibrated coded systems that pretty much require doing things that are dumb and unrealistic if you actually want to make progress? I feel like this has never been established. Surely we're past the naïve days of yore where one might have legitimately claimed that you need to put 75 days of play into a character before you deserve to call yourself a master in the art of backstabbing.

I remember way back in the day hunters would suddenly travel to the tablelands to fight one specific critter who was super dodgy just to advance their weapon skills.  I had some Salarr first hunters or whatever they were called even recommend me do it after I got to the kill everything that walks level on my hunters.

It always seemed twinky as fuck to make these trips just for a dodged swing or two.

Quote from: Pariah on November 15, 2023, 07:46:32 AMI remember way back in the day hunters would suddenly travel to the tablelands to fight one specific critter who was super dodgy just to advance their weapon skills.  I had some Salarr first hunters or whatever they were called even recommend me do it after I got to the kill everything that walks level on my hunters.

It always seemed twinky as fuck to make these trips just for a dodged swing or two.

Well, it's "twinky as fuck" from a perspective where characters should only do what they would realistically do. That's commonly called roleplaying. It would take some serious mental gymnastics for an inhabitant of Zalanthas to go, "well, all the normal things I face in the harsh desert no longer pose a threat to me, so it's time to go fight squirrels in foreign lands! It's the only way to get my black belt!"

On the other hand, the irritating reality is that one reaches that point of "normal things I fight against no longer pose a threat" very early in the graph of potential combat prowess. You don't come to that realization three quarters of the way to the top. It's more like slightly before halfway. Then you fight anything that's got master parry and you realize how absolutely useless mid-journeyman weapon skills are against that. But that was as good as you could get doing things that might conventionally qualify as roleplay.

So people self-medicate. For a long time, they did so by blindfighting snakes on a roof, or by sparring with bags of rocks on them. These methods were then nerfed. The nerfs were correct from the point of view that the methods were ridiculous, but the problem remained: unless you had the highly improbable fortune to know a very long-lived fighty dude who would spar with you on a daily basis, you were not going to get any better than 'okay' at fighting. And most characters simply don't have access to such a sensei. You might have that luxury once every five or ten RL years, and when it does happen, it usually wasn't the result of brave, creative play--you were just lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time.

Players got tired of that, and they started self-medicating. Unfortunately, the stilt lizards and turaals were nerfed, and so even more arcane methods were employed. Those with the know-how benefitted, but the methods were so silly and twinky that nobody could really justify doing it from an in-character perspective. Still, some get away with it, and they win the arms race when it comes time for a good old PvP fight. Good Boi Amos who has satisfied himself with the skill level that hunting raptors gives him then gets omegapwned by Bad Boi Malik who knows how to get much better than that.

Players are then faced with a conundrum. Do you play fair (that's a karma criterion now, after all) and not only get bored with the fact that you'll never get any better than okay but also get pwned anytime you fight a dude who chose to play by different rules--or do you fight fire with fire? And what does staff think of players who do that? That's what hasn't been made clear. It's rather nebulous, and, more importantly, it seems to me that it depends almost entirely on the personal whims of whichever staff member is tasked with watching over your clan.

Quote from: Triskelion on November 15, 2023, 08:55:30 AMWell, it's "twinky as fuck" from a perspective where characters should only do what they would realistically do. That's commonly called roleplaying. It would take some serious mental gymnastics for an inhabitant of Zalanthas to go, "well, all the normal things I face in the harsh desert no longer pose a threat to me, so it's time to go fight squirrels in foreign lands! It's the only way to get my black belt!"

Hunters struggle from a lack of sparring opportunities. I've played hunters in every single GMH and I don't think I've ever actually had a situation where I have a second hunter actively working aside me even when both hunter slots are filled, so you kinda do have to get creative when you're a solo hunter trying to skill up so you lower your chances of dying. I will say, and mods are open to slap me if I shouldn't point this out, but they FINALLY added a sparring group specifically to the northern compound, I would recommend just adding a sparring group to each GHM compound so that way hunters don't have to bend over backwards just to try and progress their combat skills at a reasonable rate.

Quote from: Kavrick on November 15, 2023, 11:15:36 AMHunters struggle from a lack of sparring opportunities. I've played hunters in every single GMH and I don't think I've ever actually had a situation where I have a second hunter actively working aside me even when both hunter slots are filled, so you kinda do have to get creative when you're a solo hunter trying to skill up so you lower your chances of dying. I will say, and mods are open to slap me if I shouldn't point this out, but they FINALLY added a sparring group specifically to the northern compound, I would recommend just adding a sparring group to each GHM compound so that way hunters don't have to bend over backwards just to try and progress their combat skills at a reasonable rate.

There's already one area in the game where hunters can find regular sparring opportunities outside the Byn and city militia, if you want a more immediate solution.

Quote from: Trevalyan on November 15, 2023, 12:34:45 PMThere's already one area in the game where hunters can find regular sparring opportunities outside the Byn and city militia, if you want a more immediate solution.

If that's the case I don't know about it, also want to point out that I'm off-peak.

I would be interested in seeing what some of you guys think about how those situations should be handled.

Quote from: Usiku on November 15, 2023, 02:03:37 PMI would be interested in seeing what some of you guys think about how those situations should be handled.

Entirely depends on what their history of effort is once they are 'skilled up'. Do they go around using their uber-skills to dominate other players, murderhobo any new 'adversary' who shows up with minimal effort, and cause entire regions\clans to become effectively off limits for anyone who isn't on their 'team'?

Or do they use their skills to advance groups, be inclusive, and foster a lot of new roleplay beyond "gave that bitch a mantis head"?

The twinking meta is a huge portion of the game. It's always going to be there. Twink control is like gun control ... if you try and stop it then only the bad players are going to be twinked up and the game just becomes overall more and more shittier.

Sorry, I wasn't referring to the conversation re. twinking specifically. Rather mansa's nine scenarios.

Quote from: mansa on November 14, 2023, 03:40:47 PMScenario 6:
Player with 3 karma - playing a noble
* Hires an aide PC to help with activities
* Hits on aide PC in game, and gets rejected.
* Fires aide PC in game.
* PC aide creates player complaint.

For this one, if I understand the rules (which Patuk quoted) correctly, the noble's player needs to ask consent to take the roleplay in that direction. And then there could still be an IC rejection after OOC consent is granted. In which case I think the aide being fired is permitted as IC retaliation in the spirit of MCB.

If consent was not granted (or requested) then the storyline shouldn't have been pursued, and there's no IC reason for firing the aide. That combo would probably be egregious enough to justify docking karma, but I'm not sure.