Displeased players should not keep their problems to themselves as that is just idiotic. How should a faction leader deal with problems if he is not told there is discontent in the faction? If the player believes strongly that it would be best -not- to mention the situation directly, he can do so without indicating it was him who brought forth the problem like stated under the faction rules:
"If your participation wanes over time, or a backlog of complaints are filed then the DM staff will contact you and let you know about the issues so you have a chance to rectify them. If things do not improve the DM staff may find a suitable replacement and transition control using a story."
I as a faction leader would love feedback and criticism from my faction members. I would love a lot more. I dont want to just hear "good job." I want to hear "you can do that better." and "how about that?". If you get proper feedback you can do a better job. To think there is no room for improvement or to allow no ideas from the members to influence the faction is completly naive and egocentric.
"You must roleplay your part as a leader while you are logged in, handle issues that your group members have, and communicate with the DM staff to let them know about events, plans, and problems."
As a faction leader you serve the players of your faction. You handle problems they have. You shield them from ooc arguments and handle them instead. You are their representation ic and ooc. You tell a dm you think that sucked and you make a point. You coordinate with other factions. You talk with your players if someone makes you aware of ooc problems that they cause.
"Running a group is a privilege, not a right, and something that must not only be earned but that privilege must be maintained."
Its also an agreement you willingly enter that your function is not to seek your own fun primarily, but to provide it to the members of your faction. If you dont like that, then dont make a faction or take the leadership of it. Some of your creative ideas will be great, others will suck. Coordinate stuff with your faction so they have a say also to where it should evolve to.
Most players who are displeased with their leader hold it to themselves, often out of fear whilst trying to avoid conflict and OOC drama.
This is very true. But it does not mean that the DMs should step up to bat for them. Oh no no. It means that the DMs should constantly tell (encourage) them to grow a pair so that they will, if that is how they feel.
Joined: 12 Oct 2005 Location: On a Disk, carried by four elephants, which stand on a gigantic turtle.
If your having problems with a leader on an OOC level, you should talk to that person on an OOC level. You should all explain that you don't think the choices they are making OOCly is right, however, ICly you can't do anything about it.
The thing is with factions. People shouldn't be the over all despot leader. OOCly a faction is a group of players who should all have a say and take part in directing the course of that faction. OOCly a faction should be diplomatic, democratic, and everyone gets to say how they feel.
Now ICly this may be an entirely different matter. But how something is percieved ICly, and how something is actually done OOCly are two very different things. As long as things run as they should be percieved ICly, there is no reason I can think of to not let everyone run a faction together on an OOC level.
Take the War Knights for example. Before our decline we all had a voice in matters of the faction on an OOC level. davis used to ask our opinions, get the gist of how we feel about things, and then make things happen. He never really just did things on his own and said "This is how it is" OOC. However, in game he was the leader. No doubt. Crunch was the leader of the War Knights and that was that, end story. The decesions to do things may have been percieved to come as advice from some of the higher ranked war knights, but it was always ICly percieved to come from Crunch in the end. Where as OOC it may have been quite different and rather been a joint choice made by every member of the faction. (Who bothered to actually get on the faction forum.)
_________________ I keels u with my axe!
"Do ye know where the Holy-Flamin' Frost-brand Gronk-slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' woundin' an' returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-out-yer-bum is?"
In a lot of factions, voting out an inactive or bad leader is simply not possible because the faction is not set up as a democracy.
This goes for any divine based faction really, where the high priest or imperator is ''chosen'' by the deity. If you oppose Darth who was chosen to lead the church by his god, you are being a heretic by not respecting the wish of Bane.
Or the grove and archdruids for example, they are chosen by ''the duir'', so if members get together and try to vote them off, they'll just say, I won't step up until the duir asks me to. Which in this case really means DMs.
Ditto for lolthites, where the high priestess was immune from disposal because she had Lolth's backing for the longest time.
The Ghaunadaurians had a system of killing off the leader as the method of IC succession. It died as a faction (it technically still exists but since you need 5 active faction members to be a formal faction, its no longer a formal faction) because most of the players left the server. Sadly, people moving on is just as likely to kill off a faction as any other method.
_________________ Illithira Frostmaiden (Snow Elf) Guardian of the Frostfell Elithiel Issatheerin (Shadow Elf) She who Lurks Isolia Oussea'lylth (Sun Elf) Apprentice Wizardess
Actually Factions are a "Right", NOT a priviledge.
You can't say that anyone and everyone can make a faction and then say it's a priviledge, because a priviledge is given only to SOME, not ALL.
Maybe you SHOULD turn it into an actual priviledge.
Use a faction command and demand LOTS of money to start a faction, then not every newb that comes can start one without a little work on the foundation, as it were. Have faction houes buyable, where you need members to actually check in, and if they don't, then the faction loses said house.
Lastly have a voting system, where votes don't represent democracy but represents the physical number of members supporting your leadership. Once the new leader is put into place, the old leader can either stay in...or be drummed out of the faction via a multiple vote House exiling system(pretty much it takes their key from them..that's all).
Actually Factions are a "Right", NOT a priviledge.
You can't say that anyone and everyone can make a faction and then say it's a priviledge, because a priviledge is given only to SOME, not ALL.
Maybe you SHOULD turn it into an actual priviledge.
There's already factional stuff that is a privilege, not a right. Forums, faction bases, etc. Anybody can form a faction, but not everybody's faction will become privileged.
Joined: 14 Dec 2004 Location: Kohlingen, and a Basement in Canada
Nekhy wrote:
Geld Yaztran wrote:
Actually Factions are a "Right", NOT a priviledge.
You can't say that anyone and everyone can make a faction and then say it's a priviledge, because a priviledge is given only to SOME, not ALL.
Maybe you SHOULD turn it into an actual priviledge.
There's already factional stuff that is a privilege, not a right. Forums, faction bases, etc. Anybody can form a faction, but not everybody's faction will become privileged.
QFE , plus I daresay while the right to gather is a right, actually turning yourselves into a faction is both a priveledge and responsibility.
Depends on what you mean by "faction." As long as you're just a group of people playing together, you have no responsibilities beyond those of every player. That's the minimum requirement of a faction, after all: people, together.
Bigger factions, groups that get recognition and priviledges, also have a big responsibility over keeping Amia lively and running smoothly. But it's not a priviledge to just start doing things together.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
No, you, as in the entire playerbase. Who keep stating different wants at different times instead of getting together and presenting a uniform consensus of opinion.
Well, my position hasn't really changed at all. The only way I see to avoid bitterness and suspicion with DMs being involved with factions is to have one steadily play the head NPC, but not have a PC involved themselves, at the very least, not in a position of leadership. Like I said with the Dale, there was a huge boost in players there for a while, because of the persistent DM/s presence in the town/faction, but eventually lots of people left, feeling if they weren't part of the clique associated with the PC who was also the DM there they couldn't really participate. I tried to stop these people from leaving through IC stuff, but it didn't really help in the end. Doesn't really matter in my opinion who is "right" or what breaks "immersion" (for me, asking DMs to avoid leadership positions as a PC with a faction they're involved with as a DM is way the hell at the bottom of my list of things that stretch my acceptance of the reality of the world of Amia), if we're talking about making sure factions/areas don't go dead and players stick around.
Furthermore, given all the constant back and forth fighting between the players and DMs I really think there needs to be some kind of mediating person as well, who has some of the powers and responsibilities of the latter. Not just for social reasons either, but because I really don't see why a faction leader needs to have a DM around to do something like give a shout announcing an event or some such. That was a royal pain in the arse having to do with the brawl. It would have been nice to were I able to give DCs to folks who showed up and RPed well (meaning, didn't break into OOC constantly which happened a lot there) and I was able to check their sheets or spawn a healing fountain and little things like that to make stuff go a lot smoother. If you don't reward, let alone even really enable, PCs to take initiative and do stuff on their own, they simply won't. I just kept at it because I'm bullheaded, but even then I got tired of it.
_________________ Former characters: Dawnbringer Goodmane Gralg Elfbane Ukre Cobcruncher Ug Rhalac
Most players who are displeased with their leader hold it to themselves, often out of fear whilst trying to avoid conflict and OOC drama.
This is very true. But it does not mean that the DMs should step up to bat for them. Oh no no. It means that the DMs should constantly tell (encourage) them to grow a pair so that they will, if that is how they feel.
And that is what we do.
Problem is, when we do grow said pair, and tell a faction leader what we're displeased with, we still have to endure the OOC drama.
I'm not saying you're wrong, 'cause you're not, but it's a very real possibility, in some cases at least, that a faction leader can't take any criticism what-so-ever, no matter how deserved.
_________________ Profiles: DakoDako & ElWacko
Characters: Currently trying my best to stick to Beridoc Brushgale
We're here to help, but you have to ask. We can't have balls for you; we need them to start our own families in the future. As great as it would be, you just can't always get what you want without overcoming some obstacles. And it's not as if recurring polls wouldn't cause just as much drama.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Most players who are displeased with their leader hold it to themselves, often out of fear whilst trying to avoid conflict and OOC drama.
This is very true. But it does not mean that the DMs should step up to bat for them. Oh no no. It means that the DMs should constantly tell (encourage) them to grow a pair so that they will, if that is how they feel.
And that is what we do.
Problem is, when we do grow said pair, and tell a faction leader what we're displeased with, we still have to endure the OOC drama.
Ah, but you'll note I'm not the one that encouraged the players in the faction actually tell the faction leader what he/she did wrong directly. That is merely a courtesy that they ought to do, but do not need to do. All they need to do is ask for a poll to be started to vote no confidence in their leader. Not just one of them. A majority of them.
Joined: 18 May 2005 Location: XC HQ Alpha, Sol System, Sirius Sector.
TormakSaber wrote:
Phearnun wrote:
Getting Nathano, Frey, and Katsumi in the same room witohut that room exploding and all three dying is a feat in itself. Good luck getting any of them to work together.
Tormak, that's so wrong, and I'm calling shenanigans on it.
In fact, Nathano's player and I are on quite civil terms. I refuse to bring OOC bullshit IC, so please don't make these types of comments about me, or my character, especially in a public forum, because your dead wrong.
And for the record, Tarkuul is in league with SEVERAL factions, just because you don't know about it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Evil factions not working well together is usually due primarily to the ego of those in charge of the faction. Didn't we try to cover this once before in regards to merging or otherwise forcing factions to be in combined in one or two places?
Didn't that thread end just the same way as this one is headed?
Regards,
_________________ "Come under the flag of truce, and brook no treason... for mineself is Death, and care not whom knows mine touch."
- Frey Asaid'De Majere
Getting Nathano, Frey, and Katsumi in the same room witohut that room exploding and all three dying is a feat in itself. Good luck getting any of them to work together.
In fact, Nathano's player and I are on quite civil terms. I refuse to bring OOC (censored) IC, so please don't make these types of comments about me, or my character, especially in a public forum, because your dead wrong.
I interpreted Tormak's comment as referring to their IC relationships.
_________________ ~Sharess on AmiaWiki~ Priestess, politician, prostitute "[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer Bolt AmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)
Joined: 04 May 2007 Location: Olympic Villiage 2010
In response to the original poster, the only way you could do what you're suggesting is by totally overhauling Amia's geography.
I think some games use geography to localize similar players, where each faction or alignment has a home base from which areas expand outwards into a bigger and bigger middle ground, and then you have disputed lands in the middle. So if there were five factions or alignments or whatever, the whole map would be shaped like a five pointed star, with the home cities at the points and the middle being a general clusterf**k. Those are primarily PvP based worlds.
Amia's the total opposite of that, being composed of maps made by different people at different times with different ideas, and was stitched together almost impossibly like Frankenstein, which makes Disco Dr. Frankenstien. I mean that in the most complimentary way to Dr. Frankenstein.
Those different models have strengths and weaknesses. The star shaped worlds can be too prescribed, and the Frankenstein world can seem too ... weirdly put together and nonsensical. I think Amia's design, despite it's flaws, is a little better because it's more like a world. It doesn't necessarily make sense and the geography can be a bitch.
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 Location: Somewhere, anywhere, everywhere, and nowhere.
lathandier wrote:
I vote hellball the lot of you so the Crimson Arcanistscan rule.
Quote:
In response to the original poster, the only way you could do what you're suggesting is by totally overhauling Amia's geography.
I think some games use geography to localize similar players, where each faction or alignment has a home base from which areas expand outwards into a bigger and bigger middle ground, and then you have disputed lands in the middle. So if there were five factions or alignments or whatever, the whole map would be shaped like a five pointed star, with the home cities at the points and the middle being a general clusterf**k. Those are primarily PvP based worlds.
Amia's the total opposite of that, being composed of maps made by different people at different times with different ideas, and was stitched together almost impossibly like Frankenstein, which makes Disco Dr. Frankenstien. I mean that in the most complimentary way to Dr. Frankenstein.
Those different models have strengths and weaknesses. The star shaped worlds can be too prescribed, and the Frankenstein world can seem too ... weirdly put together and nonsensical. I think Amia's design, despite it's flaws, is a little better because it's more like a world. It doesn't necessarily make sense and the geography can be a bitch.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
FAQ
Search
Login
