Out of Character and you... the grey of grey areas.

[Malifaxis]

Anyhow..

What we have to ask ourselves, I guess, is how many players like Beethoven we are willing to drive off in the name of punishing cheaters. Is her leaving acceptable? If yes, is it okay if five people go? The more you pursue to punish and be strict on this, the more collateral you'll find. You can go all-out Whitt and pretend all you need is staff for the game to run, but I don't live in a world like that.

But it's ok for players to leave because they got fucked over by OOC cliques repeatedly?  Noted.

Get lost.

One solution has X people leave for this reason. Another solution has Y people leave for that reason. I think the exchange rate is a little off, you're here to fulfil your swearing quotum.

Let me know when you're done with your aggro bullshit.  SOrry you got grudges bro, aint my problem.

I am interested in this discussion and the solutions it can generate.

[BadSkeelz]

I think Staff should just step back a bit and let the cliques fight it out. That or drop another meteor and kill all current PCs.

I don't think you can prevent cliques from forming, but you can definitely keep them from amassing too much in-game power to be legitimately dislodged. That's when things become stale and problematic and unfun.

[Iiyola]

I'm not sure what Patuk and Malifaxis are talking about but let me go grab my popcorn.

[Patuk]

I'm not sure what Patuk and Malifaxis are talking about but let me go grab my popcorn.

You have five minutes for me to finish writing this epic put-down where I scare him with my navy seal antics. Stay tuned.

[Delirium]

Guys... keep it cool. Iceberg cool. You're just floating along in the arctic, and nothing bothers you at all.

We good? Good.

Back on track with the thread...

[BadSkeelz]

You know, I've never heard of a mundane non-magickal/psionic plot being ruined by OOC collusion.

[Malken]

Nothing can be done about it, it's 2016 - if people want to cheat, they'll cheat. If they want to lie, they'll lie.

Now can we know what happened to/with Beethoven?

[Drayab]

Just because there will always be people breaking the rules doesn't mean we should stop caring about it. There's nothing special about 2016. This is how people have always been.

[Malken]

Just because there will always be people breaking the rules doesn't mean we should stop caring about it. There's nothing special about 2016. This is how people have always been.

There's billions of ways to break the rules in 2016, a lot more than back in 1993 - You guys are wishful thinking that cheaters will read this thread and realize how wrong they've been all along and change their ways. I feel like most cliques of the past have been broken up now because there's just not that many players interested in the game in the way that many hardcore players were interested in the game back in the days, so that's probably one less thing to worry about.

Armageddon is not a community of like-minded hardcore players anymore, it's a bunch of individuals doing their own little thing in an open-world setting and that, in it's own way, probably prevents a lot of cheating because you don't have the need and/or drive to team up with other characters anymore. Grandiose goals of the past are just not a thing in the current version of the game.

[BadSkeelz]

Just because there will always be people breaking the rules doesn't mean we should stop caring about it. There's nothing special about 2016. This is how people have always been.

This leads back to Ath's first post, about the "concern." What exactly IS the concern about OOC collusion, from a staff or player perspective?

In the example Ath vaguebooks about, the problem is really that two players (one whose PC died and one who got fingered for it) couldn't handle things not going their way and both quit. I don't see why that needed to stop what could have been an awesome orgy of destruction. Who cares if it got kicked off due to OOC collusion or short-cuts if the spectacle and play itself was fun?

If a plot is "ruined" because the surprise is lost, maybe the plots need to be constructed in a way that they're inherently fun. Not run like an M. Night Shamaylan movie that's only good once.

Personally, I'm disappointed when I know people are colluding, or using OOC knowledge, or just generally being dumb. I can understand the discouragement that comes from that... but I don't feel that being discouraged is something I should allow. Needing to rely on OOC Collusion and other form of cheating is the other players' problem, not mine. I try to play Armageddon to enjoy the scenes I'm in and to look back at the narratives that get created because of it, not the narratives I could potentially create.

Then again I haven't logged in a couple months because I feel like I've done everything fun there is to do in Arm, so maybe my philosophy is not the right way forward.

[Duskdrake]

I'm (clearly) very new to the game (about 2.5 months a player), and so obviously my opinions aren't informed by any major personal experiences when it comes to this question. I don't to talk about things that I have no idea about, but it's honestly difficult -not- to bump up against the extensive rules that are used to try and address this problem.

I mostly want to agree with what several other players have already stated, that I think the current rules are so extensive that they make the problem worse, and that loosening the restrictions on casual and more innocent OOC chatter would help to create a culture of self-enforcement that everyone seems to be agreeing is ideal. That's a distinction made in the first post of this thread, but crucially, it's not one reflected in the actual rules of the game, and I think this has the result of pushing players who desire more casual OOC chatter into the margins and unenforced spaces where the real problems actually occur.

This is a problem I'm afraid I'll probably very quickly run into if I continue playing this game, so I'd like to try and explain what I see as my personal conundrum. Though the rules don't make many distinctions as to what's allowed and what is it, we could probably subdivide some of the different kinds of banned OOC talk that players might desire:

1. Details/speculations/speculations about the code that go more in-depth then is allowed on these boards.
2. OOC knowledge that players are expected to and rewarded for passing to new characters. I.E. what mobs will kill a new player dead, how to practically advance a character's skills, surviving in the wilderness, the water cave, navigating to commonly known places, etc.
3. Casual information about current events/characters (or ones from within a year).
4. Secret information about plots/characters.
5. OOC collusion/coordination of IC actions.
(there are obviously more detailed/useful breakdowns then this, but it's an example)

As a player, I'm incredibly disinterested in knowing secrets about what's going on with plots or characters. I've been a player and a DM in tabletop games, I appreciate the value of the unexpected in a good story, and I hate how hearing about things separately can reduce my experience of those events (heck, most of my friends would deem me unreasonable for my attitudes towards tv show/game spoilers). And I of course don't want to plot things out ooc, or share secrets myself, because that just makes things worse for everyone. This is a sentiment that everyone in this thread seems to share, and agree that they should be prohibited. But some of those things on the list (for me, namely actually getting to talk to people about the game, since I have no stories to tell that are legal to share) are probably more legitimate, and things that, as plenty of people have noted, are a common and largely expected practice.

Just to speak for my own personal experiences, I feel like I've only got a few options, and all of them are bad. I could follow the rules strictly, keep to this board, and never be able to talk about any of those things, or I could hop over to The-Boards-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named, a place that has -no- rules preventing any of that, in which I would likely see more then I'd desire, and have no incentive for not crossing lines on with my necessarily anonymous account. These are shitty choices that I, even as a new player, feel stuck between, and I feel like it fairly clearly illustrates how the current rules only end up encouraging the type of behavior they seek to prevent, by forcing things that even the staff in this thread don't seem concerned about to be secretive. And to the extent that there are other options (making individual ooc friends, finding some chat group), the rules only make them more difficult to find and still hold that same risk of unwanted, problematic behavior. If this is a problem that I'm already finding myself in, I can certainly understand why so many players would end up in unregulated spaces, or end up feeling that since everything they're doing is against the rules anyways, that more severe infractions don't really matter.

Playing MUDs acts as a social outlet for me. I'm not interested in throwing literal days of my life into something that I can't talk to other people about. And the current rules are pretty ridiculous for newbies, since I'll have to play for another year before I'm actually allowed to chat about anything under the verbatim rules. So if it turns out that I'm just a type of player that this MUD isn't interested in having, then I've either got to break the rules and risk getting banned, or, in the more likely case, stop playing.

tl;dr: The best thing the staff could do to help improve the problem this thread addresses would be to create a set of rules that more specifically prohibits bad actions, while allowing for more harmless ones. This would help to create self-moderation and trust between admin and players, two things that seem universally desired in this thread.

[Narana]

Personally, I agree with everyone who has expressed disagreement with the ban regarding talking about current events on the forum. I honestly feel like it prevents a lot of people from actually seeing this as a community about the game. Probably not everyone, or even most, but a sizeable number. But honestly, sometimes (most of the time?) it feels more like a forum dedicated to the game-world, to the world-building, to basic mechanics and such, but not to the game itself. Not to the everyday experience of playing and people's reaction to them, which is, to me, what makes a game community. There's very little in here that makes you go 'oh, he/she is a fellow player who deserves my respect. I should not behave like an anonymous asshole because who cares?'

Sure, people who liked to cheat would still probably cheat, and might even use information posted on the forums to cheat if the ban was lifted/partially lifted. But that happens anyway, no? So in a way, I think things can't get much worse, only better in that regard.

Perhaps I am naive, but I believe that probably lots of cheating initially start because people need to discuss things with others beyond the scope of what is currently allowed in the rules. Why? For a lot of reasons. Like someone else mentioned before, we are social, we like sharing what makes us laugh and cry. But they can't do it in the open, so they go underground, and since they are already technically breaking the rules, then they start thinking, 'shit, why not just go all the way?'

[RogueGunslinger]

Maybe a focus on the sorts of plots that can't be ruined by OOC information would help. Not that I know what sort of plots those would be.

[BadSkeelz]

Maybe a focus on the sorts of plots that can't be ruined by OOC information would help. Not that I know what sort of plots those would be.

PVE? Unless the tarantula NPCs have become self-aware and are colluding elsewhere on the Web.

[Malken]

Not to the everyday experience of playing and people's reaction to them, which is, to me, what makes a game community. There's very little in here that makes you go 'oh, he/she is a fellow player who deserves my respect. I should not behave like an anonymous asshole because who cares?'

The main thing that always kept me coming back over and over again was reading on the GDB all of the cool stuff that I was obviously missing in the game, even if it was only hints of it. Like how people would suddenly be excited or subtly talk about stuff that was currently happening, you know, what we call today hype. There's absolutely no hype left on the GDB.

Now that the GDB is dead as dead, that nagging little voice in my head that would constantly tell me, "Play Armageddon again, you know you want to, look at how much you're missing!" is completely gone and I've had absolutely no desire to return to Armageddon in months/years.

[Malifaxis]

Not to the everyday experience of playing and people's reaction to them, which is, to me, what makes a game community. There's very little in here that makes you go 'oh, he/she is a fellow player who deserves my respect. I should not behave like an anonymous asshole because who cares?'

The main thing that always kept me coming back over and over again was reading on the GDB all of the cool stuff that I was obviously missing in the game, even if it was only hints of it. Like how people would suddenly be excited or subtly talk about stuff that was currently happening, you know, what we call today hype. There's absolutely no hype left on the GDB.

Now that the GDB is dead as dead, that nagging little voice in my head that would constantly tell me, "Play Armageddon again, you know you want to, look at how much you're missing!" is completely gone and I've had absolutely no desire to return to Armageddon in months/years.

I don't know if we've played together, but your posts make me think you would be enjoyable to play with.  Are you saying that if there was more enticement on the boards that you would return?

Have you checked out some of the new posts in Release Notes?  Some of the current changes are pretty baller.  (Them books tho)

[Armaddict]

Not to the everyday experience of playing and people's reaction to them, which is, to me, what makes a game community. There's very little in here that makes you go 'oh, he/she is a fellow player who deserves my respect. I should not behave like an anonymous asshole because who cares?'

The main thing that always kept me coming back over and over again was reading on the GDB all of the cool stuff that I was obviously missing in the game, even if it was only hints of it. Like how people would suddenly be excited or subtly talk about stuff that was currently happening, you know, what we call today hype. There's absolutely no hype left on the GDB.

Now that the GDB is dead as dead, that nagging little voice in my head that would constantly tell me, "Play Armageddon again, you know you want to, look at how much you're missing!" is completely gone and I've had absolutely no desire to return to Armageddon in months/years.

There's still plenty going on in the game.  There are plenty of naysayers about that, but I guess it's because I operate on a different level.  Character goals, character aspirations, character nuances...those all appeal to me.  I don't mean mine, I mean -other- people's characters.  I like having my character judge them, interact with them, bounce off of them.  I like having my character form some aspect of their world, the same way I try to incorporate them into mine.  Their struggles become my points of interest, and my struggles become something to drag them, kicking and screaming, into.

Mostly, I think the idea that we need huge sweeping plots to be a little overdramatic.  Those are neat.  But the action that was involved in the 'rebellion' HRPT that went on the winter before last?  It was less the -story- of what was going on there that was exciting, and more the fact that there was chaos and conflict in the streets.  NPC's were animated, ransacking...they were things that players died to and killed without remorse.  I don't think anyone was totally enraptured by the story behind why they were, as much as the fact that -things were happening-, there was risk, there were things to investigate and circumvent and survive through.  While those seemed grand in scale, it doesn't take much to bring that same sort of state of existence to the game (which is one of those things that I rant about often with fewer clans and less interests being tugged around and played against each other).

As much as I love our playerbase...we have to want to treat this game like a real novel where other PC's are the main characters.  Not like a co-op game.  Make it a ruthless political thriller.  Not a nancy drew investigation.  I'm not saying this isn't happening, but I am saying we can always use more of it.

Overall I don't blame you for not wanting to play, particularly if returning comes with the expectation of 'lots of things need to be happening all the time', because that's just incredibly hard to set up in even a book, and movies that try to make that happen for -just two hours- are either exhausting or make it old quickly.  The spikes of activity and intrigue make the excitement to stick around for, and that's simply not a gaming platform convenient for a lot of people.

Edit: Mostly, just wanting to point out that lack of talking on the GDB about IC events doesn't mean nothing cool is going on, but to keep things...
On topic:  Spoiling plots sucks unless it's in the name of your own plot/personal story (i.e. It's still progressing a narrative).  Don't ruin things to try and win the game.  On the same note, don't assume everyone who ruins your plot is just out to piss in your cheerios or win the game.  It's demoralizing when you finally do something of note with a character that you hope will springboard into great things, only to have everyone get pissed off that their fun time ended and accuse you of ruining the game just because you could.

[Ath]

So I'm thankful to see that most of you are keeping this on track, thank you, it's appreciated greatly. As for the self aware tarantulas, I'll have to keep that in mind. I'm actually at my biweekly D&D game at the moment so I cannot pay close attention to this, so keeping it clean is nice. The feedback is great, in liking what I see and you all are trying to be constructive about it. Keep it up.

So I'll ask then, what sort of events could be talked about you think? I personally don't take the rules as banning any ooc, should we write them in more detail, give situations?

[Taven]

All staff really need to do is approve characters and master crafts. Everybody else has the ability to emote what they want and kill whoever they are able. That's all you really need.

This is a little off-topic, but I wanted to address this in specific, because there is a LOT more that staff does and should do to make the world a great place. The two things you mentioned, approving characters and approving mastercrafts, are leaving out a HUGE portion of what the game is about.

Things you need staff for:

• Enabling players to influence politics on a large, city (or world) wide scale
• Having the appropriate amount of support from your House/group
• Answering questions or research, elaborating on what is only represented in a basic fashion ICly
• Starting staff-originated plots that are relevant to you
• Fleshing out the virtual world with animations
• Fleshing out the virtual world by adding new areas or items
• Adding to or revising code that, in turn, better enables player actions

I mean, I'm all for things like character approval and mastercraft approval, staff only knows, but... There's a lot more that staff is doing. Honestly, even answering requests in a positive and enthusiastic manner and thus showing you that they're excited to see what your PC will do next is HUGE.

I can think of a specific instance where a certain player I know of, not going to mention any names, was apart of something pretty big in game, it was then posted OOC about who the player was, and then IC actions were taken on OOC information.  This killed the players want to play, because technically, no one would have had any idea about what happened IC, it was spoiled because of OOC.

In the example Ath vaguebooks about, the problem is really that two players (one whose PC died and one who got fingered for it) couldn't handle things not going their way and both quit. I don't see why that needed to stop what could have been an awesome orgy of destruction. Who cares if it got kicked off due to OOC collusion or short-cuts if the spectacle and play itself was fun?

I really don't agree with this statement at all. Even with the limited information Ath said, the problem doesn't seem to be that something didn't go their way. Something not going your way is when you are ICly screwed over. When people intentionally use OOC information to fuck your character over when there's absolutely no way they should have known ICly? It's not an "awesome orgy of destruction". It's completely unacceptable abuse. I'd also say it clearly wasn't fun for the player who got OOCly screwed, if they're quitting over it.

I think if we want to turn around how OOC is handled, we need to first start with the OOC perceptions of what OOC abuse is. I think this thread is helping with some of that and bringing attention to the issue, so that's good.

[BadSkeelz]

If you're not going to accept the reaction of your IC actions (whatever the OOC motivation for those actions) the maybe you shouldn't contemplate taking those actions. I don't consider killing a character without asking myself "Does this person have dipshit friends or connections that might respond, even if I were to somehow impossibly scrub all IC traces of my involvement?" If they do, plan for it.

If you do something and it provokes an OOC reaction, you should really be glad. You've flushed out the shitters.

[BadSkeelz]

As far as staff function, I think all you really absolutely need staff to do is approve characters. The rest is all extra gravy (which is entirely capable of getting in the way when you get bogged down with reports, tedious bullshit or simply players you don't see eye-to-eye with). I don't play with the expectation of it. I want to leave that to individual staff initiative and enthusiasm.

[Duskdrake]

6. Sharing or discussing relevant in-game information via out-of-character means is discouraged. Relevant information includes but is not limited to information from within the last year, involving living characters, or involving game mechanics. The rule of thumb is: if it is not in a publicly- available helpfile or document, it should not be discussed out-of-game. This goes for use of the OOC command in game as well as any out-of-game communication. If we find that you are sharing or discussing in-game information, punishment can range from a warning, to karma reduction, to storage of your character, to temporary or permanent bans.

The current rule states that
-Things that have happened within the last year
-talking about your current character
-explicit talk of game mechanics
are all explicitly banned, before going on to making two more blanket statements about what is disallowed.

If this rule -isn't- supposed to blanket ban these things, it really shouldn't say that "relevant information" automatically includes all of this or be making such general statements, IMO. If that isn't what the rules are supposed to be meaning, then a more specific explanation would at the very least probably make the actual intended rules clear to all parties.

[Taven]

I want your thoughts, I want your opinions, I want your advice.

I think a big part of this is the culture. Making players aware that their actions can have ripple effects, even if it seems innocent, is important. That nilazi-magicker plot one is a good example, and more poignant when the original post (or summary) is read. It really underscores how something seemingly innocent can ruin a great plot.

I think that posting more examples of actual things that have happened and have led to really negative results could be good. I'm not saying that we should be so explicit as to name PC names, nor do I want to create a shaming culture. However, isn't seeing the full broadness of the problem something that would help to correct it? I think it's worth taking a look at if a middle ground can be met to just make players aware of what can happen.

I don't think most players who talk OOC are intentionally trying to hurt the game. I think that there are some players who do use their OOC networks to get little tidbits from all over and then have a larger picture. I think there are some players who even lie OOCly to change opinions so that PCs will act differently.

You can't effectively police what people do, at least not until they've done something and it's too late--Sometimes not even then. But I think that by making players more aware of the issues (which I think this thread is doing), you can start to change the OOC culture.

[Taven]

If you're not going to accept the reaction of your IC actions (whatever the OOC motivation for those actions) the maybe you shouldn't contemplate taking those actions. I don't consider killing a character without asking myself "Does this person have dipshit friends or connections that might respond, even if I were to somehow impossibly scrub all IC traces of my involvement?" If they do, plan for it.

If you do something and it provokes an OOC reaction, you should really be glad. You've flushed out the shitters.

So let me make up a situation that is 100% false:

I'm a 'rinthi who through time and effort learns to speak like a southerner. I dedicate a lot of time to making the right connections, so I can not just sound like a southerner, but know a little bit of how southerners behave. I slowly work my way upwards, becoming a higher-class southerner. I work to make sure those who knew I was a 'rinthi are dead or gone. Then, I go to the Atrium. I get a noble that I aide for... And all of this was a set-up so that I could give info to the Guild, to play politics, and utterly betray people.

But let's say one of those people I killed to disguise I was a 'rinthi is pretty disgruntled. So they go to their OOC friends and say I was a 'rinthi and they hate me. Well, that gets back to the noble's player. Suddenly this awesome plot I have spent RL months setting up and plan to take places is ruined.

That's a completely mundane example for you, by the way.

I wouldn't be glad that I "flushed out the shitters". I'd be extremely frustrated, and upset, and I'm sure in that position I'd consider if I really wanted to play Arm at all, if that's what the playerbase was like.

That's the stuff that needs to be prevented and punished.

[Taven]

I should also add in my 'rinthi aide example... It doesn't have to be as blatant sharing as what I outlined to have an impact.

For example, what if instead a player just OOC'd about some silly thing that happened months ago with some 'rinthi saying something. Something they 100% believed had no connection to anything current. They had nothing against me or my PC, and were trying to avoid anything bad. But... That little tidbit had my characters sdesc and them speaking in a 'rinthi accent, and they unknowingly posted it to the player who I was an aide to.

Let's even assume the best of that noble player. Let's say they don't automatically assume anything... They're still now open to the possibility that my PC has 'rinthi connections. Anything they could discover ICly that they might have normally passed by will now stick out to them. The plot was still influenced very badly, even when we assume that all players involved in OOC communication had no ill intent.

That said, as so many have brought up, players do want to connect over the game. And sometimes you want to laugh at something with a friend or complain about something. That's a human tendency. So how do we balance this very real desire to connect over a game we love with the risk that plots may be ruined?

I'm not sure there's a definitive answer to that. I think that being more aware of the overall issue is good. I think that bringing it up periodically is also good, because it helps get people to re-consider how they're going about things, and that's important.