Pure playerdom works, but it requires the players to start thinking outside of their characters. As soon as something purely player driven ceases to be "fun" it falls apart.

This is why Wilton fails. It isn't fun, it's annoying and "not fun" out of character.
If it's annoying OOCly, I'm not going to bother with it and spend my precious little free time elsewhere in the game world.

This holds especially true for cases like Wilton.



My problem with trying to solve the issue ICly is I have no IC basis for wanting the laws changed, only OOC ones.

My character agrees with the law. He's strictly lawful good and a guest in someone else's domain. It's not a problem for him to put up his staff and handle buisness there on the Jarls terms.

I, as a player, find the mechanical impact of the laws annoying and very not fun, so I don't even pass through anymore.

If it's a DM driven situation, the DM's can invent reasons to shift things back towards "fun". Trade caravans reacting to the too strict laws and stopping trading there, or jacking up their prices. Local commoners complaining to the Jarl, etc. Not every change has to be ICly player driven. Things that can players reasons to change the laws.

_________________

I'll just add, as a player of one of the main Wiltun guards, that I think Dead is pretty much spot on.

IC, Robin doesn't have much problem with the laws, and she'll go on enforcing them to the best of her ability. But OOC, yeah, they pretty much killed the possibility that the Jarl-Warden faction is going to have much significant RP with anybody but itself. I've *loved* my RP experience with the Jarl-Wardens. It's been some of the best fun I've had on Amia. But I do have to acknowledge that pretty much 100% of that awesome RP has been exclusively with other members of the faction, which, while that's perfectly ok with Robin (my PC), is less than perfectly ok with me (the player).

That's my problem with the "if you don't like it, fix it IC" fallback. My OOC motivations are not the same as my IC motivations. I, the player, would love to see all sorts of people stomping through Wiltun like it used to be. But I, the PC guard, just want peace and order and don't really care about whether there exists a flourishing RP hub where disparate people can bump elbows. *Nobody* cares about that IC, because nobody IC is playing a character who knows they're a fictional person on a computer server that's ailing. Nobody is in a position to understand IC what is an entirely OOC concern. "If you don't like it, fix it IC" is a lazy, glib handwave, it's not a real suggestion for improvement.

_________________
Winner of Amia's "Most Ethical Time Traveler" award 2026

Character Portraits!

One quick corollary thought to that last post:

It applies to Bendir Dale, too. The week those ridiculous laws were implemented IC is precisely the same week that the Dale basically became a dead zone, and has been ever since.

_________________
Winner of Amia's "Most Ethical Time Traveler" award 2026

Character Portraits!

Highly untrue, or rather just the wrong way of looking at it.

IC someone can easily dislike the fact that they cannot just hang around Wiltun anymore. There's more possible IC reasons than that, but it's not all cut down to 'OOC to influence IC'. Clearly there are characters that do not like the changes, or else they would not have left Wiltun.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

Right, but you're arguing against yourself, there. They dislike the changes, so they said "screw it" and left. They didn't hang in and try to change things.

_________________
Winner of Amia's "Most Ethical Time Traveler" award 2026

Character Portraits!

Also bear in mind that they might just not go to Wiltun period because it gets on their nerves. Honestly, its not going to help if people just keep it the same and demand the majority of people adapt either way.

Umm...I hate the problems and I do my best to fix them, but Wiltun has not failed and can in fact be fixed. There have been key choices and directions that were taken that led to a server wide problem of which Wiltun is only one symptom of the issue.

Wiltun has and is and always will be fun for me. I was there long before the guard faction was started and I'll probably be there long after it is gone(hopefully it never goes away but adapts and becomes something better), not just because I've invested so much time and effort into it, but because Wiltun can be a blast if people don't quit.

I'm going to make an effort to address the problems and have been aware of them for a while, so beating the subject to death isn't really going to bring any new insight to it.

Well yeah, I'm not saying things don't need to change or anything, just that a character will care about Wiltun IC, but not for the same reasons a player does OOC.


I do not see how I'm arguing against myself, but okay. You just said exactly what I was saying. I was merely pointing out that is a character lacks IC reason to want to change things, then they will not. Characters, however, can have IC reasons to do so.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

"Well yeah, I'm not saying things don't need to change or anything, just that a character will care about Wiltun IC, but not for the same reasons a player does OOC" Naivatkal.


It's not always about IC. We are people not our toons. Right wing rp as I call it thinks everything has to be IC all the time. It doesn't. People are pissed off as evidenced by the HUGE amount of frustrations coming out in this thread. Settling things, or atleast discussing them OOCLY and letting things slide once in a while creates a friendlier more human atmosphere and community.


Sorry, don't know what happened trying to quote.

_________________
"Ain't it like most people, I'm no different, love to talk on things we don't know about." The Avett Brothers

I actually get a bigger headache from the folks who try to go OOC all the time. I am always and will always be courteous and as understanding as I can be out of character, but sometimes it gets taken way too far and creates a shit ton of grief.

I'm going to offer some food for thought for the people who are complaining (rightfully so, in some instances) about the bogging down of rules and regulations in some PC-run settlements. Bendir Dale, Cordor, and Wiltun are the examples being given. The primary reason laws have changed in these settlements is because it was necessary. Not because the people in charge want to particularly be totalitarian dicks and micromanage every little thing that comes in or around their territory. That is exhausting and tedious.

Unfortunately, other PCs (most of which have no real lasting investment in staying around a long while and are subsequently never seen again: see the Alt-itis topic) go and haphazardly create a need for further regulation in an IC manner by creating a new and unheard of threat, that leaves an open door because the perpetrating character was never "brought to justice". Most of the time it's because the consequence is scary, and players generally do not like consequences. While it is a benefit to the server, it is not a direct benefit to them.

I remember Bendir Dale having this problem for a while, even though I feel it's something every PC run settlement has to deal with in a different way. Bandits or "bad people" would hang around the gates and cause fights, and use the cliffs as a wise vantage point over poor Bendir Dale, where I assume they could cap someone from a distance with a crossbow bolt and then flee (which would be admittedly pretty awesome for an assassination). They had a town meeting to discuss the issue, and made a change. They asked their friends and peaceful visitors to come inside to socialize where they are not only safe, but they are not posing this new threat. They also moved the cart routes to cut down on that new and dangerous traffic threat that, perhaps with a little hint of healthy paranoia, was bringing in the "bandits". I think it's pretty fluid and justifiable criminal recognition, but not everyone thinks so. The way I see it, someone inspired enough fear for an entire settlement to change their manner of living. Unfortunately, it was done by someone who isn't even relegated to being a boogie man after they disappear. They're no-one. A one-shot character with a death wish and maybe a dream of a grinded-to-level-thirty blaze of bloody gore-y.

The dangerous part of this for RP is that it does its job. It discourages bandits, but it may only be doing so by discouraging other players; however, ICly, the intention is met and there is no reason to change it. You're safe from bandits, but you're also bored as sin. It comes down to the tired hope for a middle ground, but it's something that I don't know how to create, but it's something I've struggled with very much. I call it the clam-shell, because nothing can come in or out without extreme force or permission.

But this "it only takes one" is a long-standing trend on Amia, but I can't say it's unwarranted. Just unfortunate. I wouldn't hate it so much if the offending character who forced the regulation change would stay around (talk about criminal recognition!) but they often don't. I assume the reason is that the fun came and went for them when they caused their trouble and then the avenue for it was blocked (which I think is what a lot of people are frustrated about. The opportunity was seized by someone who didn't care about the impact and now no one can easily seize the opportunity again). The point I am trying to make, is that when this happens, we cease to have the living, breathing server we desire when there is no one to be held accountable for why changes happen. It is left hanging and what could have been an open and shut case, where maybe the opportunity could be more easily plucked, there is an an unresolved tension that everyone needs to pay for in the establishment of a new regulation. Why? Because if it happened once, it'll happen again.

OR

It happened once, and the person mocked the punishment until the end. In Cordor, maybe it's a long, grueling jail stay with no sunlight and frequent interrogations being your only interaction with other people, so your will can slowly break and you may go slightly insane (unfortunately, no one tends to grasp the mentality of being in "The Hole"). In Wiltun, maybe you lose your hands, or head, or be hog-tied and catapulted over the seawall into the open ocean (or a tree, hahaha). In Bendir Dale you might be punched in the groin and buried alive in the apple orchard to be harvested later for yummy xp (I have no idea, but it sounds like a good idea).

But, if "justice" is not met for a community in a PC-run settlement, or even in an NPC settlement (such as Cordor and its citizens regarding adventurers) it leaves a feeling of something unresolved and impending, so it drags on and becomes something established, because that one time, someone was killed with a shield in Wiltun. (@gorgometh, )

In Short:

1) A lot of the laws are based on one-time offenders who decided to do something tremendous and damn the consequences with a throw-away, one-time-use experimental character. It's not digging at anyone, but in general, I've seen the character be grinded to 30, then go out with a bang, and then cease to play the character while waiting for punishment or after punishment has been doled out.

2) Just because the original offending character isn't around doesn't mean it didn't happen. From a logic IC perspective, if it happened once, it'll happen again. Especially if you have enemies, which all settlements do, so you patch the holes you see are leaking. While it ends up bogging down everyone with restrictions (see Lizzie and Wiltun), it functions as intended ICly and it makes the PCs happy, but it makes us bored and unhappy as players.

My solution? Stick with your characters thick and thin, through success and miserable failure, especially when dealing with PC run settlements. Don't create a character just for a single purpose and then to throw away. It's not fair to everyone else, even if it's entirely "fair" or rather, "justifiable" in an IC manner of thought. It'll create the living, breathing, interconnected mature story server that I think most everyone who has posted here wants. For other related readings, please see the Alt-itis topic.

If it changes so that there is beautiful, harmonious consistency in the characters being played, I think we could see less overbearing regulation. I can already imagine one thing that would be very very different in South Cordor that would give our crime-loving people who always complain about the district would enjoy, if there was any consistency.

_________________

"The world takes and takes, even things that aren't offered. Finally, it gave us something back; I wish he was here to share it with me."

Hey, that's still technically a quote


The hell is this 'right wing RP' philosophy? I'm being serious. Regardless, settling things OOC is fine. I don't think anyone is disputing that. Sometimes things break down on an OOC level and you need to repair that first.

But when something happens IC to make a change like in Wiltun, why would you fix it OOC? This is a roleplay server, which means that roleplay has consequences. It also means that said consequences can be fixed.

It's the same with Bendir. People act like it makes zero sense that the Dale made those laws when people were getting killed on their doorstep. Yeah, I do get that it made people leave, but here's the kicker: If you leave for IC reasons (ie your character is annoyoned), then fine that makes sense. If you leave of OOC reacons (ie you, the player, are annoyed), then ... what?

I have characters on both sides of this sort of thing. I have a CN 'don't give a fuck' mage that was highly irritable with the staff/hood laws in Wiltun, mostly because he lost spells because of it. Heck, he started to backtalk a DM-NPC guard once because he was encumbered and using his staff to help get to the shop, but then stopped and just complied to make things easier. Sorana ended up joining the Wardens some time after that, and she has zero issue with enforcing the rules. My old main refuses to go to Wiltun because he's more or less a good guy but doesn't trust people so he only takes off his hood indoors with select people or in Kohlingen. My spellsword couldn't care less, course not a lot bothers him.

Now, did my mage loosing spellslots bother me OOC? Yeah, it irritated me a bit. I got over it, however. I am not stating that everyone needs to 'just get over it' because a mage loosing spellslots is different than something like a shady character not being able to be all shady anymore. So, again, yeah things need to change, but there are ways to go about it IC rather than just wanting a DM to suddenly go 'whelp, I'm waving my wand of fix-all'.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

And I agree with this. I'm trying to find something to tack onto it, but I can't find anything. I'm always up for a courteous discussion, but I hate trying to appeal or cater to someone's OOC sentiments. They are almost always in conflict with what should happen IC, and creates a bunch of grief and ill-feelings when a "favor" is not granted.

_________________

"The world takes and takes, even things that aren't offered. Finally, it gave us something back; I wish he was here to share it with me."

When I played a drow matron, there were definitely a lot of times at which my character's IC motivations went entirely against my players OOC motivations.

I remember Soriano's character and mine had cornered the greatest drow heretic of all times, Veszfein. Our character's would have gained massively from bringing him in, but as players, we would have killed off a big source of tension and plot in the underdark. Its at times like that when you have to let OOC bend IC. Our characters can make mistakes. They can screw up, intentionally on our part, in order to let what we know is best for the game happen at the expense of what is best for them as characters.

I think situations like this are when OOC can and should take precedence over IC, though you can still make it IC in the end. Sometimes, we just have to force our characters to take one for the team. I think most people realise this. Its when you get into situations when someone is obviously doing something that's destructive to most people's fun, and saying - its the result of purely IC decisions - that I get annoyed. Our character's actions are always the result of OOC decisions, because we, the players, are OOC.

_________________

Also, BoB put it rather well and did a greater job explaining what I was trying to put into my posts.

BoB, I would kiss you but I don't want your cooties. We can still, though, cyb0rz bby <3

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

I agree if it makes sense ic, you need not to force it on an ooc level. However, you can do so on an ic level.

Bendir Dale persues a fortress minded policy with visitors, and because of that the activity drops incredibly. With the lack of adventurers visiting the place the blacksmith, tavern and local priest notice a large decrease in revenue. Less adventurers visiting and helping the dale citizens with their local problems such as the trolls, orcs and the mylocks also cause a rise in their number and an increase of roadside ambushes, which again damages trade. The dale slowly notices it will fall on harder times, and the characters will need to find a way how to bring back the gold-shitting andsword-swinging adventurers, preferably in a way that does not lead back to the former problems.

@Didi

I can't agree with that. IC will always trump OOC to me unless someone higher up than me tells me otherwise or a DM wants to retcn something that should not have happened. I'll be courteous and I'll be kind, but my character's actions are the actions of my character because of his development and personality. Nothing more. I'm not trying to cause a headache and at the same time, I don't want one. I play amia for escapism and story, not pandering to players when an interaction between characters can fix most problems.

I've been screwed over OOCly before, meta-gamed and the like, but even when that happens, I'll roll with it.

We're going way off topic here, but....

I'm in no way saying we shouldn't roll with the punches. I'm not talking about how we should act when we get shafted. At those times, we should all act with gentlemanly conduct and not whinge and moan. I don't think this is up for debate.

What I'm talking about is intentionally screwing your own character over (in terms of what they view as success) to make things more fun in the long run. In the role of a law keeper in Wiltun, this might mean allowing themselves to be hoodwinked by someone who is trying to corrupt the guard, or by letting someone distract you whilst they sneak into the town. You can choose for your character to be fallible in order for something to happen that they don't want but you do. Its IC, but its IC directed by your own more panoramic view point.

If everyone has the same aims, to break the stranglehold on rp caused by excessive laws in Wiltun, then you can find a way for it to happen IC by choosing to let your characters make poor decisions. You don't have to make them act against their own interests, they can just act really badly in their own interests and you can let it work against them.

_________________

Chatting OOC'ly breaks IC immersion and actually builds an OOC relationship that can threaten the IC one. As in, you don't go for the gold because you have had to talk to that person, you know their feelings, and also know that no matter how innocent and purely IC you intend for it to be, they will never take it that way. And since an OOC rapport has been started, that other player will interpret your IC actions as an OOC betrayal, as well. Nobody is ever reasonable about anything, when you really get down to it (know a person long enough, try hard enough, you will find that unreasonableness in there, even if it only shows its face once every ten years) which is why I don't ever talk to anybody OOC about anything and apparently deserve the "right-winger" moniker soriano is throwing around (which is very ironic because in most aspects I'm very liberal).

If that sounds ass-backwards because I'm putting the IC before the OOC, well...I guess it is. The IC is why I came here in the first place. I inevitably had to deal with the OOC when becoming a DM, but I don't relish it.

More to the point, I get insulted when other players feel like they have to talk to me, as you're suggesting, in order to "diffuse tensions" that their conflict rp creates. I don't get tension over that. People who do, in my opinion, are unable to separate reality from this fiction and compartmentalize their emotional responses. I am not one of those people, and being molly-coddled like I am gets on my nerves. It doesn't make me ragingly angry, mind you. It's just vexing.

Now I know someone is going to read that and take offense because they will think that I am referring to them, or that I think less of them because they do need that kind of reassurance. That isn't the case. It is less about thinking less of anyone else and more about thinking more of myself, if that makes it clearer. It doesn't make me any less sympathetic towards people who are like that, either, and I like to think players have found (and been surprised) by just how accommodating I can be in spite of appearances to the contrary. I just don't want to be treated that way.

There are some other things that need to be cleared up that have been said this morning. I'm a bit disappointed certain players are taking this thread as an opportunity to make false claims about how all DMs operate.

I do not send people to the requests forum for job log changes. If you want it wiped, I may ask a simple question about why, but I trust my own opinion as much (and sometimes more) than the rest of the team's, so I just do it IG without any trouble or bureaucracy. And I will continue to do this until such a time as the job system is seamlessly integrated into the IC universe in a mechanical way and has tangible value beyond "an alternate means of XP and gold". Which is all it was intended to be, btw. The hint? If you don't want it micromanaged any more than it is, don't let it become a determining factor for anything. I use it as a guideline, and on rare occasions I will say, "You should really find someone with this job in order to accomplish your goal in this way." And I struggle against myself, actually, to not let it become a forced thing. I want it to be one, in my perfect mental universe, but I also play the chess game several moves ahead and I am aware that the consequences of having my way on that will ultimately be bad for the players.

We do not require requests for deleveling or removing XP. We still, as we always have, do that for free. The only exceptions are like RDDs, and not because we need to micromanage anything special IC, but because of the way the class features are scripted. We have to delevel in a different way. If I am wrong about this, then I will be pretty shocked that somehow we changed something and it completely missed my radar, but to my knowledge, we still actively delevel for free. I do it all the time in the client.

I was inititally very excited with the direction of this thread and I felt like I was finally reaching some of you and getting you to stand up and make the server what you want it to be, and that this can be accomplished mostly IC (though, to an extent, I suppose if you need to talk it all out OOC here, that's fine, too).

Now I see the writing on the wall. I saw it two years ago when Didi sent me a PM and told me that the ideal server for Amia is one where DMs take a back seat to players and let the players run the universe while we play referee. I gave up playing my PC in order to focus intently on DM'ing, because I realize that while that is an ideal, it is still very true that players do not think on a "DM level" most of the time, balancing their enjoyment with the enjoyment of others. Players are not all creative. They are not all able to solve the problems that need to be solved in order to implement their wants and needs in the fictional universe. I have traditionally been absolutely mum about what I look for in a DM candidate, and the things I am saying here are the things that I look for when we are discussing a candidate. I rarely see them exercised on a level that Amia deserves.

If a perfect playerdom is what you want, then I am no longer of any use to you.

Too much to drink at this point in the night so I will refrain from posting until the dawn so I do not get banned again.

_________________
"Ain't it like most people, I'm no different, love to talk on things we don't know about." The Avett Brothers

Good choice!

Can we go back to the point where we all agreed that to many alts created a bad atmosphere and agree upon it

_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856

I think you're seeing things from a DM perspective.

You as the DM team may not think that you need to make a request for various things. But players see those requests being made, and so they assume there is a rule that they should do it too. There isn't an exhaustive list of rules and regulations, for very good reason. At the same time, you can't then get annoyed if people think there is a rule when there isn't.

DMs decide what is allowed and what isn't. Players only see a black box. This happens, this gets said. If some people ask for permission for delevelling, and receive it, others are going to assume there's now a rule about delevelling, unless you expressly tell them there isn't.

I don't think anyone's trying to spread lies about the DM team, just misinterpreting the situation because from their perspective, there isn't any other logical conclusion.

_________________

I do not want a "perfect playerdom". One of the things I love about Amia as opposed to Arelith, where I /was/ a DM, is how involved the DMs are. You are people here. Not just units of the server. You have fun, and you /are/ fun. We /need/ rules. Or we'll have rampant time mages with steampunk false extremities. (Izzzt, you know who I'm getting at.) And that's crap. You'd also have things like vases that contain "a rampant cureless plague" or some bullshit, and no. There need to be limits.

That said, I do think in some cases the DM team could lighten the grip on the reins just a little.
I don't think jobs really need a DM approval ratio. I know I've learned and forgot new skills all the time as a plain human, don't tell me Katsumi can't learn or forget something.
I don't think nobility needs a request /so long as/ it's not an Amian title or a canon char, or the offspring/sibling/spouse/parent thereof. If you want to say you're a princess of Rashemen, who fucking cares? You're just a lvl 3 squatter here, baby.
I don't think full self rebuilds need DM approval. You're gonna be RPing them as they level up, that's the RP right there.


Whoever said "We're here because it's easier than the other servers with hardcore DM teams" is right. The atmosphere here is different. The DM team is friendlier and more approachable. But that's on its way out, imho.

_________________


Aly'dra Zau'ana: Priestessish Of Eilistraee
Danika Nefzen: Druid of the Earthmother
Delia Am'Anodel: Paladin of Torm

And it even makes perfect sense ICly. If I was that potion merchant from Wiltun, I'd pack my coffers ages ago.


@Burningoutbright

The golden middle in Bendir Dale would be if the said no-lingering-law was enforced by PC guards, and not by the threat of "metagaming NPC guards" in case of failing to comply. That's the universal solution. More PC guards, less "don't metagame guards".

1 NPC guard > a company of 10 epic level characters only because there's no DM at the said moment to emote it

_________________

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Login: Narkudauman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ╬ Join the Magisterium Mortis ╬

I was going to disagree, or at least redirect in regards to some of the things you said there, but I realized something. Something that might help anyone else thinking the same thing I was:

What you right there are describing is part of the very basis of having a character. They will have flaws. We may not like it, but they do. Or, at least, they should. What you said is easily doable in that a PC cannot see everything happening around them. Like when your back is to someone and they give hand signals to the person you are talking to. That sort of thing. Or someone creeping past. Something like that. That all makes perfect sense and should happen, because our PCs are not gods. They are not the be all end all. They are just as imperfect as well all are.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

Well, since I'm probably one of the certain individuals that's telling you how things are run. (Which I am not intending to do, I'm merely pointing out inconsistencies.) I will bite.

De-leveling requests:
viewtopic.php?f=90&t=60767&p=1007279
viewtopic.php?f=90&t=61170&p=1013275

There's more, if you query "delevel request" you'll find that there are tons.

As far as job requests go, what you said is new to me. I've always been redirected to the forums ever since the rebuild changes, but I guess YMMV? I mean, I don't need to link any threads, since there's probably at least 5 active ones on the request forums as we speak.

I'm not trying to tell you what's right and what's wrong -- whatever way the DM team decides on things is the way it's going to be anyways. I just am a bit perplexed of the consistency of these things.

_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata

Well, since the kids seem soundly asleep for once, I'm going to post one final point.

- In game figures have gone down because some jerks would rather spend their time on the forums causing trouble than getting in game.

And then I'm going to listen to my own advice, and go in game.

_________________

You folks are writing a lot...

_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!

Well put!

The problem with this is, again, is the lack of responsible (or I think I used mature players) which Yossarin terms as DM-minded players, or something similar.

There are two sides of the issue that I immediately think of: one is the opposition waiting for people to log off before enacting their plans of attack so they have the advantage. This is done without IC scouting or observation, and is instead done by watching the playerlist or coming on during dead hours. ICly, it is legitimate, but OoCly, it's a bit of a dick move. I've experienced this before, and it makes me sad.

The second, conflicting side is when both sides agree on a time, and then suddenly every archived character and their best friend who grinded to 30 shows up for a brawl, and then disappears. I believe someone (I think Didi?) mentioned this in relation to factions, but it removes the spontaneity and potential to be better equipped than your opponent, since everyone knows it is coming. I've seen this before, too, and it makes me equally sad.

The bottom line for both is the playerbase is not at a point of enough enlightenment as a whole to play fair and reasonably, but also that for some things to work on fairly or with a guise of mystery, a DM is a necessary middle-man. Some of us are at the point of wanting to play fair and allow spontaneous butt-kicking and assaults on our settlements, but none of us are in the position of being able to regulate who can and cannot be involved. I've never seen anyone tell a level 30 PC who has been archived for over a year and suddenly arrived to fight be told to leave, ICly or OoCly, on either side. It's not our place, it is a DM's, imo.

In the mean time, NPCs are a necessary evil until we can find a solution and a point of mature enlightenment for everyone. I know it's a bummer, but as it has been alluded to, the playerbase as a whole cannot see the big picture.

Edit: I realized a boo-boo I made in expressing an idea.

_________________

"The world takes and takes, even things that aren't offered. Finally, it gave us something back; I wish he was here to share it with me."

Yossarin, I honestly don't know how the DMs operate with requests. My claims are certainly not false, whether they can be generalized or not. What I see is people stalling with simple maintenance and making silly demands over something trivial. It may not be the norm, but as the most recent example of something discussed here it caught my eye. It happens. The problem seems to be that the DMs don't know, either. When I asked someone for a job log wipe on an old PC made before the system was even ready, they weren't sure if they could just do it (but ultimately did it no problem, noting it in their log). Silent's comment seems to suggest that you need to post on the forums, and you'd think someone had posted "Ask in game" in the Requests threads if that weren't the case.

I'm personally rather annoyed that the DM team doesn't even seem to agree on what requires a request and what doesn't. You can't seem to get a clear yes or no that you can count on in the future. Inconsistency caused by changes in the roster and lacking documentation, the latter of which isn't that hard to fix. Perhaps it's a case of new DMs being uncertain and thus erring on the side of caution, but that's just another form of the faceless tightening of control that also happens when players give up their responsibility and make an unnecessary request. Something originally done "just to be sure" becomes the norm, at least in some people's minds, and nobody can agree on what the exact policies are anymore. You would benefit from a requests overlord who maintains a list (even a mental one) of what the exactly the current policies are and keeps tabs on new decisions. With Tormak gone, a big part of the team's collective memory is lost too.

This is somewhat beside the scope of this topic, though. I do not seriously think this has much to do with our player count. It just irks me to no end. And it has nothing to do with people; it's simply something that will happen inevitably without mechanisms to control it.

As for DM control over story, I'd gladly welcome more. I want well-planned resistance to my PCs' attempts, not predictable cookie-cutter PC plots whose course is determined by simple rules of peer pressure and flavor of the month.


EDIT: I am in game actively role-playing at the moment, mind you!

_________________

I think this is what some people are trying to say, and I was a bit as well. I never knew you didn't need to request a job log change or a delevel. The only thing I know you don't need to request are head changes (within reason, as in nothing monstrous). I'm pretty sure that is it. The only other thing I have asked for IG without doing a request is bumping my back a level when I hadn't taken the level up yet (I was tired of hearing the level up chime when I logged in and had to finish figuring out what my chara was going to take next lol).


I'm not a jerk! Well, I am, but I'm being a jerk at work so I have good reason!



Well, we do play a more or less textual game, after all

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

Everything being said here sounds valid, but my ONLY problem is levelling. DMs are fine, plot is fine, rp is great.

I play for half an hour, get hit by a lucky critical or two, die, and have made about 1000xp at level 6. How people get to 10 in a day, or 20 or 30 in less than two weeks I have no idea.

And this influences my IC plans, because if I'm not 25-30 then I can't do some things, don't feel able to give my character IC seniority, etc etc. Mostly I just can't match up statements like 'I'd like to delevel to 11 to change a feat choice, and then I'll grind back up to 30' with the game I'm playing. Because I will never get to 30.

And that's making full use of 2 pets, ghostly vis, invis, flame weapon, and knowing where to buy items in-game. For brand new players it must be worse.
Is there some fasttrack? Did I press a button which only gives me 10% xp?

(This may improve with higher play numbers, but in the past week the party tool has told me 'no-one is looking' most times and 'only two level 20s' today when it was relatively full.)

_________________
Gunthar Einarsson, Skald. Also brewer of Ale. Also drinker of Ale.
Marcus Tyrell, Druid of Mielikki.
Julius Tarl, Sorcerer.

I will expand on what I said, as it may have just been too simplified. It was not all about chit-chatting ooc, but I will get back to that in a bit. I do not enjoy ooc banter too much outside when I am not involved in roleplay, and would even prefer if amia disabled parties. Most anoying thing for me is the banter during an event. I am also horrible at multi-tasking, so party conversations and the green tell texts often finds themselves unawnsered because I simply forget about it, or am not too enthusiastic to focus on it. I do try to be approachable for the other players, and that is what I mean with having an ooc conversation. I felt some people really liked that and it helped to know there is a player behind the character. When they have a question, a problem, a concern or just want to chit-chat for a bit after the event I do not mind to do so. It is a bit like after a pen and paper session.

That being said, I have been in many factions and have seen many group-conflict arguements. Most often it is simply because of little things turning into an out of character version of the war of the roses. With the Robert vs. Cultists conflict it helped incredibly to avoid any ooc-arguements by just building some trust by the way played. When there were pvp-rule mistakes I did not make a fuss out of it, report them, or argue with them about the mistakes. When there was a loss on my side I did not whine about it or make some silly excuse like "wrong gear, duh.", even if once it was true that I had a shitty rings on. When someone in the own team began doing so I told them it is no big thing and not make it one. I tried my best to abide by the rules myself, and in turn when I slipped up, those on the other side had not the least bit of a problem with it.

Perhaps Caraigh worked back then because most of the players knew one another, and the groups were led by people who got along with one another, even when their characters sure as hell did not. It was smaller than when the plot hit, pvp became more frequent and people started unnecessary arguements. At a point I hated being in the good party, as I simply could not stand the unjustifed, or only to a small degree justified whining.

You know, I've been watching this topic for a while, but said nothing. I think I'll post share of my thoughts on some of the more prevalent issues.

First, there's the 'too many laws' issues I hear time and time again. I've seen it both ways, in fact, it still happens in the Triumvir because there's no NPC guards and have seen the result many times. The result when you have that? You get a lot more random violence. I mean, not long ago, you had people hellballing, killing, murdering each other like once every week or so, sometimes more. No one's instituted any guards, though one of my PCs will certainly like it if he could get away with it. Why? Because he doesn't want to clean up the collateral damage after every fight there, doesn't want to be attacked by six randomly violent madmen every day while trying to paint. I think most people of settlements share this mentality, AKA they don't like being randomly attacked so they station guards and set up laws to mitigate them. After all, why would a random civilian want two murderous psychotic people blasting everyone and everything in his back yard? In this case, it's really a matter of IC actions and IC consequences. The laws that were put in Bendir were put on because of all the attacks. Cordor cranked down on Cordor south because who wants hellballs going off in the city on a daily basis? Wiltun is the same way really.

Next, the issue with player-controlled places and DM-control. I, personally, think the DMs are necessary. The only way that DMs would not be necessary is if: Each and every person in the world was controlled by an individual player, each of those players were logged on for 16 hours a day. An alternative would to be to have a perfect AI, that would have each and every character, monster, and everything controlled in a perfect fashion that could respond to any stimulus based on a set of guidelines. Actually, considering things like vampire or demonic invasions that happen without player control, unless each vampire and demon and every 'spawn' has it's own unique player, then it's not going to work. Suffice it to say, you need DMs. Players aren't the only ones in the world. Cordor has a huge population that isn't feasible to completely give to player control, it needs a DM to pull their strings.

Personally, I feel that there is one issue with the DMs, but it's in a different direction. I like DM interaction, as a player I constantly try to get in on every DM plot I feasibly can. They're a great deal of fun. They offer a lot of growth for character development. Even if your character is still a level 3 kobold who can't pickpocket enough to feed himself and has to get by by rubbing his nose against some rich and kindly big persons. The DMs do a great job.

I think the greatest problem is availability though, and this is especially prevalent if a DM runs more than one area. You could have a DM in charge of 4 different areas, and... at the same time, have players who want to do things with all those areas requesting his time at the same time. This will inevitably, leave 3 sets of players frustrated they can't have the DM. This is especially so for longer and more involved things, so some players may left feel out. It can even be frustrating for people who just want to do some crazy stuff in a banned area which won't have any lasting impact on the area, but would be fitting for the character. Chaotic characters especially might wander into a banned area and risk a lot to satisfy a whimsy. Unfortunately, there isn't a lot the lone DM can do in this place. He can only manage any one set of players at any given time, which leaves the others feeling left out. It's not fair to expect a DM to be there all the time for a specific group of players, they can't be in the client 24/7 either. It's just not a reasonable expectation.

To how to ameliorate that? The only thing I could think of is: have multiple DMs controlling multiple settlements. Of course there will be overlap, but in the above case and there's say... three DMs on, then they all could handle the settlement plot matters rather than just one. I'm not sure if the system of having one and only one DM assigned to each settlement is a good setup. I know it does help prevent things like schizophrenic NPCs, but more coverage for the playerbase is good. If a specific DM is needed at several points at once, they could have another DM, if on, handle it. Also, with plots, I think it might be a good idea for, especially the island wide big plots, to have multiple DMs in on it. It probably isn't needed for the flash-plots, but the longer ones could benefit from it in a couple of ways. Coverage of different timezones, coverage of different areas, and even if a DM goes out for some RL induced reason, they could have back-ups to continue and conclude. Still, I imagine this could come with complications of it's own. No solution is perfect after all.

_________________
I play:

Collective memory?

_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856

I'm feeling a bit sick today, but I'll try to be coherent.

Regarding the player-controlled places vs DM-controlled places. Player controlled places work on one condition: If the level of maturity in the area's playerbase is high enough. There are a lot of people who log in simply to create conflict, which is not necessarily a bad thing in itself, but in regards to civilizations, it is. You can't have a place getting attacked and people getting murdered every single day. These player-run settlements also work well because they tend to focus more on politics than conflict. NPC guards will always be required for the simple fact that without them, every city would devolve into baseless violence on a daily basis. I think a lot of the people that are complaining about the presence of the guards are the same people who refuse to just get a DM to do what they're wanting to do and instead just lament their inability to do anything at all.


My other quibble is about DM events. They're all pretty awesome, but I tend to like smaller events. Even if that means I get them less often, I find it's simply far more manageable to have 3-6 people involved in a small, one-off (or long lasting but slow-paced) event than to have a server shout lure a hundred people to one zone. I almost always avoid the server shout events unless they happen to be focused right where my character happens to be at the moment.

_________________
Remember when I knew a boxer, baby

Yes! The small, surprising ones are awesome. I cannot remember the DM, but I was in a party running through the trolls and RPing and such and we ended up getting attacked by a few umber hulks and then something that I cannot remember (monster that eats magical items and gems and stuff). It was completely out of the blue and I loved it. There was another that a DM did when I was in a party in the Abyss, that was amazing as well.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

The only problem I see with IC vs. OOC interaction is if you do not really get to know those who are playing with you they will eventually begin to think that you are your character. This is going to be a slightly longer and personal post, but I really want to explain why I feel like this instead of making it a one-liner.

I haven't been on the server very long and I've yet to make the character that I really want to, which I want to shoot myself in the foot for, so I can't really go into about what the server used to be or come up with ideas on how to fix it, because I don't know/haven't seen the problems. I can only really comment on this because of personal experience.

I used to be a person that was all for IC over OOC. I would make small comments here, faces and some funny (or I thought they were funny!) comments there but not a lot of people really knew who I was or how I acted when I wasn't playing my character. Because I didn't want to break RP to go into tells or party chat and talk it up, I kept to IC unless I was doing absolutely nothing. Over the course of a few years people began to think I WAS my character when what they didn't know is if they had my email address and talked to me on MSN they would've seen a completely different person.

My character was Lawful Evil. A leader of a group made up about roughly 20-23 people give or take the time of the year. She was a tyrant and awful to those who would betray her to the point of hunting them down, murdering them, and slamming their heads on a pike. She was tolerant of those who were loyal to her and rewarded them. I basically looked up the word bitch in the dictionary and followed it to the letter with her.

The hardest part about this was when I was on as a DM, and we had aliases so we could play without people feeling the need to bother us, suck up to us or pick at us about things we didn't really want to deal with at that moment. I would see how people really felt about my character, which was fine. I would've been the first to admit she was a bitch. Then it slowly turned into party chat rants about how -I- was the bitch, that I was no different from my character to sum it up. They used some really nasty words that I don't feel like repeating, heh.

My "reputation" followed me after the server went down and I found people who used to play on the server went to new ones. Basically because of how people saw me on my old server, new servers wouldn't accept me because of how people can gossip.

So I gave up, made a new account and came here. And from what I can tell you guys are going to be a lot nicer. But what happened is going to effect me for awhile. Hell, I'm having a problem hitting the submit button because I'm worried about what people will think.

td;lr
It's not a bad thing to talk to people you play with. They get to know you and realize that you're just playing your character. To not talk to them at all except a few words here and there is more than likely only going to hurt you in the long run.

Jesus Christ. It's almost a thread like it used to be and there's still no flaming. I know it looks like a lot of writing, Disco, but I think it's a good thing. It's good for players to be able to talk about how they feel, even if it's criticism of how things have happened or where they see things going. That's the whole point. Restricting the openness and criticism felt like restricting the press in the real world. It turns the server into a place where freedom of speech doesn't feel quite so free anymore. Don't think I'm encouraging flaming or that I agree with half of these retarded opinions because I'm not and I don't. I just missed seeing people have opinions of their own and not just agreeing with the first intelligent, scary and/or popular forum presence to come along.

Next I want to clarify to you, Yossarin, that I was in no way looking for a playerdom with my generalized problem post. Those of you that do want that would be directing Amia down a pathway that other servers already traveled and that would be putting Amia into even more of an "identity crisis." This place wasn't created to be a playerdom, there's no reason for it to develop into one when you can get that somewhere else. What Amia has been over the course of my time here is a melting pot. It lost its acceptance of all kinds of people somewhere when people who hated putting up with shit volunteered to run shit. I have always approved of how Amia has gotten more lore-appropriate and more realistic. Still, just because we're gearing our leadership and our direction that way doesn't mean we have to outcast those who came here for other reasons. Yet that's what seemed to happen.

The requests forum should 100% be modified. In many terms, including things like what Iron and Yossarin are getting at. It shouldn't take 3 DMs for something stupid and obvious and you should have faith in the rest of the DMs you select that they will know when and where it's appropriate to do it on their own (like you have faith in yourself, Yoss). You also need to get a new Head DM that could be like Nekhy and has more awareness and stamina to stay around than Lally. You lost the ability to reign in the assholes of the DM Team when you lost the people who had the care, intelligence and force of will to tell the unruly and disrespectful DMs on the Team to STFU. And when you lost that, you lost a lot of old players who in fact deserved more respect. It's inappropriate for a player to tell off a DM, yes, but you currently have very few DMs up there who feel capable to say those things to the other DMs who sometimes deserve it (and hopefully know they sometimes deserve it).

The world could be modified back down a little bit and it might "waste people's effort," but I don't think it would waste anyone's effort or care if you gave these areas some fun when you took them out. Rather than just take shit out because you need to, why don't you make it fun for some people while you do it? I remember plotlines where multiple cities almost fell into The Abyss, drow cities were flooded and collapsed, whole islands were overflowed with lava, etc. See what areas aren't used, ask the developers what they would want to keep most out of those, what took the most effort, work with them and you can easily take some places out and create fun for the few players that loved those areas at the same time. I know drama comes along with that and it may not be as easy as I make it sound, I do, but you've done it before, that's my biggest point.

Wiltun, Cordor and Bendir and their law changes... well. In those situations, everyone has a little bit of blame, even me! For it was my character who got drow banned from Cordor in the first place. And honestly that was the very first more strict law to happen in any of those cities. So if you hate that you can't get in there? Or hate that it developed into a place that locks half-dragons up and abuses them? Hate me. It definitely made criminal RP harder in many ways. The sad part of what you're all writing about these situations is that you have to focus on blaming someone. Why? Why not take these annoying situations and laws and see it as an even more epic and awesome wall to climb? Or conversely, guards, why not try to come up with more reactions that have a nice consequence for a player breaking your laws but doesn't restrict the RP to come? Even in criticism, let's try to be optimistic.

In all my years on Amia I've shied away from criminal/guard RP most of all because I am terrified of failing at it, of the headaches and because many involved seem incapable of taking the attitude that I just tried to profess: optimism. It is absolutely more work and more responsibility than being a crazy paladin on a path of self-destruction. It is no wonder that many successful faction leaders become DMs because faction leading and criminal/guard RP require so much skill and finesse, and like what Yossarin said, make you think of the whole world in general and everyone's fun who your character can possibly affect with their actions. I can think of a few alternatives to these specific things you all are complaining about, but I admit that some of your complaints just seem silly and inconsequential. Here goes though:

-- Make a public posting about the first instance of a shieldbashing and write, "If your shield moves anywhere near another being in any way that a guard or superior finds hostile, they are entitled to chop your arm off then and there."

-- Chop off the arms of the person who did the shieldbashing and hang them outside the gates with the shield attached. "Want this to be you?"

-- Strangle someone with a fishing line. No shield needed.

-- Put some really spiky boots on and use those if really necessary.


As for the whole OOC/IC balancing act and which is more important, it always depends. We can argue it back and forth until we die. It's just going to have to be at the beck and call of who's in charge and it's understandable when you lean one way or the other depending on what's going on and how well you know those involved. As you can see, you all have different opinions on it and while Yossarin may want everyone to be as unemotional as him, I am sure he is aware that is entirely impossible, especially on this server.

There are two types of people.

People who RP socialize avoid conflict the most, they just want to go into a corner and chat with people

Then there are people who want RP conflict, which requires finding people to interact with.

When a Social RP character meets a conflict RP character, eventually the Social character will go somewhere else to avoid any conflict.

People where in Bendir because the conflict kept people there, without it people got bored. Amia forest was more populated on the road, but the random "bad guy" doing PvP chased people out of there, especially ones who just wanted to chat with a friend

Yes, I know, Estara. But I can have my dreams.



I'll be honest. For the reasons you listed, we really don't need a Head DM. Why? Because I would challenge you to point at any DM on the team right now who carries the "asshole" problem or stigma and needs to be reined in.

Aside from me. But that's a different kettle of fish, and I assure you, should I ever get dramatically out of line, the rest of the team has proven they know how to rein me in. And I have no desire to go out of line, either. But pressures of DM'ing, not getting to play, having to be on the front lines communicating with angsty players (as I have been through this thread), it all wears you down, ad nauseum arguments you've all heard, blah blah

And if one of you ever develops into one? I see the potential for quite a few. Tormak and Ron weren't ridiculous all the time, but they had their moments. You want to wait until one of those moments to elect someone to deal with it? Seems silly and discouraging to me, as someone who suffered from some asshole moments.

To avoid having to deal with my own bureaucracy behind the curtains here with a Head DM, like we used to have to suffer with? Absolutely. I would never, ever, ever get anything done.

I'd like to think there's someone capable of both having that responsibility and not getting involved in your bureaucracy, Yossarin.

The recent MoshingChris has said some quite a few choice things that fit that category.

_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata

The recent MoshingChris is no longer a DM.

And no, you misunderstand, Estara. I don't have any bureaucracy. The problem with reverting back to that terrible old system we had is suddenly forcing all of the current DMs into a bureaucracy again, one where we get even more mommy-daddied than we do now. I became a DM while Nekh was Head DM, and even compared to the way it is now, those were the very worst years of DM'ing. Why? Because I couldn't do anything as a DM. I didn't have the liberty needed to take the kind of risks I take as a DM, to build and put things together that should work for players. I didn't have the freedom to run a plot that lasted more than a day.

Although it sounds crappy to Nekh (she shouldn't take it this way), losing the Head DM position was the single best change the DM Team had in my entire time serving as DM. I literally blossomed in the wake of losing that threatening oversight and did my very best work in the year to come.

You wanting to put those shackles on me again is horrifying, and really underscores what I said earlier about what I have to offer in terms of creativity, energy, problem solving, and just plain DM'ing no longer being welcome here.

I believe that you can put shackles on the PR and OOC relations without crushing any imagination and IC incentive that any DM has. I don't think Didi/soriano left because of Tormak's Flight plot. I don't think Needled was irked by Mosh's Khem/Nes'ek drama. It's because of the OOC shortcomings and the OOC nonsense.

You seem so keen on separating the IC from the OOC and say you're capable of doing so yet you can't imagine a DM that heads off the potential bullying of DMs (which is what drove me off for quite awhile) because you're scared of what that DM might do to your RP plots? Well, imagine what those bullying DMs have done to some of our RP with their micro-managing and power trips, remember what it might've been like when Nekh micro-managed you if that is what she was doing, and now you realize why some of us have left before.

I know what you are saying. I hear you. But being the only one in this current conversation to have lived through it and know what it is really like to suffer under a Head DM, I would sooner scream at the rest of the team to force a unilateral action against a problematic DM than return to that living hell.

EDIT: Or, alternatively, just be Head DM myself and lead with a total laissez-faire attitude and encourage flourishing and synchronized DM'ing. Or be a total tyrant. I'll flip a coin. Either way, I'm not stymied because I suddenly have someone to answer to in addition to the playerbase.