Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

KaVir · 04-08-2004, 03:47 AM

I am saying that those are the features defined by the term "RPI". The label RPI stands for "Role-Playing Intensive", because RPIs are all Role-Playing Intensive muds. However the label represents more than just having intensive roleplaying - it represents a specific style of mud.

The same applies to other things as well, for example a "PK mud" stands for "Player Killing mud", yet it would not apply to a mud in which players were only killed by mobs, because it means more than the literal definition of its words. It represents a specific type of mud.

Equally, every mudder is playing the role of someone other than themselves - their characters have skills and knowledge different to that of the player, and often belong to entirely different races. So in theory every mud requires roleplaying - indeed, unless the mud allows you to play yourself, you could even say that it was "roleplaying enforced". However we don't list every mud as an RP mud, because RP is used to represents a specific type of mud.

It has nothing to do with whether or not the game is a roleplaying intensive mud - but it is one of the criteria for labelling a mud as an RPI.

I agree. In fact I find many of the RPI features contrary to what I consider a good mud, and some of them contrary to encouraging roleplaying. However no OOC channels is one of the features defined by RPI muds.

However the difference then was that Threshold wished to use the term MURPE as a replacement for being a MUD. RPI is not a replacement - it is a specific type of mud, no different from many of the other labels we use.

MOO stands for "Mud Object-Oriented". Yet I don't see every object-oriented mud claiming to be a MOO, nor do I see anyone claiming that if you're not running a MOO your mud is not Object-Oriented. The label RPI is no different. An RPI gets its name from the fact that it's roleplaying-intensive, just like MOO gets its name from the fact that it's object-oriented, but in neither case is there any implication that that is the only type of roleplaying-intensive (or object-oriented) mud.

So what happens if people start redefining terms? The people running RP muds which don't fit the criteria for an RPI are generally the ones that seem to take a dislike to the definition of an RPI, yet they are often highly critical of pseudo-RP muds that list themselves as RP muds. If you were to use RPI purely by its acronym meaning, then why not the others?

So lets say Bubba is running a typical stock mud, except he's renamed the classes to "smurf", "pokemon" and "ninja turtle". He knows that none of his players are smurfs, pokemon or ninja turtles, therefore he can safely say that every player is playing a role. Therefore, following the actual definition of RP (Role-Playing) he can quite legitimately refer to his mud as an RP mud. The main focus of his mud is PK - indeed, there is little purpose for mobs, as the main goal of the game is to beat other PCs to death with clubs or blow them up with C4. However Bubba can safely say that, while dozens of characters get killed every hour, no actual player gets killed. As the literal definition of "PK" is "Playing Killing", and no actual players are killed or do any killing, Bubba is also able to refer to his mud as a non-PK mud. As the word "intensive" is rather subjective, and Bubba feels that his players play quite intensively, he decides to call his mud a "non-PK RPI mud".

Do you think that would be useful for new players, who are searching for specific types of mud?

04-08-2004, 03:47 AM	#22
KaVir Legend Join Date: Apr 2002 Name: Richard Home MUD: God Wars II Posts: 2,052	I am saying that those are the features defined by the term "RPI". The label RPI stands for "Role-Playing Intensive", because RPIs are all Role-Playing Intensive muds. However the label represents more than just having intensive roleplaying - it represents a specific style of mud. The same applies to other things as well, for example a "PK mud" stands for "Player Killing mud", yet it would not apply to a mud in which players were only killed by mobs, because it means more than the literal definition of its words. It represents a specific type of mud. Equally, every mudder is playing the role of someone other than themselves - their characters have skills and knowledge different to that of the player, and often belong to entirely different races. So in theory every mud requires roleplaying - indeed, unless the mud allows you to play yourself, you could even say that it was "roleplaying enforced". However we don't list every mud as an RP mud, because RP is used to represents a specific type of mud. It has nothing to do with whether or not the game is a roleplaying intensive mud - but it is one of the criteria for labelling a mud as an RPI. I agree. In fact I find many of the RPI features contrary to what I consider a good mud, and some of them contrary to encouraging roleplaying. However no OOC channels is one of the features defined by RPI muds. However the difference then was that Threshold wished to use the term MURPE as a replacement for being a MUD. RPI is not a replacement - it is a specific type of mud, no different from many of the other labels we use. MOO stands for "Mud Object-Oriented". Yet I don't see every object-oriented mud claiming to be a MOO, nor do I see anyone claiming that if you're not running a MOO your mud is not Object-Oriented. The label RPI is no different. An RPI gets its name from the fact that it's roleplaying-intensive, just like MOO gets its name from the fact that it's object-oriented, but in neither case is there any implication that that is the only type of roleplaying-intensive (or object-oriented) mud. So what happens if people start redefining terms? The people running RP muds which don't fit the criteria for an RPI are generally the ones that seem to take a dislike to the definition of an RPI, yet they are often highly critical of pseudo-RP muds that list themselves as RP muds. If you were to use RPI purely by its acronym meaning, then why not the others? So lets say Bubba is running a typical stock mud, except he's renamed the classes to "smurf", "pokemon" and "ninja turtle". He knows that none of his players are smurfs, pokemon or ninja turtles, therefore he can safely say that every player is playing a role. Therefore, following the actual definition of RP (Role-Playing) he can quite legitimately refer to his mud as an RP mud. The main focus of his mud is PK - indeed, there is little purpose for mobs, as the main goal of the game is to beat other PCs to death with clubs or blow them up with C4. However Bubba can safely say that, while dozens of characters get killed every hour, no actual player gets killed. As the literal definition of "PK" is "Playing Killing", and no actual players are killed or do any killing, Bubba is also able to refer to his mud as a non-PK mud. As the word "intensive" is rather subjective, and Bubba feels that his players play quite intensively, he decides to call his mud a "non-PK RPI mud". Do you think that would be useful for new players, who are searching for specific types of mud?