[lckychrmsrr]

I have been looking for a new mud for a few months now and can't seem to find one that quite suits my tastes. I don't really have specific requirements such as classless/leveless systems but would like something with Pk. I am looking for an RPI MUD (no MUSHes) and would like your suggestions on what to go check out.

Please do not recommend...
1) SOI
2) Arm
3) or any game that isn't free to play

I look forward to seeing what all is out there that I haven't discovered.

[fjin]

You didn't forbiddened to mention Harshlands so it should be mentioned. There is very good atmosphere, and real Roleplayers do like that place.

[WarHound]

I'll second Harshlands. Though I've never played there religiously, I did enjoy the time I spent there. Check it out...

Shattered Kingdoms is also a pretty solid game.

[dragon master]

Harshlands is the only other RPI that I know of besides the two you mentioned. Maybe you mean RP enforced mud? There are plenty of them. (RPI is a more strict term)

Harshlands is similar to SoI codewise (but with less advanced code in my opinion) but has a completely different setting (including a LOT more religious influences) and a lot less players.

If you want a PK mud, Carrion Fields isn't an RPI but it is RP enforced and focuses very heavily on PK.

[Kaleisha]

Everybodies definition of RPI seems to be slightly different these days. And even within that particular area there are a multitude of muds with differing playing styles. Someone who wants RPI might consider that levels is not a roleplay device therefore any game that includes a level system is not for them. So since you were fairly loose in defining your boundries I shall give the game I haunt a shameless plug.

Evarayn has been running less than a year, it is based on entirely original code. Not adapted from another code base or mutated, but built from the ground up. Some people find it hard to adjust to playing there because they prefer the familiar syntax and routines of what they are used to, but many stick it out and become perfectly at home (just think what it was like with your first mud and how foreign it all was). We have a unique skills system and plyers gain points to learn more skills through time in the world - which is a plus for roleplay as you are not forced to spend time hunting things to gain useful skills, instead you can be acting out a scene with a group in  village somewhere.

We are a small world, if you are looking for a large population then evarayn is not for you, but we are building playerbase steadily. Gods are active and IC, we have cities and factions, societies and continents. Sailing ships for travel and beasts you can breed yourself and ride. All needs are provided by other players, cooking, crafting, smithing and repairs. We do have player to player combat, pk is not forbidden but there is expected to be ic reasoning behind it. We're not permadeath, though we do have some interesting penalties from death which effectively weaken you until you attend a renewal ceremony (performed by players who have chosen the sage path)

I won't rave here any more, I could do so for hours! check through our website evarayn.com and read up the histories and information posted. If you think we're what you are looking for come on by and try it. It won't cost you a cent, even if you don't think it is what you are looking for come by and try it, you never know until you do

[Valg]

My impression is that "RPI" is jargon- it's a term invented by people with a certain style of game to describe their own style of game.  It's no more instructive than going to the grocery store and seeing "New and Improved" or "Deluxe".

There are a lot of games where the method and goal involves good roleplaying, and where roleplaying is required of all players.

We fit the bill of what you ask for in your original post- we're 100% free to play (no "pay-for-perks" or similar systems which amount to "you can play for free as a second-class citizen"), we require roleplay from all players, we have PK, etc.  We're a well-established MUD- up since 1994, with a large and diverse playerbase.

This is an ad from the summer describing our basic philosophy and perks.  This is a more focused ad, which 'zooms in' on our thief class (one of 16).  Check both out (macrocosm and microcosm), and see if anything there interests you.

[dragon master]

Originally Posted by (Valg @ Dec. 17 2004,13:50) My impression is that "RPI" is jargon- it's a term invented by people with a certain style of game to describe their own style of game.  It's no more instructive than going to the grocery store and seeing "New and Improved" or "Deluxe". There are a lot of games where the method and goal involves good roleplaying, and where roleplaying is required of all players. We fit the bill of what you ask for in your original post- we're 100% free to play (no "pay-for-perks" or similar systems which amount to "you can play for free as a second-class citizen"), we require roleplay from all players, we have PK, etc.  We're a well-established MUD- up since 1994, with a large and diverse playerbase. This is an ad from the summer describing our basic philosophy and perks.  This is a more focused ad, which 'zooms in' on our thief class (one of 16).  Check both out (macrocosm and microcosm), and see if anything there interests you.

The point of RPI is to a term for a certain style of game. It is a game that focuses on roleplaying above all else, including PK, level-gaining and getting your character uber 1337.

In an RPI, people are shown by descriptions not names that are somehow mysteriously known. There are no levels or experience points. People don't mysteriously pop back when they die. When you die you make a new character. Character's have to go through an application process before being created. There are no global channels(except maybe a newbie channel, I think). RPIs are sort of like the hardcore roleplaying games. Somepeople like them some people don't.

Nowhere have I said that RPIs are "better" than other RP enforced muds. They are a more specific type of mud and some people may like them while others may not. Some people might like the immersion into the world created by an RPI. Some people might not like not being able to go around killing mobs, players, or gaining levels. Some people might not like righting character applications. And some people might just not like the extensive amount of RP that is involved.

It is a term that is used to help people identify the type of Mud it is not saying that it is better or "new and improved". In my previous post I even recommended Carrion fields. It is not an RPI, but that doesn't mean it isn't good or that it isn't RP required. But somebody who likes playing RPIs, might not like Carrion fields and will probably leave annoyed when their character keeps getting PKed or when people they kill come back to life. Other people might like the adrenaline rush provided by PK and love Carrion fields.

RPI muds are a type of mud. They are in no way "better" or "worse" than other RP muds except in people's opinions. If an RP enforced mud were, RPIs would be apples. Some people might like apples better than oranges but this doesn't mean one is "better". Even though neither is "better" a distinction still needs to be made so somebody doesn't bite into an apple thinking it is an orange or bite into an orange thinking it is an apple.

edit: Evarayn is not an RPI, just wanted to clear that up. (it doesn't have permadeath, has experience points I think, and has an OOC channel, etc.) This doesn't mean is a bad mud, as I said before.

Also, Evaryn is "pay for perks", so they aren't 100% free.

[Jenred]

This is from Wiki-Pedia

Originally Posted by RPI MUDs Another lesser known variant of a MUD are RPI MUDs, Role-Play Intensive Multi-User Dungeon. RPI MUDs center themselves around playing out specific roles as if the role were real. Realism is often blended in with fantasy in these types of MU*s. In general, the objective of the game is not to complete computer-generated quests or to hack-and-slash monsters in order to gain levels and equipment, but to collaborate with fellow players to create complex and multi-layered storylines in a cohesive gameworld. RPIs are very different from other MU* because of this. The majority of RPI MUDs are levelless and classless, focusing instead on skills and crafts that players may pursue during the lifetime of their characters. RPIs also differ from MUSHes in that they retain the hard code of a MUD in deciding such variable outcomes as combat, magickal spells, and so on. RPI MUDs could be considered giant plays where the setting or world is the theater, and the players are the actors as well as the viewers. RPIs are a newer branch of MUDs in general, but have still been around for a long period of time

[Felomar]

Originally Posted by (Jenred @ Dec. 19 2004,00:41) This is from Wiki-Pedia Originally Posted by RPI MUDs Another lesser known variant of a MUD are RPI MUDs, Role-Play Intensive Multi-User Dungeon. RPI MUDs center themselves around playing out specific roles as if the role were real. Realism is often blended in with fantasy in these types of MU*s. In general, the objective of the game is not to complete computer-generated quests or to hack-and-slash monsters in order to gain levels and equipment, but to collaborate with fellow players to create complex and multi-layered storylines in a cohesive gameworld. RPIs are very different from other MU* because of this. The majority of RPI MUDs are levelless and classless, focusing instead on skills and crafts that players may pursue during the lifetime of their characters. RPIs also differ from MUSHes in that they retain the hard code of a MUD in deciding such variable outcomes as combat, magickal spells, and so on. RPI MUDs could be considered giant plays where the setting or world is the theater, and the players are the actors as well as the viewers. RPIs are a newer branch of MUDs in general, but have still been around for a long period of time

Interesting, according to Wiki-pedia MUSHes can't use code to resolve combat and such. If that's the definition you're going by, then Chiaroscuro would be an RPI MUD, or at least partly so, because we have a taskroll system and a crafting system that silently rolls your skills to determine the success/quality of your output.

I wouldn't recommend walking into Chia and calling it a MUD though. There's certain MUSHers that hate that.

Basically, according to Wiki-pedia, an RPI MUD is just a MUSH that uses code to determine success or failure. Which makes it seem that either RPI MUDs are just MUSHes for people who want roleplay but hate MUSHes by name, or MUSHes are RPI MUDs for people who associate MUD with hack-n-slash mob killing only.

Originally Posted by We fit the bill of what you ask for in your original post- we're 100% free to play (no "pay-for-perks" or similar systems which amount to "you can play for free as a second-class citizen")

To supply a view from an opposite bias, not all pay-for-perks systems make those who don't pay second class citizens. It depends entirely on what the perks are and how they affect gameplay. For instance, on Chiaroscuro (which I would classify as a limited pay-for-perks system), most perks are things you don't actually need to excel. A noble can go around for years without ever actually paying to have a keep built on grid, for instance. You can buy your very own special custom sword and it will have a cool name, a detailed description, and an interesting (and not always flattering) background history, but with the exception of the occasional special build from Bahamut, it will still be the same combat value as the generically described sword that the guy you're fighting bought at the NPC merchant. Even Bahamut's special builds don't exceed +1 over standard weapon strengths; no +12 swords of devastation here. This is because Bahamut is also the guy who spends hours of his time poking about through the weaponry and armor and rebalancing it all periodically just because he's cool that way.

Basically, it's quite possible to have pay-for-perks without those who don't pay becoming unimportant in the world. It requires that the admin really set out to be sure this is the case, and not all games do. Like anything, it varies from game to game in how it's implemented.

[Jenred]

MUD is a general term (at least to me). Its a text base game that has a heavy code presence, lots of coded items, rooms, etc. MUSH is another general term. Its usually light on code, rooms, and items, and alot of time people don't even use coded combat but rather emotes.

Then there are subclasses like RPI mud, H&S mud, Rp-encouraged, sex mud, etc. Each has various definitions and its really up to the person viewing to decide.

But for the most part, RPI muds have a very definitive look and feel to them. Putting such an emphasis on roleplaying as to require character applications to control the type of characters (usually to preserve the games environment, keep characters semi-permanent in their appearance, and prevent description silliness). There is usually few 'numbers' (like no damage numbers, no skill numbers, no levels, etc.).

Anyways, there is a big difference in my opinion between RP-encouraged/enforced/required muds and RPI muds like Harshlands, Armageddon, Fourlands, Southlands, SoI, etc. And I feel that wiki-pedia has done a good job expressing the common meaning of the different terms, at least from what I've heard from other players.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Jenred @ Dec. 20 2004,04:04) MUD is a general term (at least to me). Its a text base game that has a heavy code presence, lots of coded items, rooms, etc. MUSH is another general term. Its usually light on code, rooms, and items, and alot of time people don't even use coded combat but rather emotes.

MUSH isn't just a term - it's the name of a derivative. MUSH is derived from TinyMUD, just like Merc is derived from Diku, and they all belong to the MUD genre.

To quote Dr Richard Bartle (author of the original MUD) concerning the usage of the term 'MUD':

http://www.informit.com/articles/article.asp?p=99703

Originally Posted by Although this term is still in common currency to the extent that it has made it into several regular dictionaries, it is not universally accepted. In particular, many players of certain of its subcategories see it as implying some kind of combat-oriented world view, and prefer the term MU* instead (MU for multi-user and * for anything that could conceivably follow). This would be analogous to calling dinosaurs *saurs on the grounds that "dinosaurs" vaguely implies that they were all pea-brained carnivorous monsters, whereas in fact many were pea-brained herbivorous monsters—and hey, there are pterosaurs and plesiosaurs, too. ("Dino" comes via New Latin from the Greek deinos, meaning "fearful." Saurus merely means "lizard.")

Originally Posted by (Felomar @ Dec. 19 2004,15:33) Interesting, according to Wiki-pedia MUSHes can't use code to resolve combat and such.

According to Tychepedia, any idiot can edit a Wikipedia entry and they often do. Time to fix it. ;-)


p.s. There, is that better?

I was going to add RPI players tend to be extraordinarily anal-centric, unimaginative and highly annoying hobbitses, but I figured they didn't want opinions no matter how highly considered.

[prof1515]

I find most RPI MUDders to be far more creative, imaginative, and mature than your typical MUDder. From my experience they also tend to be older, which could account for the last part.

The term Role-Playing Intensive seems to define itself. While some do not understand the grammatical reason the "intensive" follows the "role-playing" and not vice-versa, it's rather important. Role-Playing Intensive suggests that the MUD is centered (intensively) around role-playing, not hack-and-slash or anything else. To that end, the code is designed around the goal (ie. role-playing) rather than the game world being designed around the code. Levels are removed, references to hp are often removed, game mechanics irrelevant to role-play are either removed or hidden, and the world is designed independent of the code's characteristics (so rationalization for things like levels and killed PCs being "ressurected" because the code isn't perma-death are eliminated).

Sadly, the number of RPIs out there can probably be counted on one, and maybe a finger or two on a second, hand. And not all of those are that great. Still, given the time-intensive nature of developing a good character, it becomes hard to play more than two or three simultaneously anyway.

Take care,

Jason

Originally Posted by (prof1515 @ Dec. 20 2004,20:25) I find most RPI MUDders to be far more creative, imaginative, and mature than your typical MUDder. From my experience they also tend to be older, which could account for the last part.

I'd suggest they be younger than your typical role-player and older than your typical hack-n-slahser, but then that's such a relative term and a broad generalization. Tweeners on the role-playing spectrum.

Originally Posted by (prof1515 @ Dec. 20 2004,20:25) Role-Playing Intensive suggests that the MUD is centered (intensively) around role-playing, not hack-and-slash or anything else.

Some consider that Intensive part immature. It's also a false conceit when better role-play occurs elsewhere. Only in an RPI will one be forced to role-play for the enjoyment of the objects, mobiles and hidden staff. Such is not the way of other role-players who role-play for the entertainment of their fellow players and themselves. RPI is role-play for the hopelessly left-brained and the tragically Diku-centric mud universe, IMNSHO.

Originally Posted by (prof1515 @ Dec. 20 2004,20:25) Sadly, the number of RPIs out there can probably be counted on one, and maybe a finger or two on a second, hand. And not all of those are that great. Still, given the time-intensive nature of developing a good character, it becomes hard to play more than two or three simultaneously anyway.

There's more than enough. There's a reason it's the smallest segment of even the role-playing population.

[Traithe]

Originally Posted by (Tyche @ Dec. 21 2004,01:41) It's also a false conceit when better role-play occurs elsewhere.

Huh, that's odd - and a little disappointing.

I don't see any supporting evidence for that blanket statement of yours. Let me translate it into a statement that's a bit more honest for those that might have missed it: in Tyche's ever-so-venerable opinion, it's a false conceit because better role-play occurs elsewhere.

Given the fact that Armageddon, a fairly well-known RPI, averages 60-80 players on nightly or so and over 200 for large events, and given the fact that my own MUD generally averages 30-50 a night and over 100 for large events, I'm going to hazard a wild guess here and say there are substantial numbers of people who disagree with you.

Come to think of it, with the supposedly shrinking number of MU* players these days, we could probably count the numbers of MUDs on the entire internet with similar or larger number of players online on two or three hands - less, if we remove the large commercial games.

So really, come off your high horse already. The genre appeals to some people, and doesn't appeal to others. End of story. If your issue with games like this is some sort of perceived elitism, I can't imagine that turning around and doing the same thing (or worse) will do much for your moral high ground - really, I'd expect better from someone with your obvious intellect.

[The_Disciple]

Originally Posted by (Traithe @ Dec. 21 2004,07:44) So really, come off your high horse already. The genre appeals to some people, and doesn't appeal to others. End of story. If your issue with games like this is some sort of perceived elitism

There really is an elitism among "RPI" players, at least as expressed on TMS' forums.

I don't disagree with you at all in asfar as this genre appeals to some players and not others.  It's not the kind of game I personally prefer to play, but I can respect what's been created on the better works of the genre for the quality games they are.

Everyone thinks the game they choose to play is the best.  It's just the way of things.  The difference, I think, is that RPI players tend to project this opinion that the fact that they choose to play an RPI makes them more mature or adult than players who choose a differing style of game.  Whereas, for example, a H&S mudder will tend to think he has the better or more fun game, but he won't call you a child, immature, or socially deficient for preferring something else.

[Traithe]

Originally Posted by (The_Disciple @ Dec. 22 2004,00:55) There really is an elitism among "RPI" players, at least as expressed on TMS' forums. ... The difference, I think, is that RPI players tend to project this opinion that the fact that they choose to play an RPI makes them more mature or adult than players who choose a differing style of game.

Well - you do realize that this is precisely my point, yes?

"I dislike members of group X because they all stereotype members of group Y."

If you're going to make blanket statements like that accusing a group of elitism you may as well be honest enough to admit that in the process you're doing pretty much the same thing.

I'm sure there are players in group X who do stereotype members of group Y - but there're also plenty of them who don't.

This is why stereotypes really have no place in reasoned discussion. If you're going to get up on a soapbox and disparage someone else for using them, do be careful that you aren't using them yourself.

I've heard that shoepolish doesn't have a very pleasant taste.

[The_Disciple]

Originally Posted by (Traithe @ Dec. 22 2004,01:24) Well - you do realize that this is precisely my point, yes? "I dislike members of group X because they all stereotype members of group Y." If you're going to make blanket statements like that accusing a group of elitism you may as well be honest enough to admit that in the process you're doing pretty much the same thing.

Yes, I got that. What I'm saying is a little different.

I don't have a problem with stereotyping, although I certainly don't think all RPI players think that way and say things like that -- just a lot of (again, not all) of the ones that post here. That's not so much a stereotype as it is a matter of record.

The problem is more about having the opinion of others, stereotyping them if you like, that if they don't enjoy the kind of game you do, they are immature, childish, or "not ready for a serious game."

I don't recall you, for example, making a statement of that kind, but there are a lot of them going around here.

Put succinctly: it's one thing to think your favored game is the best, and that everyone else is playing an inferior game. (This follows, since yours is the best! It's another entirely to conclude that the reason that players choose other games is because the are stupid, unable to roleplay, not adults, etc.

[Valg]

My original point was this:

There are a lot of games where the method and goal involves good roleplaying, and where roleplaying is required of all players.

RPI is one style of this. It isn't the only way to roleplay, and depending on your personal tastes it may not be the best way to roleplay.

For example, I think the games in the genre tend to over-focus on tedious tasks like preparing food, repairing worn armor, etc, and that this focus takes away from roleplay by forcing the player to spend a lot of time on these sorts of tasks. To go back to my novel-writing analogy, a story involving travel doesn't pause to describe the main characters preparing their food every time that realism dictates they would have eaten. It occurs "off camera", but most RPI engines don't allow this- you're forced to go through the motions each time, learn skills related to these tasks, gather ingredients, or suffer starvation.

Our approach is to push that kind of activity away from the foreground, precisely so the player can focus on more interesting things- adventure, storytelling, etc. You need to purchase food and eat, but we don't want to make a big production about it, so it's relatively easy.

Now, we keep food/hunger in the game because we feel like you can do cool things with it:
- certain abilities can inflict hunger
- thieves can steal, poison, and re-plant food onto unwary victims
- woodsy types can often locate food in preferred terrain
- certain foods come with extra benefits
- an especially lightweight and nourishing stash of food can serve as a minor 'treasure' in an area
- etc.

But the important thing is that these cool things aren't burdened by a lot of the things that we feel would slow the game down. Some people like the detail of a system that goes through all the motions, and plays more like a simulation. Other people like our way of abstracting it because they see it as distracting to other elements of the roleplay process- and also because the time we would be spending implementing food preparation is spent implementing quests, battles, spells, etc.

Saying that one style is "roleplay intensive" and the other, by default, isn't... strikes me as labeling, much like my aforementioned example of "deluxe". It's two styles of achieving the same goal.

[Dunestalker]

Originally Posted by Saying that one style is "roleplay intensive" and the other, by default, isn't... strikes me as labeling, much like my aforementioned example of "deluxe". It's two styles of achieving the same goal.

My opinon of it is that the "intensive" part of it is from going into the detail of playing out those mundane things that you say "slows the game down" and detracts from what you say is the most important part of it.

The "intensive" part, in my opinion is having to incorporate those "mundane" things into your rp and have to incorporate the fear of permanent death into it as well. Having to constantly make those emotions, physical needs and such a real part of your character where in others that lack this...you do not.

That is my opinion of it.

Originally Posted by Huh, that's odd - and a little disappointing. I don't see any supporting evidence for that blanket statement of yours. Let me translate it into a statement that's a bit more honest for those that might have missed it: in Tyche's ever-so-venerable opinion, it's a false conceit because better role-play occurs elsewhere.

Well yes.  IMNSHO or IMESVO if you want.  The RPIers, at least those vocal enough to prolificly post on the subject, have adopted the same conceit that the old Tiny MU* crowd did with Hack-n-Slash.  Yeah better role-play exists outside of RPI muds.  The "intensity" part of the acronym is lame, but we've argued over that before.  You're not any more "intense" than those playing at places like TrekMush or ElendorMush.  What you really mean is "complete immersion" or at least dwarves passably faking it while gaming the game.  Not that there's anything wrong with logging into a RPI mud and having one of your "intense" RPIers send you whispers or telpathic tells on how stupid you are for picking the staff over the sword, because well the sword is much better than the staff (actually happened to me on an RPI mud).  Not that there's anything wrong with trying to enjoy the game with a friend and being thrown into different hometowns and not being able to play together, let alone even communicate with each other ooc-ly (that too happens).  

Originally Posted by Given the fact that Armageddon, a fairly well-known RPI, averages 60-80 players on nightly or so and over 200 for large events, and given the fact that my own MUD generally averages 30-50 a night and over 100 for large events, I'm going to hazard a wild guess here and say there are substantial numbers of people who disagree with you.

Ah but size is inimical to good role-play.  Someone said that the quality of role-play is inversely proportional to the number of players.  I think they were right.  Nevertheless Shangrila averages 300 players a night and has hit close to 600 for special events.  Of course size may matter there. *kof*  And I'd imagine being enslaved and whipped by hot chicks in leather might well be more intense than hanging with hairy footed hobbitses.  But there are dozens of other role-playing non-RPI muds between 25-50 players with somewhat more traditional vein of scifi/fantasy.    

Originally Posted by Come to think of it, with the supposedly shrinking number of MU* players these days, we could probably count the numbers of MUDs on the entire internet with similar or larger number of players online on two or three hands - less, if we remove the large commercial games.

None of the ones I named are even listed here, despite being larger.  One might consider the possibility that a significant group of mudders don't read TMS, TMC, or Mudmagic.  Why should they?  They have their own communities.  I will say the TMS role-playing board is better than the other two.  I see at least some non-RPIers, but just as intense if not moreso, mud role-players have posted there.

Originally Posted by So really, come off your high horse already. The genre appeals to some people, and doesn't appeal to others. End of story. If your issue with games like this is some sort of perceived elitism, I can't imagine that turning around and doing the same thing (or worse) will do much for your moral high ground - really, I'd expect better from someone with your obvious intellect.

Hey it's not me that thinks they are better because of this intensity thang.  It doesn't appeal to me obviously.  My experience is the "I" in RPI on some of these games stands for "Invasive rectal monitoring".  You don't have those sorts 'trust' issues on role-playing muds that don't implement games that can be gamed by dwarves.

Not that there's anything horribly wrong with RPI mind you.  :-P

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Tyche @ Dec. 23 2004,05:35) Ah but size is inimical to good role-play.  Someone said that the quality of role-play is inversely proportional to the number of players.  I think they were right.  Nevertheless Shangrila averages 300 players a night and has hit close to 600 for special events.

Just a point about Shangri'la. It has a lot of players online primarily because they let people idle online. Last time I checked (few months ago), the -average- player on Shangri'la had been idle longer (26 minutes) than the most idle player on the mud I was comparing it to.

--matt

[lckychrmsrr]

This post has kind of gotten off topic but thats ok, I'm glad it spurred some discussion. I tried out all the muds recommended and still didn't find anything that really suits me. *shrug* It happens.

A lot of points have been raised concerning RPIs and other types of muds. I'll pitch in my two cents. When I say RPI I don't mean games that are classless/leveless, only use descriptions instead of names, etc., etc. I mean a game where all things in the game have to be roleplayed. Roleplay "encouraged" leaves a lot of room for players to just be twinks. Some roleplay "enforced" games are the same way. I don't think a RPI needs to be void of classes, levels, or the occasional mob hacking. It does need to have an enforced IC/OOC policy. In my opinion if a game allows or encourages players to simply gather eq, become uber buff, and massacre anyone they want just cause they're "1337" then its not an RPI.

[Felomar]

Icky,

Since we had a mention of your definite for RPI MUDs, I'd also be curious what makes a MUSH something you're not interested in that differs from what you seek in an RPI MUD. What things are you looking to avoid by avoiding MUSHes?

[dragon master]

Originally Posted by (lckychrmsrr @ Dec. 23 2004,14:04) This post has kind of gotten off topic but thats ok, I'm glad it spurred some discussion.  I tried out all the muds recommended and still didn't find anything that really suits me.  *shrug* It happens.   A lot of points have been raised concerning RPIs and other types of muds.  I'll pitch in my two cents.  When I say RPI I don't mean games that are classless/leveless, only use descriptions instead of names, etc., etc.  I mean a game where all things in the game have to be roleplayed.  Roleplay "encouraged" leaves a lot of room for players to just be twinks.  Some roleplay "enforced" games are the same way.  I don't think a RPI needs to be void of classes, levels, or the occasional mob hacking.  It does need to have an enforced IC/OOC policy.  In my opinion if a game allows or encourages players to simply gather eq, become uber buff, and massacre anyone they want just cause they're "1337" then its not an RPI.

I'm going to use the term RPI the way it actually is, not the way you use it Icky. It is designed to classify a certain type of muds(that many people either love or hate, in order to attract/warn away players respectively) and using it differently is a real pet peeve of mine. It's a name that allready has a meaning, it isn't really an opinion that varies from person to person although many people try to use it that way. Anyway, my response:

Hmm, you don't want strict RPI, but you don't want a game that allows or encourages players to gather eq, become buff, and massacre anybody? So basicly an RP mud that is not to restrictive on RP, but not too lenient either. Well, it's hard to decide what is to restrictive and what is to lenient for you for the simple reason that I am not you, but have you tried New Worlds? From what I've read about it, they seem very very RP-oriented, but not to the extreme that an RPI is. I haven't actually played there for more than about 10 minutes, so I can't be sure. (I left cause I'm REAL picky about the RP in the muds I play). There's also Advent of the Mists(or something like that) that is full of lots of ex-Turning Point players. I don't know how far in it's creation it has gotten though. Hmm, that's about all I can think of.

[dragon master]

Originally Posted by (Felomar @ Dec. 23 2004,14:24) Icky, Since we had a mention of your definite for RPI MUDs, I'd also be curious what makes a MUSH something you're not interested in that differs from what you seek in an RPI MUD. What things are you looking to avoid by avoiding MUSHes?

He said he liked PK. Unless my understanding of MUSHes is completely wrong(which it very well may be), that would be enough right there, to keep him away from any MUSH.

[lckychrmsrr]

I must say I've never played a MUSH but I have visited several websites and read through their requirements, rules, mechanics, etc.  Many of them allow for PK, but not in the way it is done on a mud.  My experience with MUSHes is that you have to gain permission from the other players to do anything that might affect them in any way before you do it.  That in addition to having entire battle done through only emotes with not code to back them up does not appeal to me.  Like many have expressed here, we each have our own tastes and MUSHes don't taste good to me.  

Originally Posted by RPI MUDs Another lesser known variant of a MUD are RPI MUDs, Role-Play Intensive Multi-User Dungeon. RPI MUDs center themselves around playing out specific roles as if the role were real. Realism is often blended in with fantasy in these types of MU*s. In general, the objective of the game is not to complete computer-generated quests or to hack-and-slash monsters in order to gain levels and equipment, but to collaborate with fellow players to create complex and multi-layered storylines in a cohesive gameworld. RPIs are very different from other MU* because of this. The majority of RPI MUDs are levelless and classless, focusing instead on skills and crafts that players may pursue during the lifetime of their characters. RPIs also differ from MUSHes in that they retain the hard code of a MUD in deciding such variable outcomes as combat, magickal spells, and so on. RPI MUDs could be considered giant plays where the setting or world is the theater, and the players are the actors as well as the viewers. RPIs are a newer branch of MUDs in general, but have still been around for a long period of time

Also, by using this definition of RPI what I have asked for does not stray from this.  An RPI does not -HAVE- to be leveless or classless, it only needs to place RP at the center of things.  I like the hardcoding of a mud and I like the RP.  I don't mind things like classes, levels, or XP if it is all secondary to the RP.  

The thing is, I am only looking for suggestions to see what other players here like by giving a vague set of guidlines so I can test a wider variety of what might otherwise be recommended if I had provided a strict definition of what I was looking for.  I realize wherever I go will NOT be where I used to play.  However, I would like to find the closest thing available.

[Felomar]

1-->

Originally Posted by (lckychrmsrr @ Dec. 24 2004,02[img http://www.topmudsites.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img]1)]I must say I've never played a MUSH but I have visited several websites and read through their requirements, rules, mechanics, etc.  Many of them allow for PK, but not in the way it is done on a mud.  My experience with MUSHes is that you have to gain permission from the other players to do anything that might affect them in any way before you do it.  That in addition to having entire battle done through only emotes with not code to back them up does not appeal to me.  Like many have expressed here, we each have our own tastes and MUSHes don't taste good to me.

There you run into yet another subdivision... the "Consent-Based MUSH" versus the MUSH that doesn't consider itself Consent-Based. In my experience, PK generally falls into four camps:

1) No PK - kind of obvious, this is games where no player can kill any other player for any reason.

2) Free-for-all - By this I mean the basic hack-n-slash MUD-type PK, where you can simply walk up to anyone on the street and stab them with a knife because it'll gain you better levels if you win. These games tend to advertise PK as a major component. They also tend to be, but are not always, non-permadeath games.

3) Full Consent-Based - This is the opposite end of the scale, and includes the MUSHes you described, where you can only hurt another player if they agree to it, no matter what the situation. This has often be likened to playing Cowboys and Indians as kids "Bang, I shot you. No you didn't. Yes I did". With good players who like the storyline and trust each other, it works just fine on the honor system. Introduce a powerposer who believes he can dodge 79 arrows simultaneously and things begin to crumble if admin don't step in and make (and enforce) rulings.

4) Non-consent RP-based PK - This is sort of a wide category, and could be subdivided in many ways. They use various terms including "Limited PK" to describe themselves. But what it basically means is a game where you are allowed to kill a player without them having to consent to the death, but you have to demonstrate an IC reason for doing so, whether it be a century-long feud, a war, or stabbing them with a broken bottle in the heat of a bar brawl. It has to be done in the context of the ongoing roleplay. And because it happens in the context of the IC roleplaying, it also carries IC consequences with it. Walk into the throne room and kill the king, and you'll be branded a traitor and assassin ICly, and those loyal to the king will be hunting you, including NPC guards. Kill a man in a bar brawl, and the constable may come looking for you.

I'd classify Chiaroscuro as an example of the 4th. Player death is fairly rare outside admin plots, though a few duels have been fought. It's rare for anyone to kill anyone else because we all know how much effort each other have put into characters, and the game is permadeath. We do, also, have luck cards that provide a "Get out of death with only major injuries and maiming" option, if there's a reasonably IC way for it to happen. Which means, a single archer may miss a killing shot and only disable you. A thousand archers all firing at you is probably a non-luck-card situation. Combat is determined by taskrolls, but RPed out attack by attack, with the rolls determining success or failure.

[dragon master]

Originally Posted by (lckychrmsrr @ Dec. 24 2004,02:01) I must say I've never played a MUSH but I have visited several websites and read through their requirements, rules, mechanics, etc.  Many of them allow for PK, but not in the way it is done on a mud.  My experience with MUSHes is that you have to gain permission from the other players to do anything that might affect them in any way before you do it.  That in addition to having entire battle done through only emotes with not code to back them up does not appeal to me.  Like many have expressed here, we each have our own tastes and MUSHes don't taste good to me.   Originally Posted by RPI MUDs Another lesser known variant of a MUD are RPI MUDs, Role-Play Intensive Multi-User Dungeon. RPI MUDs center themselves around playing out specific roles as if the role were real. Realism is often blended in with fantasy in these types of MU*s. In general, the objective of the game is not to complete computer-generated quests or to hack-and-slash monsters in order to gain levels and equipment, but to collaborate with fellow players to create complex and multi-layered storylines in a cohesive gameworld. RPIs are very different from other MU* because of this. The majority of RPI MUDs are levelless and classless, focusing instead on skills and crafts that players may pursue during the lifetime of their characters. RPIs also differ from MUSHes in that they retain the hard code of a MUD in deciding such variable outcomes as combat, magickal spells, and so on. RPI MUDs could be considered giant plays where the setting or world is the theater, and the players are the actors as well as the viewers. RPIs are a newer branch of MUDs in general, but have still been around for a long period of time Also, by using this definition of RPI what I have asked for does not stray from this.  An RPI does not -HAVE- to be leveless or classless, it only needs to place RP at the center of things.  I like the hardcoding of a mud and I like the RP.  I don't mind things like classes, levels, or XP if it is all secondary to the RP.   The thing is, I am only looking for suggestions to see what other players here like by giving a vague set of guidlines so I can test a wider variety of what might otherwise be recommended if I had provided a strict definition of what I was looking for.  I realize wherever I go will NOT be where I used to play.  However, I would like to find the closest thing available.

Using a definition from a site that anybody can edit, change, or create entries is hardly using a precise definition.

I really don't see why people keep trying to redefine RPI muds to be whatever RP mud they like playing. It only causes confusion. If you want to have a name for the type of RP mud that you like to play, pick a name that doesn't allready mean something specific. Using RPI mud the way you are is like me using MUSH to mean a game with humans as the only race. It's using a standard mud term to mean something different and only serves to cause confusion.

RPI muds are one type of RP mud. If you don't like them, fine. But stop trying to redefine their title just because you enjoy playing a different type of mud.

[The_Disciple]

Originally Posted by (dragon master @ Dec. 24 2004,12:07) Using a definition from a site that anybody can edit, change, or create entries is hardly using a precise definition.

The definition from some random guy on a mud website would be more accurate?