I don't know Delerak, but I'm an Arm player, fairly new to the game (only since August of this past year). A few things the reader might want to know about a couple of things he pointed out:

1) He mentioned his character dying, then rezzing with the 2-hour grace period for new characters (it's two hours, not three, as he stated). His character then went to retrieve the corpse and an IMM promptly slayed his rezzed character, meaning he could no longer rezz (only one rezz per new PC).

Fact is, retreiving your corpse is a HUGE no-no in Armageddon, because your new incarnation would have no memory of dying, and therefore wouldn't even know to look for the old corpse. The IMM was right in removing his character from the game.

2) He mentioned about bringing a kank into the 'rinth and getting chewed out by an IMM for it.

Regardless of the size of the alleyways, the 'rinth is not a place where anyone would WANT to bring a kank. Why would he have done this in the first place, unless he just wanted to see if he could? And what kind of roleplaying is that? Answer: it isn't. It's deciding that you can take advantage of game mechanics in a way that they were never meant to be used.

Just because I *can* spar 24/7, doesn't mean I should, for example. Just because I *can* see people who hide well, walking into a room, doesn't mean I *should* have my character notice them and point them out each and every time. Just because I *can* listen to conversations at other tables, doesn't mean I should let my character be magically capable of hearing them from the other side of the room.

So in summary, I believe that Delerak was writing out of anger, and his own personal sense of RP, rather than taking into consideration the INTENT of the game and all its nuances.

I just thought I'd mention this.

Let me say that review was not out of anger.  If I was angry I would take it out on the mud itself.  It was a review, simple as that, I quit for good reasons, why play at a place that does nothing for you?  You have nothing to show, nothing but bull **** and a few memories of actual people who knew what it was like to take a role and mold it into something spectacular.  I gave you a couple  of things too, my latest ****, which was with a kank in the 'Rinth, (of course it warrents judgement and death by an imm who probably knows nothing of the 'rinth and just gave some reason he/she thought was right.) And the first **** I got into with the corpse.  So I guess that's the best way to teach a PC.  But I would have learned anyway without that.  What makes it better is people go back for their corpses all the ****ing time, and imms do nothing about it, make up your ****ing mind, don't take it out on a select group of players you do not like.

"When an immortal at a roleplay intensive mud uses their commands more often then their brains, it then becomes a roleplay interference mud, which I think Armageddon has become"

Thanks for replying, I always love to chat it up with someone who thinks they know the mud.  Besides, my point in the review wasn't if I was right by doing it IC, the fact was the imms use their ooc powers to control things ic to what they believe is right, which is of course not right.  Then again what mud has ever been a democracy toward the players?  None I would say.  Then again, without players you have no ****in' mud, without the ordinary people you have no country, no kingdom, no world.  Something to brood over, eh?

-Delerak

None? One of the most famous text muds ever, LambdaMoo, was run by the players. Of course, they eventually chose to give control back to the admins.

--matt

Never heard of it. How is this..
No online, and running mud?
-heh..

You can never have true democracy in a mud, only the illusion of it.  The admin can give the power to the players - but they can also take it back at any time they wish, and there is nothing the players can do about it.

I guess you can go as far to say you cannot have democracy anywhere.

Consider the US President, House, Senate, and all upper-tier political figures as Admin. What would stop them if they decided to attack Canada? Even if 95% of the public didn't want to attack Canada?

But, you really could have a democratic MUD. It'd be fairly simple, although not that successful.

The Arch Wizard creates a system that only he has permissions to change: every two years everyone in the Administration has their bits removed, then the players vote for the next person to have administration. The players who were voted into Admin/Builder/Imm get auto-generated users.

Then the Arch Wizard scrambles his password to the game and can only perform mandatory functions (like rebooting the server).

Probable? No

But it can be done pretty easily.

It doesn't have to be a pure democracy, when the player can actually influence the world without the interaction of an imm would be great, but still not possible at muds like Arm.

Real-world governments can be (and in the past have been) overthrown by the people. Muds, on the other hand, cannot - nor can the admin of one mud decide to "liberate" another; their power means nothing outside of their own game. You could have the mud equivilent of terrorism (bringing down the mud or its server, destroying data files, etc), but even that would have limited (and temporary) impact. Fortunately, unlike the real world, if you don't like your mud "government" its very easy to simply move elsewhere (or even create your own mud).

That is a dictatorship giving the illusion of democracy. The power rests in the hands of the players only for as long as the Arch Wizard wishes - and should he wish to disband the existing mud "government" (perhaps because, as is extremely likely, it was ruining the mud) there is absolutely nothing anybody could do about it.

The Arch Wizard (or head implementor, or whatever you wish to call the owner) is not the equivilent of a president - they are the equivilent of god. They create the very world in which people play, define its rules of reality, and are answerable to nobody. They can give others the right to run a democracy - and they can take that right away. They can be a "good" god or a "bad" god, they can rule with an iron fist, or ignore the players entirely, but at the end of the day it is always their decision. And that is what a dictator is - someone with absolute power.

What everybody is ignoring here is the simple fact:

The implementor is the one paying for the game.
He (Or she) is the one who created the game.
Without him, there can be no game.

So I think the imp has every reason in the world to be able to be a "dictator", because the players can't run the game they play at (That would cause lots of horrible things to happen, mainly cheating, or would create a state where the players become the dictators and nobody would play the game).

So what if the imp is a dictator? It's his game, he's paying for it, he made it...

Not "ignoring", but "taking for granted". I don't think anyone has disputed the fact that the implementor can do whatever s/he wishes, because that fact is plainly obvious. The dispute has instead concerned whether or not it is possible to have a mud run as a democracy - and my argument is that no, it is not possible to have a democracy, only an illusion of one.

In the end, even despotism is a more effective form of government than anarchy.

It is possible to have a democracy KaVir, you just need to be creative and playful, and not so factual.

Democracies breed autocracies, autocracies breed democracies, thus has it ever been.

You mean, you can imagine it's a democracy if you ignore the fact that it actually isn't? Lying to the players is bad enough, but lying to yourself is really silly. As I've said before, the best you can achieve is the illusion of democracy - but the real power always lies with the owner of the mud. The owner can overturn any decision at any time, cannot be voted out or removed from power, and are limited only by their own sense of what is "right" and "wrong". For better or worse, they are dictators, and IMO that's a good thing - I can think of few things conceptually worse from a development point of view than a mud run by the players.

Been playing Civilization, haven't we?

I'd like to contribute a few things, because this thread is rapidly moving to the point where it's being assumed that Armageddon = bad dictatorship that's driving away all the players. I'm not convinced that's true.

Some facts about the game:

We have about 20 active staff members, and a staff discussion board where things are argued/discussed/hashed out, including policies, building, and plotlines. This includes when a player tries to make a major change to the world - things are debated and a consensus reached.  So, right off the bat, you have 20 dictators, which should confuse things a bit.

I don't think you'll find a lot of muds with a stronger community. All staff comes from the playerbase, and usually those are longtime players. Players contribute all sorts of things - including artwork, poems, stories, documentation, movies, items, npcs, rooms, rumors, weather messages - and there's a lively discussion board at

The game's been around over 10 years. The staff has  a wealth of tradition, history, and social documentation, and a major concern is making things make RL sense and that player actions take the virtual world into account and make the mud a RP experience, not just staring at a text screen.  Admittedly, it's not everyone's cup of tea - some people prefer MMORGs, or hack and slash, or the Sims. That's what makes the gaming world interesting.

I also don't think you'll find a lot of games where things are so constantly worked on and improved. We just implemented a new bug tracking system, and I'm looking forward to seeing that in action, helping us figure out what takes priority - because we continue to get new ideas and inspirations - often from the players.

Sorry to interject in this thread, since admittedly I'm biased, but when the game's being attacked by someone who was repeatedly banned for OOC, for cheating, and for multiplaying and given second chances by multiple staff members, as well as  the same person who put up the "Armageddon Cheater's Board", I feel the need to say something.

I think most every MUD in the top 10 has had a disgruntled former player (usually one of legendary twinkiness and rulebreaking) come to air his dirty laundry on TMS.  I've seen it in countless threads, and I usually tend to just think "Oh, look, another whining moron who would rather bellyache than be civil."

There is no such thing as bad publicity, and though I disagree with 95% of what Delerak said in his review, and subsequent posts on the forums, we all know that no mud can appeal to everyone.  Delerak is not good for ArmageddonMUD, it isn't good for him, both sides have proven their point.  I wish him the best of luck in finding the world he so desires, or even creating it himself.

As far as players influincing the world, while I don't have as much knowledge about the game as Sanvean, I know that I myself have done marvelous things in game without much if any imm-support handed down for me.  I have also known very well that they were there for advice if I needed it, and coding/building support if my play required it.  

Delerak (known better to Armageddon players as Exodus) has allowed a breakdown of communication to fester and become this rage, which he apparently feels should be forced upon TMS forum members.  I do not agree with this action, and hope that disgruntled players will use these forums for what they were intended for, finding and making the best games for the players whose style they fit.

Lord Templar Hard Nose says, in tatlum:
"If the shoe doesn't fit, find another ass."

Regarding the democracy/dictatorship debate... If the admins turn the mud off, they won't be getting whatever they hope to get by leaving it on. The mud admins can't force players to play their mud rather than going somewhere else. (Oftentimes they don't even know what all the players are doing within their mud at any particular moment.) Nor can the players force mud admins to change their mud or work on a different mud. The mud community as a whole works on a pure free market capitalist system. Mud admins may have power over the mud, but they don't have power over the mud players, except what the players freely give them. Thus, there is no dictatorship, unless you are referring to an individual's dictatorship over himself or herself.

 If I want a completely RP game and everyone who comes on trys to turn it into a HnS or ooc chatroom, since muds are dictatorships I can individually ban people or just shut the entire thing down and try again some other time.  Do the players have a say in the decsion?  Only if the owner chooses, it is his kingdom.

Of course not, owners have absolutely no control on what the PEOPLE who play muds do.  Just the same if I type force Burr sing and dance, you dont stand up from your computer and start doing your best Travolta impression.  They DO have complete control over your connection/character once you log into their dictatorship.  They can't force the person behind the computer to do anything, but they can certainly restrict you from their game.

No but if they wanted to know, they could certainly find out.

Exactly, they have complete power over whatever they wish to enforce.  This makes a mud a dictatorship.

Again it seems you are confusing the RL person and the connection/character.  I can not make you log into my game, but once you do you grant me complete control over that character/connection.  No matter if I choose to use that power or not, it is still there and thereby the mud is still a dictatorship.