delerak
GDB Superstar
PK'ed by jcarter
"When you want to fool the world, tell the truth." - Otto Von Bismarck
Posts: 1,670
|
Post by delerak on Dec 19, 2015 23:47:40 GMT -5
playin league sorry.
|
|
|
|
Post by RogueRougeRanger on Dec 20, 2015 15:46:41 GMT -5
To upkeep the interest in allanak, there has to be some common enemy that the city can unit against, while at the same time scheming and corrupting itself internally for more power. The relentless OOC search for the right combo of open/closed clans, or open/closed taverns, or open/closed cities, or caps necessary to make certain areas (or all) of the game fun is a classic (maybe THE classic) example of dysfunctional staff-side reasoning. It also misses the point, IMO. All that's necessary for fun to be had and to maintain interest in the game as a whole, or for any specific area, is for the staff to trust the players to play. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 17:35:46 GMT -5
To upkeep the interest in allanak, there has to be some common enemy that the city can unit against, while at the same time scheming and corrupting itself internally for more power. The relentless OOC search for the right combo of open/closed clans, or open/closed taverns, or open/closed cities, or caps necessary to make certain areas (or all) of the game fun is a classic (maybe THE classic) example of dysfunctional staff-side reasoning. It also misses the point, IMO. All that's necessary for fun to be had and to maintain interest in the game as a whole, or for any specific area, is for the staff to trust the players to play. That would be a really nice idea. Except there are some players who can't be trusted, and they ruin it for everyone else. Plus new players who don't know how to play and therefore can't be trusted to play - not because they're griefers or intentionally untrustworthy but simply through lack of knowledge and understanding about the game world. |
|
punished ppurg
GDB Superstar
Why are we still here? Just to suffer?
Posts: 1,098 
|
Post by punished ppurg on Dec 20, 2015 18:18:08 GMT -5
That's what karma is for, laowai. Don't just close things, but make it an option. I've agreed with Tuluk closing because there were fundamental flaws, but removing further content or ignoring content already there is not kosher.
Gith are already there, and it's about time they were re-opened.
|
|
|
|
Post by pinkerdlu on Dec 20, 2015 20:11:28 GMT -5
I don't understand
What is a newbie going to be able to accomplish that's going to completely ruin the game if staff trusts them?
ghaati did you forget to take your pills again?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 20:30:02 GMT -5
Let's try this again, since you both have either intentionally ignored my point, or aren't grasping it:
RogueRougeRanger said:
All that's necessary for fun to be had and to maintain interest in the game as a whole, or for any specific area, is for the staff to trust the players to play.
My primary response (which was why I posted it first) was this:
That would be a really nice idea. Except there are some players who can't be trusted, and they ruin it for everyone else.
My response to ALL THAT'S NECESSARY IS FOR STAFF TO TRUST THE PLAYERS
is
NOT ALL PLAYERS ARE TRUSTWORTHY, SO THAT ISN'T ALL THAT'S NECESSARY.
The rest was an aside, which was why I put it secondary in the post.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 20:32:41 GMT -5
The relentless OOC search for the right combo of open/closed clans, or open/closed taverns, or open/closed cities, or caps necessary to make certain areas (or all) of the game fun is a classic (maybe THE classic) example of dysfunctional staff-side reasoning. It also misses the point, IMO. All that's necessary for fun to be had and to maintain interest in the game as a whole, or for any specific area, is for the staff to trust the players to play. That would be a really nice idea. Except there are some players who can't be trusted, and they ruin it for everyone else. Plus new players who don't know how to play and therefore can't be trusted to play - not because they're griefers or intentionally untrustworthy but simply through lack of knowledge and understanding about the game world. Cant be trusted to do what? Mudsex endlessly? There are better solutions to bad apples. |
|
punished ppurg
GDB Superstar
Why are we still here? Just to suffer?
Posts: 1,098
|
Post by punished ppurg on Dec 20, 2015 20:48:45 GMT -5
Who are the players who ruin it for everyone else? They surely must be a minority. In a community of 300, you should be able to pick them out easily and identify them. Are you willing to provide any examples of the players that ruin everything for everyone else?
And, moreover, why is it that these identified individuals' participation in this text community causes such grief and failure for the rest of us? Can't we do anything about it, other than dulling down the experience for the majority who can handle it?
|
|
jesantu
Displaced Tuluki
Posts: 388
|
Post by jesantu on Dec 21, 2015 3:54:39 GMT -5
Ghaati would make a terrific imm. Just say yes to limitations and so would anyone though.
What fails imms at every turn is the eternal effort to make the game about their stories and almost never about the players' stories. Things are better on that front....but only marginally....and sure to end the moment nyr returns. I have some faith in rath to make a change for the better but backed by two useless duds, brokr and urinemoose, whose sole contributions are the nitpicking and limiting of players, to say nothing of a useless nessalin, he's got an uphill battle.
|
|
grumble
GDB Superstar
toxic shithead
Destroyer of Worlds
Posts: 1,619
|
Post by grumble on Dec 21, 2015 8:43:50 GMT -5
Who are the players who ruin it for everyone else? They surely must be a minority. In a community of 300, you should be able to pick them out easily and identify them. Are you willing to provide any examples of the players that ruin everything for everyone else? And, moreover, why is it that these identified individuals' participation in this text community causes such grief and failure for the rest of us? Can't we do anything about it, other than dulling down the experience for the majority who can handle it? I think he's talking about the players with 8 karma, staff keeps wishing they'd pick the high-powered roles that would leave them isolated in the wilderness forever, instead of endlessly role-apping clan leads, then driving fun into the dirt. (not all players with buttloads of karma do this and I bet some are low karma as well, but that admittance ruins the joke, alas) |
|
|
|
Post by pinkerdlu on Dec 21, 2015 17:37:45 GMT -5
Let's try this again, since you both have either intentionally ignored my point, or aren't grasping it: RogueRougeRanger said: All that's necessary for fun to be had and to maintain interest in the game as a whole, or for any specific area, is for the staff to trust the players to play. My primary response (which was why I posted it first) was this: That would be a really nice idea. Except there are some players who can't be trusted, and they ruin it for everyone else. My response to ALL THAT'S NECESSARY IS FOR STAFF TO TRUST THE PLAYERS is NOT ALL PLAYERS ARE TRUSTWORTHY, SO THAT ISN'T ALL THAT'S NECESSARY. The rest was an aside, which was why I put it secondary in the post. no, you didn't clear up anything Either you aren't very good at expressing yourself (mommy probs?) or you're a bit slow (genetic probs?) My response was along the lines of: WHAT IS THE DANGER OF UNTRUSTWORTHY PLAYERS IN THE CURRENT STATE OF ARM? The only danger I see is grumble getting away with solo-RPing rape with an underage npc because game = zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Trust me. Untrustworthy players aren't holding Arm back. Uninspired players (guilty) and talentless fools? may be part of it. But I think we've covered this already. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2015 20:52:04 GMT -5
Let's try this again, since you both have either intentionally ignored my point, or aren't grasping it: RogueRougeRanger said: All that's necessary for fun to be had and to maintain interest in the game as a whole, or for any specific area, is for the staff to trust the players to play. My primary response (which was why I posted it first) was this: That would be a really nice idea. Except there are some players who can't be trusted, and they ruin it for everyone else. My response to ALL THAT'S NECESSARY IS FOR STAFF TO TRUST THE PLAYERS is NOT ALL PLAYERS ARE TRUSTWORTHY, SO THAT ISN'T ALL THAT'S NECESSARY. The rest was an aside, which was why I put it secondary in the post. I think RRR is saying players need to have some creative control in the game. They need to feel like they are, to some degree, in the driver's seat. Players want to feel like what they do matters, and whenever they feel like passive observers, that their actions don't matter, they then become the "untrusted" because staff feels the need to write the story without them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2015 21:09:29 GMT -5
I agree it's great to feel like you have some creative control. But if everyone had creative control of the game, what kind of game would it end up being? Everyone wants what they want. But some people can't have it. And basically everyone can't have what they want, at least some of the time. The staff has to set boundaries somewhere. Someone has to be "that guy" who says "no, you can't play a living gingersnap from the planet gleek." Because you know there will be "that other guy" who insists on testing boundaries. If you say "you can't use the word "lass" in your sdesc they'll app one anyway to see if it slips by. Or they'll app "lassie" or they'll app something equally retarded, JUST to see if they can get away with it.
Someone (maybe it was Mansa?) rolled up a character once who did absolutely nothing. He logged him in and parked him in the Gaj for a few days. Then he reconnected (since it dropped his link) and moved him one room away, and ignored him for another few days. He wasted the staff's time just to have him create what amounted to nothing more than an NPC that he refused to animate.
Someone has to say "you can't do that." That someone is the staff. And we are the ones who can't do stuff sometimes. There are a lot of things I really want to do in the game. It frustrates me sometimes that I can't do those things. But most of the time, I'm content doing the things that I *can* do and not obsessing too much about the things that I can't.
|
|
|
|
Post by sergeantraul on Dec 22, 2015 22:04:31 GMT -5
It's actually really depressing that you think that. Your philosophy is literally poison to the collaborative roleplay-storytelling experience that is an RPI.
The game staff are similar to the GM at a tabletop game. One of the things you need to learn about GMing is that telling your players "no" is bad. You need to have a really good reason if you're going to say no (enforcing basic rules is a good reason, but you need to know when to bend or break those rules). Telling your players they can't do something stops them in their tracks, reduces their enthusiasm for the game, and perhaps most importantly, stops them from lightening your workload for you.
This doesn't mean you have to let players get what they want. When a player tries to do something outlandish or impossible you let them try, and then let them suffer the consequences. It creates a much more dynamic and interesting game, and very quickly you have the players bouncing off one another "trying" things and suddenly the GM has a lot less work to do. The best way to bore your players is to stop them from even trying to do something, especially if you do so to protect a railroad plot that they will be less invested in each time you stop them from trying something.
Avoiding telling players no doesn't mean you let them get whatever they want, nor does it mean you have to tolerate blatant rule breaking, so those points are irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcarter on Dec 22, 2015 22:07:32 GMT -5
Someone (maybe it was Mansa?) rolled up a character once who did absolutely nothing. He logged him in and parked him in the Gaj for a few days. Then he reconnected (since it dropped his link) and moved him one room away, and ignored him for another few days. He wasted the staff's time just to have him create what amounted to nothing more than an NPC that he refused to animate. ...what the hell was the point of that story? how was staff's time wasted? because they approved a character that achieved about as much as most other characters in game? are you really trying to draw some sort of line in the sand over this? |
|
