View Single Post
Old 09-27-2010, 09:31 PM   #135
silvarilon
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 144
silvarilon is on a distinguished road
Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs

Mmmm, no argument here.
I just don't think you recognize that the phrase "RPI" itself encourages those two attitudes to combine.

I've got no objection to that term, although it doesn't seem to have taken off.

I agree. Which is why I didn't disagree with anything he said - I merely pointed out the phrasing might imply MUDs which "meet the standards" are higher quality. That was never explicitly stated.

This is the meat of what I'm really interested in

There isn't any point comparing the decline of quality RP in RPIs to the other games, unless we're seeing similar declines for similar reasons.

The differences that can be noted in the RPIs between then and now are useful. Perhaps we can figure out the causes, and reverse the trend.

Does the greater number of players necessarily indicate that they were blinded by the desire to attract those new arrivals? Could it be a symptom of something else, such as a greater emphasis on RPing in the MUD community (and therefore RPIs are attractive to a greater percentage of the audience?)

Or could it be a symptom of the game having more features, and therefore attracting non-traditional audiences, without necessarily loosing the features and strengths it had before?

My question is... if previously there were less than 5 players, and those players displayed a high level of roleplaying, and now there are more players... how many of that larger pool display a high level of roleplaying? If there are now 20 players online, but only 25% of them display a high level of roleplaying... then we've still got those 5 high quality people. We've just opened the game up to the others, too.

The next question would be, if that's the case, how can the others be taught to RP well, (or encouraged to stay out of the way of the RP if they are uninterested.)

Could this "new blood" be a boon rather than a bane to the roleplaying, once the players are encouraged in the right direction?

This is an ongoing problem for me, too. Many players are uninterested in reading any background information. Many others know the background information, but are uninterested in making their character conform.

Another agreement from me, that is one very damaging thing that regularly happens, if allowed.
The game needs to (and can) push quite hard against that. There can be coded or formalized cultural rules that are put in place. For example, we have the formal rule that someone can't be arrested until AFTER there is enough evidence to prove guilt. And a noble can't just have someone arrested at will. However, when collecting evidence, the word of a noble is worth significantly more than the word of a commoner. This helps to encourage the renaissance setting of a rising middle class, with new freedoms, that are still partially under the control of nobility. Players can talk about "rights" all the want, but there is an undeniable "law of the game universe" that the nobles have the coded ability to have more influence when a trial happens. It changes the debate from "Stupid noble, you can't do that" into "You can't just have me arrested... what, trumped up charges? You don't have evide...oh. You just gave your testimony." so instead of "I have rights" it's "You shouldn't have the ability to do that! But you do..." which pulls the players modern argument back into the renaissance context.

Not directly related to RPIs, I know. But I think it's the same problem. It's something that needs to be fixed by considering the outcome that the game staff want, and structuring the game environment in a way that will encourage the desired behaviour.

In a setting where people have no rights, there should be the ability to bring sanctions down on them, with them unable to (legally) respond. There can still be options for the players to respond. Maybe their characters have to go to criminals for help. But that still makes the point that, legally, they have no option.

Mmmm, yep.
But how much of that is the player just wanting something different? Or how much are players that wouldn't be doing the role-play anyway?
As long as the economy is balanced properly, it shouldn't matter how many H&S players are off to the side mob-bashing, that won't impact my roleplaying.

What we need, though, are encouragements for those players to RP when they run into other roleplayers. Having people ask "want to group" during my roleplay totally turns me off. Having someone come up and say "Hey, you look capable. Are you interested in joining an expedition?" adds to it.

Not to get off-track by questioning the RPI criteria, but spam-crafting and mob-bashing as an advancement activity only happens when players need to spam-craft or mob-bash to advance their skills. With sensible limits (only one item needs to be made each day, after that it stops adding to skill. Only three mobs need to be killed.) you can cut most of that from your game. The roleplayers can get it "out of the way" quickly, and not feel like they're falling behind or being penalized, while the achievers can spend all day mob-bashing, and feel that they got the reward by finding that extra bear pelt.

I'm of the opinion that "there's no such thing as a bad player, only bad game design." - if the player is doing the wrong thing, then something in the game design is encouraging them to do the wrong thing. Players will always worry about personal gains. And the majority will seek those gains through whatever means is most effective. If you design the game well, so that the desired behaviour is "what is most effective" then the players will follow. If the player is doing something negative, then there must be a reward in it for the player. Remove the reward. Give a similar reward for something positive.

This is tricky, isn't it?
We want to put roleplaying first. But this is still a game. When the player sits down at the keyboard, they need to have fun, or they won't come back tomorrow.

I 100% agree.
silvarilon is offline   Reply With Quote