|
|||||||
This is a discussion on "Guidelines for an RPI mud." in the Top Mud Sites Advanced MUD Concepts forum : Originally Posted by shasarak That may be true, but I'm not sure it matters; it doesn't change the fact that it's a dangerously imprecise term that people have decided to use to describe an extremely precise concept. Just like PK or MUD or H&S. PK MUDs don't involve killing players and it's quite a "dangerously imprecise term" to suggest to players inexperienced with them that they do. MUDs don't have consist of "dungeons". H&S games need not be limited to only hacking and slashing as a ... |
|
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our MUD community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you are a registered member of the old TMS forums, please click here
|
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
|
|
#61 | ||||
|
Senior Member
|
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Jason |
||||
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
New Member
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
I think a lot of people are really missing the point on what Delerak and a lot of members of the RPI community are trying to achieve with guidelines like this.
We are not trying to invalidate the RP of other MUDs, we are simply trying to make it known what YOU, the gamer, should expect when you run across a MUD that calls itself an RPI. This has come from the fact that big three did not have a designation and were forced to call themselves MUDs when they were vastly different from all the various other categories of MUDs out there. Too much unforgiving code to be called a MUSH and such a strict RP environment as to really sour someone who was expecting one of the various styles of RP encouraged MUDs and even RP enforced. What the RPI standards are trying to do is not to say "HEY JACKASSES YOUR RP IS AWFUL AND I HATE YOU!" to any other style of MUD or game out there that does have "intense RP", but just to let people know what they're getting into when they begin to play an RPI. This has been fine for awhile, and everyone was happy until other MUDs starting picking up on the term that were vastly different experiences than one would expect from an RPI, they weren't necessarily bad games, they were just different enough that they couldn't really be accurately compared to the other games using the designation. And the whole point of a designation is to define something, whether people are getting their panties in a bunch because it's a term that holds some sort of importance outside of RPIs, it's not a perfect term, it was coined by those who played the RPIs, not something a haughty MUD owner used to fluff themselves up. And it's just stuck for a long time now. I suggest to those who are arguing against the use of the term. Give one of these RPIs a try, see how different they really are from other styles of MUDs. |
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 9
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Hi there. First post (took a few days to get validated, though I've been reading in the meantime). The only problem I see with this is there is no 'industry standard'. While I agree it would be nice to know what you're getting yourself into if a MUD advertises itself as RPI/RPE/Whatever they want to call themselves this week, who decides exactly what the guidelines are and which MUDs meet them? What stops a MUD that does not fit *insert random name here*'s version of an RPI from calling themselves an RPI? More importantly, how do the PLAYERS (you know, the people you are trying to entice to your MUDs) figure it all out?
![]() Slapping acronyms on MUDs is all well and good but, without a clear consensus across the board by every single MUD admin, it's confusing and sometimes misleading. One man's RPI is another man's nightmare and so on and so forth. Confusing the very players you want to entice is never a good idea, which is why I ignore the acronyms and read what the MUDs have to offer me. |
|
|
|
|
#64 | ||
|
Legend
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Threshold RPG
Posts: 1,019
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
And then once again, when PROVEN wrong, they lash out with personal attacks against your mud, the RP on your mud, your family, your spouse, your children, anything they can think of. Quote:
And they would come up with a non-vague, non-generic, non-qualitative term like RPI. They'd come up with a term like "PRP" - Prof's RP rule set or "ARP" Armageddon RP rule set or something of that nature. There is a very clear and simple path they could take if the goal was truly listing a set of features so people who like those features could find that kind of mud. But that path never gets taken. |
||
|
|
|
|
#65 | |||
|
Senior Member
|
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
I believe I mentioned it in one of these threads and have definitely mentioned it before that I favor the removal of such dishonest MUDs from the listings and their placement on a "Liar's List" denoting that they've used deceitful assessments of their games. Quote:
When done, a group of games begins to take shape. While most are descendents of those first three, there are examples of other games which are not. The feature set reveals a list of MUDs that match those parameters originally described as RPI. Just as those original MUDs were not disputed as RPI, so too can such a positive identification be derived for those games today bearing the same characteristics. The term gains clarity and usefulness once more. Quote:
Jason Last edited by prof1515 : 03-23-2008 at 09:02 AM. |
|||
|
|
|
|
#66 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 706
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
1) Labeling people who agree on a term "RPI defenders" is silly. There's nothing to defend, because RPI isn't an official title of anything. Unless you are referring to people who disagree with you being defensive, thus making you offensive, then I suggest you do away with the melodrama. 2) I am (theoretically) "one of the RPI defenders" and I haven't once lashed out with anything against your mud. I've never played your mud, I've never looked at your website, I've never had any interest, of any kind, at any time, in your mud. I have no idea if your mud's RP sucks. I don't know why you feel so threatened by RPIs that you feel you have to accuse me of insulting your mud. Maybe there's something to the phrase "thou doth protest too much," hm? Lay off the self-righteous sanctimonious histrionics long enough to realize that most people just don't give a damn about the term RPI, and the vast majority of people who do give a damn, are playing them. And, that vast majority, is a miniscule minority. And, you and your game is not included in that minority. Is that so hard to swallow? Does it hurt your feelings -that- much, that you have to pop a vein over it? |
|
|
|
|
|
#67 | ||
|
Legend
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Threshold RPG
Posts: 1,019
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Quote:
In fact, the latter is how the whole thing started up this go around. |
||
|
|
|
|
#68 | ||||||||||
|
Senior Member
|
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
1. The term RPI was first applied to a small group of MUDs and used both by and in reference to those MUDs by members of the MUD community besides those associated with said games. 2. Those MUDs share the same features agreed upon earlier in this discussion. 3. That the use of this term to describe three different games utilizing two independently-derived sets of near-identical code features which were later adhered to by more games including a third independently-derived codebase. 4. That the term RPI has since been appropriated for use by MUDs not bearing similarity to any of the above. Quote:
Despite whatever reason you have for doing so, these repeated attacks have only served to provoke the sort of response you then point to as a substitute for an actual counter argument to their points. Whether your behavior is a result of fear that some community members' assumption that the term RPI denotes greater quality or simply jealousy on your part in regard to that assumption, as accurate or inaccurate as it may be, I can not say. But your repeated denial of the purpose of this discussion has only been backed by accusation and aggravation of those individuals, myself included, who are attempting to distill a reasonable and accurate definition of the term RPI. I repeat that any comment I just made is directed solely at you and not your family because I have yet to hear any legitimate argument from you to counter those four points of discussion which have been arrived at before the derailing of this thread. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Here's to keeping the discussion civil and factual from here on out. Is that something we can all agree to? Take care, Jason Last edited by prof1515 : 03-20-2008 at 01:58 PM. Reason: Comma splice! |
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Senior Member
|
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Now, let us return to the purpose of this discussion and summarize what features were defined by the invention of the term RPI. Ideally, it'd be nice if the digression were separated from this thread but as I'm not a moderator, that would be up to one of them.
Delerak, as this puppy's your thread and thus far you had kept track, I happily defer the honor of keeping the results of this investigation presented as updated (or maybe I'm just too lazy to type it out myself :-D). |
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 9
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Jason,
Thank you for such clear responses to my statements. I've learned a lot by reading this thread. Namely, which MUDs I couldn't be paid to try out. It will be interesting to me to see if some kind of consensus is actually met in what constitutes an RPI. |
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Legend
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Threshold RPG
Posts: 1,019
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
|
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 9
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Legend
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Threshold RPG
Posts: 1,019
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
|
|
|
|
|
#74 | |
|
Senior Member
|
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
You're welcome.
Quote:
I believe Delerak had a good intention in attempting to define the features. I myself have spent well over half of a decade doing so (ever since the first time I witnessed dispute over the term and back to a time when I still played H&S as well as RPI MUDs). One would think an objective examination of comparitive features would be enough but the tendency of people to simply disregard anything that doesn't fit their preference, as it's been called, means that no matter how sufficient the evidence, some simply won't accept anything less than what they want the answer to be. All one has to do to know this isn't confined merely to MUD terminology is to look at the unwillingness of some to accept the theory of evolution over the creationist mythology. Regardless of the preponderance of even the strongest evidence in support, people don't like to accept even the strongest of arguments if those arguments contradict what they want to believe. That said, I reiterate my hope that Delerak and all those interested in discerning as objective and exact a list of criteria possible will continue to examine and compare all the MUDs in question in order to arrive at an accurate definition of the term. Take care, Jason Last edited by prof1515 : 03-23-2008 at 09:32 AM. Reason: Typo. That's what I get for typing quickly. |
|
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
New Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Home MUD: Carrion Fields
Posts: 21
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
My listing for RPI feature set would be features that help in making the roleplaying atmosphere more intense. Here are few features I'd expect a true RPI to have. Personally, I wouldn't use some "historical three" as a guideline, as games evolve and implement better features. Thus, I'd like to propose a following development goals for any game (I would not restrict RPI concept for MUD use, as one can say RPI MUD to specify) that wants to call itself RPI:
-One important factor is realistic-based character advancement, which means that the most effective way of character advancement would be similar to the way it is done in real life. Thus, you'd only learn so much coding from typing Treshold's code snippet over and over. The skill based/level based discussion is sort of moot, as the advancement is measured with integers in both cases. Thus, the important part is the realisticness of the advancement, not complete hiding the code or levels, as the player behaviour will be the same if the game is properly coded. Only reason to hide the system is players min-maxing the system due to the inferior nature of the system design in RPI-sense. Thus, the hiding of code itself shouldn't be a requirement, but can be used as a trick to make it easier to build an RPI, as it protects your inferior code from being discovered. -Realistic game physics. This means that your actions have consequences, whatever is appropriate in that particular world, such as jumping off a cliff would cause you to fall down if a force pulling you downwards, such as gravity, is present in the enviroment and you do not have means to counter it. Ideally, people wouldn't be able to do what is not possible in their world. Permadeath is not a requirement per se, but there should be a convincing explanation why the resurrection is possible RP-wise. -Realistic game culture. Actions should also have realistic social consequences. For example, if you clear out an area hack&slash style, the heinous mass murder should have some consequences, such as the town you committed your crime in turning hostile towards you, providing that the deed does not go unnoticed. Anyway, the world would be affected by the actions of players and thus, working as a deterrent for heinous deeds if the players do not wish to face the consequences. Thus, hack & slashing creatures wouldn't be against the rules per se, but the adverse effects would automatically create an enviroment where it is a rare deed. -Intuitive user interface. The game system should be simple enough to use so that the mechanics do not become a hindrance to roleplay. Last edited by DurNominator : 03-23-2008 at 10:20 AM. Reason: extra dash removed |
|
|
|
|
#76 |
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 202
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
I don't care what we call them. RPI's RPXPDMODS XYZS TEAANDBISCUITS just so long as we can find them when we're looking for them and avoid them when we're not.
|
|
|
|
|
#77 | |
|
Senior Member
|
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#78 | |||||
|
New Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Levels for skills - This seems acceptable. Levels for characters - Even you have said calling someone a "Level 10 Fighter" is silly. Although regardless I wouldn't make either one a definition on what is or isn't an RPI. I'm just responding to the assertion that levels are IC. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
So are you saying that RPI's cannot have global channels such as a newbie channel? I could go on at length about why this is wrong (IMO), but I'll see if this is truly what you're saying. |
|||||
|
|
|
|
#79 | ||||
|
Senior Member
|
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
RPIs are games with coded systems just like other MUDs. The difference is not the existance of any form of such scale but rather the existance of such knowledge to the player. Behind-the-scenes the numbers still exist but a player in an RPI will never see them.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If I recall correctly, it was Brody who once cited a difference between the terms "role-play" and "roll-play". The former has nothing to do with levels and skills and levels and skills have nothing to do with role-play. At best, the possession of a skill can dictate the appropriateness of role-playing the use of such ability. In this regard, that's where code steps in to maintain the standard of what can and can not be done in role-play and how effective such abilities may be represented. Quote:
Take care, Jason |
||||
|
|
|
|
#80 | ||||
|
New Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If instead we created a newbie channel where they could ask all trusted players a question (such as "how do I fill up my waterskin?" and had the trusted players answer the question without needing to be in the same physical room, this would be a global channel. Does that mean its no longer an RPI? Of course not. Which shows the limitation of simply documenting what current RPIs do or do not have. |
||||
|
|
|
|
#81 | |||||||
|
Senior Member
|
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Just as a mammal may or may not have a tail, so too may a RPI have or not have some features such as ranged weapons. But just as a mammal has hair and not scales, so too would the existance of some features or the absence of others determine if a MUD were or were not RPI. The point of this discussion has been to try and determine what those specific features were that were shared by the games that were referred to not only as RP MUDs but as RPI MUDs. Quote:
Quote:
The confusion seems to be over the misinterpretation of Role-Play (RP) MUD and Role-Play Intensive (RPI) MUD being interchangeable. While many today use them as such, that's akin to saying Kleenex in reference to a tissue. Kleenex is not the general term for the thin paper object, tissue is. Kleenex is a specific type of tissue. Likewise, RP MUD (general term) and RPI MUD (specific term denoting RP MUDs with a particular feature set) are not the same thing. RPIs are a specific type of RP MUD. All RPIs are Role-Play MUDs but not all Role-Play MUDs are RPI. Quote:
Quote:
Take care, Jason |
|||||||
|
|
|
|
#82 | ||
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,160
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Quote:
Using that same logic - that whatever doesn't share the characteristics originally applied to a class of MUDs shouldn't label themselves an RPI - would invalidate an RPI MUD (or indeed essentially any MUD listed on TMS) from calling itself a MUD. They don't share the same set of features that the original games to which the term MUD was applied had. In fact, they share almost none of the same set of features of the original MUD. If you accept that something can be a MUD even with vastly different features from what was originally called a MUD, then I don't see why you wouldn't accept that something can be an RPI even with different features than the original MUDs to which the RPI label was applied. Language and its meaning evolves. --matt |
||
|
|
|
|
#83 | |||
|
Senior Member
|
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Quote:
The problem is that the term didn't evolve into use so much as it was simply ignored and used either out of ignorance or deliberate deceit. Language may evolve but we're talking more than language. We're talking taxonomy. Quote:
Take care, Jason |
|||
|
|
|
|
#84 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Name: Chris
Location: Wolverhampton, UK
Posts: 357
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
RPI is a completely different kettle of fish. This, according to you and players of "RPI's", stands for RolePlay Intensive. This is a phrase which could, and does, mean something in normal english usage. A MUD that doesn't fit your criteria could still be roleplay intensive regardless of whether you agree with the features of that game. Claiming that these other games can't use RPI when it is for all intents and purposes a normal, acceptable acronym because a bunch of people think it should only apply to games with a certain set of features is like saying I've decided other MUDs can't use the acronym RPE (RolePlay Enforced) any more because in mine and my mates game we enforce RP by having one staff member per player follow them around enforcing their RP, and the code watches to make sure you're RP-ing, so other games claiming to be RP-Enforced are inferior. If the initial three games mentioned as "RPI's" want to have their own special acronym to signify a certain set of features, as has already been mentioned they need to come up with something a bit less generic. Just because something is in common usage doesn't make it right. |
|
|
|
|
|
#85 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Emily's Shop
Posts: 60
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Exactly! ![]() It's also worth pointing out that some of the other previously cited "counter-examples" are actually nothing of the sort. "MUD" is a perfectly good term, given that it doesn't stand for "Multi-User Dungeon" any more, it stands for "Multi-User Domain". And both "Hack & Slash" and "PK" are actually quite reasonable phrases to use to describe what they describe: PK means "killing characters controlled by players rather than by the computer" - "player-killing" is a reasonable and unambiguous abbreviation for that (unless you think we need to distinguish it from systems where the actual human players are killed in real life while playing). However, "RPI" here is being used in a sense that is different from what one normally means by the phrase "role-play intensive", and the phrase "role-play intensive" could be (and is) used in a far wider context. If you actually say out loud "no, just because a MUD is role-play intensive doesn't mean it's Role-Play Intensive" you can see quite how inapparopriate the term is. Again, I've nothing at all against RPIs, but the choice of "RPI" as a term to describe them was simply wrong. The fact that people who play "RPI" MUDs were the ones who coined the term doesn't make it any less wrong. Put it this way: if they'd decided to call them "Armageddon-like" MUDs, would we even be having this discussion? (sits back and waits for prof1515 to say "We're not talking about role-play intensive MUDs, we're talking about Role-Play Intensive MUDs!" as if that actually meant something...) |
|
|
|
|
|
#86 | |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,160
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
![]() --matt |
|
|
|
|
|
#87 | |
|
Legend
Join Date: Aug 2007
Name: NewWorlds
Home MUD: New Worlds
Posts: 1,169
![]() ![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Once he understands that many do not and will not accept this (his) definition, perhaps the insanity will end and an more reasonable discussion will ensue from what Delerak originally begain as a round table about what everyone considered an RPI. Let's face it, the three threads have gone into circles of the same argument. RPI is simply a poor and ambiquous term for a few MUDs to demand appropriation of said term. |
|
|
|
|
|
#88 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 32
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
Truth be told these days following so much mis-representation, bickering and general anti-rpi idiots, pro-rpi snobs.. very few players actually care about the term or distinguish a mud by it. Mud adminstrators may get up in arms about this being called that and what things are classified as, who breaches what liscence.. but the players.. just like to play ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#89 |
|
Legend
Join Date: Aug 2007
Name: NewWorlds
Home MUD: New Worlds
Posts: 1,169
![]() ![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
A point made a couple of times I believe and a good point at that. It seems odd that someone would speak like they are the voice of the gang at RPIMUD, yet none of the originals have even commented.
|
|
|
|
|
#90 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 706
![]() |
Re: Guidelines for an RPI mud.
Quote:
You see, it really doesn't matter what the letters of RPI "stands for." It matters what the term has come to mean over the years, for people wanting to play a certain type of game. YOU can change what it means to yourself, as much as you'd like. But when I and dozens of other people who have played this particular type of game, are in the market for a similar type of game, with similar criteria, WE will be looking specifically for that similar criteria. And we will be calling it RPI. And if we see an advertisement for a game that claims it's an RPI, and we go to the website, and don't see that it's got that criteria, and then we actually attempt to play the game (which most of us wouldn't do, if the info wasn't on the website, because THAT is one of the criteria too), and see that it isn't permadeath, or that it is pay to play, or that it has a HUGE "verblist" but no emote system, then we will be very disappointed and know that we were deceived - whether intentionally or not. Because as you all know, RPI stands for Remove Paper Insert. |
|
|
|