I've only seen the term "RPI" used with an implied reserved meaning by people associated with Armageddon or MUDs derived from the Armageddon codebase. As far as I can tell, this term can be relatively safely interpreted as: Armageddon, MUDs derived therefrom (e.g., harshlands, southlands) or MUDs which are nearly feature-identical to Armageddon. In fact, I've told this outright by several people, and it's probably the most clearcut definition I've ever been given.

I remember the term being used simply as an abbreviation for "roleplaying intensive" in IRC RP game channels as far back as '95, but I noticed it attaining a special reserved meaning with respect to MUDs around '99.

Whether or not this special reserved meaning has become part of the vernacular is not entirely clear to me, so I avoid using the term as much as possible to avoid potential confusion.

Actually, there are zillions of muds sharing the same code base as Armageddon, as its code base is simply Diku, albeit heavily modified.

Harshlands/FEM/SoI/4Lands aren't derivative of Armageddon, at least not in the traditional sense. They may have features that were inspired by Armageddon, but there was never a release of Armageddon's code that people then began to modify and use to create their own muds (except one time when someone stole the code and put up their own Armageddon clone).

Harshlands, FEM, and SoI, on the other hand all do use similar code and there has been much sharing of the code between the administration of those games.

As trivia: Arm's initial unique code feature was a scripting language created by its founder called DMPL (Dan's Mud Programming Language). However, the staff has since begun to phase out DMPL and replace it with javascript.

I have this really freaky idea. I think y'all are gonna just absolutely love it.

How about - everyone stop nitpicking over the term RPI, since it has -nothing- to do with this topic (as shown in the quote of my post)?

The question is clear: What do readers of this thread consider a "must" for text-based interactive multi-player online games that require, enforce, and support (via the code and staff interaction/intervention) roleplaying?

If you wanna talk about the definition of the acronym RPI - which stands for Roleplay(ing) Intensive, have at it. In another thread.

A topic entitled "What is necessary to have an RPI?" has nothing to do with the term "RPI"?

The question could have been interpretted in two ways, so I answered it from both perspectives, and asked which the poster intended - something which he later clarified. Cutting out my answer to the question he intended and quoting the answer to the one he didn't, then claiming that I am drifting off-topic, is really quite low.

I think it's been established that it is fairly recent term and it is ineffably subjective.  But there is more to support that below.

I've found a few bits and pieces.

The first mention of RPI on the mud-dev mail list was in late 1999 by Locke announce the release of an RPI codebase Nimud 2000.   It features a who list, a global channel called OOC, a score command, no permadeath.   Doesn't look like there was any contention over Locke's use of the term.  Were not the imlementors of these RPI muds on the list?  Methinks they were indeed.

In 1998 someone releases an RPI game SwordQuest which had no permadeath.  

And I find it odd that one of Armeggedon forum's prolific posters (and I would assume players) isn't aware of that RPI has very specific criteria, and was suprised by what you told him.  Again specific criteria which have never been published.

Yeah it's probably why neither Harshlands nor Armeggedon advertise their muds as RPIs.  Because not even players and implementors of those two muds apparently care what it means.   And it's also without a doubt certainly true that many of those players would find Threshold or DartMud right up their alley as well.  Don't get me wrong.  There's nothing wrong with any of them.  In fact they do share the same general role-playing style.  Imagine that.  There is a general subset of role-players that those games would appeal do.  And they don't wear an ISO service mark (i.e. RPI) on their forehead.

I would note it appears to be an attempt by one or two implementors, looks like they are associated with a defunct mud named Aldarra, repeatedly proffering their OPINION on what constitutes a good roleplay mud.  "That's not RPI"  "Yes it is"  "No it isn't".  

I'll tell you what it looks like to me.  A bunch of left-brained Type B Diku hobbits who finally discovered role-playing after 6 years online trying to dictate the use of an acronym they can't even agree on amongst themselves.   Yeah that's what it looks like, because that is exactly what it is.  

You are right, the acronym is not at all like MOO, Mush, Mud, Muck, etc.   It's definately like RP, PK, HnS...   Looks like it is indeed a subset of RP.  And apparently just as clear as pornography, we knows it when we sees it.  

One wonders why anyone would even bother correcting a poster who would *kof* "misuse" it.   I would venture it's especially annoying if you are a roleplayer to be corrected on a term by those who don't really give a flying crap about role-playing anyways.  

That may just be exactly why I posted.  Let the hobbit John tell you what RPI means to him.   I suspect from reading his posts he's actually got a bit of elven blood in him.  

It's a #### GOOD THING RPI does not have specific definition as it would completely squelch any and all discussion on it.

Heck I thought Gemstone was "RPI" when I first started playing. Mostly because I had nothing to compare it to. The roleplaying was intense (for someone who had never roleplayed before) and by virtue of the words themselves:

Role Play Intensive = RPI.

Then I grew out of it after wondering "if this is so roleplay intensive, how come I have to step my character over scripting zombies on the way to find the RP?" and went to Inferno, which advertised its game as serious RP. I then realized that GS wasn't RPI - but that Inferno was, compared to GS and my -very- limited experience bugging out on H&S muds for a few weeks.

Then I started seeing too many things with Inferno I didn't like and was introduced to Armageddon. THAT - has been the pinnacle of my RP experience. The fact that it has no ooc channels isn't what makes it RPI to me, at all. OOC channels can always be turned off or triggered to show up in a seperate window so you don't have to look at them.

Its being permanent death isn't what constitutes RPI, to me. It helps, but I don't see it as a "must-have" criteria for an intensive RP environment. What makes it an RPI to me is the roleplaying itself. Put in all the insipid colors, the newbie mudschools, the ressurrection and repops, a hack and slash stock-ROM or whatever - and it's the roleplaying that makes it different. The community of people who will RP no matter which environment you stick them with.

Call it RPI if that's what makes you hard and hot. I don't give a cahoot. Tell me that other games aren't RPIs if the sweat it causes on your brow gives you a tingle. WHATEVER.

As far as *I* am concerned, an RPI is any game where you can totally lose yourself in the fantasy because the community of players support the fantasy with their own roleplay.

You can tell me I'm wrong and that it isn't RPI til you're blue in the face. I don't care. Not even remotely. I will continue calling it an RPI and there ain't nuttin you can do to stop me. So there. Nya.

Love and kisses, The Hobbit

Why are you "nya"ing?

Nobody told you to stop calling Armageddon an RPI.

Your indignation comes as quite a surprise.

I'll try this for the addle-brained (whoever that might be - if it applies to you, own it. Otherwise, ignore it)

R.P.I. is an acronym. It is not a phrase, term, or word. It stands for Role Play Intensive, or Role Playing Intensive. Each word, when used independent of the other, carries its own definition. Combined, and used in the context of gaming, they refer to "A game that has intensive roleplay."

If you want to add other stuff to that, have at it. You are not required to. And neither am I. As far as I'm concerned, Inferno is a RPI. It is -vastly- different from Armageddon, in almost every possible way I can think of. From genre to code to limitations to plotlines to the emoting system to the combat system - vastly different. Inferno has ressurrection built into the roleplay. Characters do not die permanently. Inferno has an entire OOC AREA - no need for ooc global channels, just pop out of the game any time and hang out with your OOC buddies to your heart's content.

Both, to me, are RPI, because it's the ROLEPLAY that makes it so. Armageddon would -still- be a RPI if they didn't have permadeath, or if they had global OOC channels.

R.P.I. Role Play Intensive. Not "Roleplay Intensive, plus you have to have permadeath." Not "Roleplay Intensive, plus no global channels."

One more time - if someone wants to arbitrarily add other criteria to the term and announce that anyone who uses it incorrectly is wrong - then go out and buy yourself a freakin copyright on the term and license it. Till then, shaddup and let people define it however they see fit.

I find playing the role of the marine in Doom to be pretty intense. Therefore Doom is an RPI, and you would have no qualms about labeling it as such. If you would, then we need some sort of criteria other than the base definition of the acronym. Whether it's an elite cabal of crack linguists that define this criteria, or we merely recognize what people tend to think of when the term is used, I think quite a few would agree that going completely by the base definition would be a misrepresentation of Doom's gameplay.

The terms rp and rpi are truely becoming a gimmick. Look at almost any of the new mud posting and over half will claim being 'rp' or 'rp enforced' and some of the more ambious ones will even claim role play intensive.

Then there are those who play on muds like Armageddon and want their own term, so they don't have to sift through hundreds of muds claiming it to hook you only to be another hack and slash. Is it so wrong for muds to have some form of label for the more realistic rp experience driven games?

Then there are the non-arm rp muds (yes some exist) who see the people asking for their own term as elitists because they would seek to separate themselves from those muds. I won't name names, but based on the arguement on this thread, I think it's pretty plain whom I'm talking about.

My point? I think there should be a separate term because those 'rp elitists' will never come to accept muds that have certain features they feel don't fit. IT doesn't matter how much one tries to distort the terms, it ultimately comes down to what people are looking for.

I think this whole issue wouldn't be an issue if not for the term rp being the hip thing to tack onto any game. It's like they make the claim to draw people in, but in truth anyone looking for a certain kind of experience will or won't go a certain way reguardless of the claims once they enter the mud.

Perhaps another term wouldn't solve it. However arguing for the sake of justifying your own game or unjustifying someone else's game from a term is silly. There is defaintly a fair group of people looking for a certain kind of RPI mud, whom might benifit from using a term that would set them apart. But it would be up to them to coin it I think

I find it amusing that Armeggedon web pages explain that they are a MURPE.  And I distinctly remember playing on a game called Threshold that was called a MURPE and Armeggedon wasn't.   None of that matters.  You can call it what you want.  

I think that's the point.  "We own the term RPI and it means this, don't use it."

To which the only sane and rational response is...
*hahaha*  

And it's doubly amusing that there has to be sides, battle lines, and hidden
secret agendas.  You'd think this was one of those tin foil hat sites.  Not
that there's anything wrong with tin foil, maybe sometimes with the folks who
wear it.  

I agree with Aristotle.  I disagree with KaVir.
Big deal.  Next time it might be the other way around. *shrug*

Oh yeah I have a hidden agenda too.  I want to fool all the Armeggedon
players into migrating to Harshlands, all the Harshland players into
migrating to Dartmud, all the Dartmud players into migrating to Threshold
and all the Threshold players into migrating to Armegeddon.  That's
step one of the master plan.  And then in the midst of the confusion I
release a game that has an 12-letter acronym associated with it that's
really fun to say, except in front of mom.  Finally I harvest all these
confused players, and feed the implementors of the aforementioned muds
to sharks.. err maybe crocodiles.  There are others involved too.  Maybe
Achaea, Aardwolf, Medievia, maybe both KaVir and Aristotle, maybe Wolfpaw
and Kyndig, maybe IMC2/ICEMAN/I3 networks are involved, there's plots
within plots and double agents, triple agents.  Watch the right hand, and
pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.  Maybe none of this is
true. Maybe Bill Gates is in on it with SCO and Linus Torvalds.  
Who knows... The truth is out there.  Where the smoking man?

Had enough babble?  Yeah, I agree me too.

Yui, you addressed the point nicely in your own post. If you believe that the game you play is primarily an intensive roleplay game, then of COURSE it fits the bill of RolePlayIntensive.

Now, Doom is also a graphics game. So I wouldn't look past that part of the game's description when looking for a new game, because while I DO insist on intensive roleplay, I also insist on text and not graphics.

Just like ASAP means "As Soon As Possible" - there is no law that determines what that means, other than "As Soon As Possible." It COULD mean - as soon as you're done mudsexing that chick because I know that's really important to you. It could mean - stop mudsexing and deal with this RIGHT NOW. It could mean - well as long as you handle it some time today, that'll be great. It could mean - okay - finish the mudsex, then get your coffee, and don't forget about the job interview tomorrow morning. When you get home from that, please deal with this situation.

RPI is just like that. It *IMPLIES* something but is not restricted to a narrow set of criteria. It is Roleplaying Intensive - which COULD also have graphics. and COULD also be pay-to-play, and COULD also allow resurrections, and COULD also involve a whole lot of hack-n-slash. Intensive is a subjective term, and up to the user to decide what is intensive to them.

As I mentioned in my previous post - someone who has never played ANY roleplaying game might find their first one intensive, even if it isn't to people who don't play it. People who have been playing Gemstone for years and have never tried other games would probably be quick to point this out to anyone who says otherwise.

My opinion stands - as it did the last time, and will in the future.
RPI means RolePlay Intensive. It might easily -imply- other things, but it only means that one thing, and anything that is Roleplay Intensive fits into the category whether anyone likes it or not.

This is also the same point I covered a number of posts back.

If you agree that anything can be labelled as RPI (and by extention everything can also be labelled an RP mud), what is the value of having such a label? If every mud is allowed to label itself in any way it sees fit on its listing, then the mud listing becomes useless.

Moreover, as this is the roleplaying board, if every mud can be considered an RP mud then does that mean any sort of mud-related discussions are acceptable on this (the roleplaying) board? Would it be acceptable for me to start a discussion about playing the role of a warrior on a typical HnS mud, even though it would have nothing to do with what most people consider "roleplaying"?

The crux of the arguments floating around in this thread is that there is no wrong definition.  The term means anything we want it to be, so long as it makes sense within the context of the acronym.

When I play Doom, I assume the persona of the marine and interact with the world as such.  Primarily by blasting monsters back to the netherworld.

Anyway, I am in agreement with KaVir.  The result of these arguments is that RPI, RPG, and any other categories such as 'Action' or 'Adventure' are essentially useless terms.  We could abandon them and think up new terms, but they would likely also be as ambiguous as these, leading to similar problems.  Can anyone think of an unambiguous, non-cumbersome term for the sorts of "role-playing" environments we're talking about?

We could just blow it off and stop bitching.

RPI RPG MMORPG MURPE MOO Moo{like a cow} STFU

To me, they mean exactly the same thing as ' '.

A stupid acronym shoudn't decide wether or not you play a mud, and I doubt it will anyway. A mud could have an RPI monument erected to itself, and it still wouldn't change the content of their mud, the quality of their roleplayers, the ****tiness of their atmoshpere or lack thereof.

I have nothing useful to add.

Rock and roll.

Not really.  I mean I've seen those arguments and simply refused to entertain them.  Both you and KaVir are more perceptive than that.  Well I have some faith in that anyway.  You may have noticed that Aristotle responded angrily when KaVir suggested RPI either meant anything (or nothing) or met a partial list of criteria he listed.  What prompted my little humorous tirade was also the hint or suggestion of a literalist position or anything or nothing at all position.  i.e. PK just might mean killing off your users then.  heh.    

It's how the argument is framed.  If Aristotle and myself don't agree with the list of criteria posted (as I think was outlined in the first 6 or so posts), then RPI just might as well mean nothing or anything.  A serious argument?  I don't think so.

I believe, and presume Aristotle does as well, like many mud acronyms the definition of RPI is a term describing an analog state.  There are mud games which are clearly in the RPI spectrum, mud games which are mostly in that spectrum, some on the edge of that spectrum, and games which are clearly outside of that spectrum.

Interestingly the same is true of MUD itself.
Is chess a MUD? Is IRC a MUD? Is Doom a MUD? Is Ultima Online a MUD? Is Mush a MUD?  Are the TMS forums a MUD? Is Armeggedon a MUD?  Is Baseball a MUD?  Is Diablo a MUD?  Are games with graphics MUDS?  Does a MUD have to have combat?  Are games without elves MUDs?

Quite likely you'll get some resounding no's, yes's, some maybe's, some WTH?!s, on answers to those questions.  Same is true of this RPI or roleplay intensive/immersive term.

It seems clear enough to me anyways that it's indeed a subset of RP or role-playing muds.
Knowing a mud is deep into that RPI spectrum is somewhat useful to me too.  I can then avoid it when I want to role-play.

I don't see what a codebase has to do with wether or not its RPI. I used to play on a DIKU base MUD that was 'centred around RP', thank you very much.

I do agree with the definition itself though - if the game is essentially defined by its roleplaying I feel its RPI, while if roleplaying is merely one facet of the MUD, maybe not.

The criteria originally listed by KaVir, in my opinion, are good indicators of if a MUD is RPI or not, but not a good definition.

Also a note about the no OOC channels requirement... even Armageddon, a MUD I think we can all agree is an RPI, has OOC channels in the form of forums and people talking to each other over MSN, AIM etc... so I don't really see how that could be the part of any definition.

However those are the arguments being used to justify why "RPI" shouldn't have a specific meaning - eg:

Aristotle: "Unless something is managed by a standards body like ANSI or IEEE I do not think anyone can lay claim to what exactly defines RPI or any other game related acronym. Yes, people can share their opinions but nobody has the authority to outright declare what the precise and exact criterion are. Ultimately, the owner of a game has the right to label his/her game however he/she chooses."

Jazuela: "If you believe that the game you play is primarily an intensive roleplay game, then of COURSE it fits the bill of RolePlayIntensive."

The only arguments given for why those critiera shouldn't apply is because the literal meaning of RPI is Role-Playing Intensive, and because "the owner of a game has the right to label his/her game however he/she chooses." If you want to use those arguments, then they need to be applied consistantly if you want them to be taken seriously. If we should use the literal meaning of RPI, then the same logic dictates that we should also use the literal meaning of other acroynms - and if the owner of a mud can list his mud as an RPI purely on the basis that he feel it should be classified as such, then the same logic dictates that the owner of a mud can also list it as PK, RP, or whatever else takes his/her fancy. And if we do that, such labels become meaningless.

That's a better argument, the only problem is that "RPI" has been used for many years to refer to something which isn't so analog - something more analogous with a codebase.

The definition of "RP" is certainly analog, while the definition of "MOO" is not - would you agree with that?

However an "RPI" might not represent a derivative in the copyright sense like a "MOO" is, but it is still commonly used to refer to a group of muds which have all copied certain gameplay features from each other, which (aside from legal implications) is pretty much the same IMO.

Now obviously there is nothing stopping people from redefining RPI, but regardless of personal opinion it does currently have a specific meaning among a certain group of mudders, and trying to use it for something else is going to lead to confusion.

Look up a post, I argued against the no OOC channels.

The one thing with Aristotle's arguments as he comes off as trying to justify why his MUD should be RPI even though it has OOC channels, no permdeath, you go OOC to kill mobs, etc. Not saying that's what you're trying to say Aristotle, just how it comes off to me.

Another criteria that I'm suprised wasn't mentioned here is colour - or lack thereof. During my brief stay on Armageddon I mentioned that the lack of colours hurt my eyes (as I am used to at least sensible colour) and I was told no serious RPI would have an ugly rainbow-splattered MUD, or something to that effect. Lack of colour is why I left Armageddon, but I was wondering, is this a generally accepted criteria?

Why would a mud need to force colors on people, when you can pick and choose your own on your mudclient?

I mean - if Arm forced colors on me, and I had no way to shut them off, I wouldn't play. I hate colors. But let's say for the sake of arguement that I kinda like them.

Let's say I even have preferences. A pale grey background, dark blue regular text, magenta mobs, green room titles.

Now let's say the mud I wanna play has black background, white test, pale green mobs and pink room titles. Am I gonna play that game? Heck no. I probably won't make it past the login screen.

Best bet: allow the user to configure their own colors if they want them, however they want them configured. Also allow for no special colors, with either black background/white text as the default, or reverse.

Colors? Have nothing to do with roleplaying. The only colors I wanna see are the colors described with words when I look at things.

It might be a good idea for you to read my posts instead of just projecting random opinions onto me.

I dislike the acronym RPI for countless reasons. I have already explained this in great detail. Why would I want to use an acronym I dislike? That makes absolutely no sense.

Also, what the heck is "you go OOC to kill mobs." Huh? Do you go outside in RL, shoot a squirrel, take a photo, email it to the admins, and gain exp or something?

Finally, if no-color is another "RPI requirment" then that is just an additional example of how the acronym is truly laughable. The more I learn about it, the more I learn how arbitrary and silly it is.

To Jazuela: I don't know of any game with colors that doesn't have an option to turn them off. I agree with you though that any game that doesn't let you turn colors off is just plain stupid. I also agree that giving people as much customization of their colors as possible is a good thing. The point is that "color" or "no color" is a pure interface issue and has nothing to do with role playing.

Aha.

So this is one of the latest crackpot, elitist RP concepts. Ragging on non-permadeath systems as being bogus/OOC is passe so now its "killing mobs is OOC."

Apparently the only thing that is IC is a couple people (or even just one person) sitting in a room spewing emotes at each other. Everything else is OOC or hack-n-slash.

I get it.

I've seen the "XP for mobkilling means no RP!" argument before, and I don't buy it either.  

For example, we (like many MUDs) have a system where you can grow as a character through combat.  XP is one incentive, but skill improvements, etc. all figure in.  You can earn XP in a number of other ways, but combat is the most common.

What does that tell you about our roleplaying quality?  Nothing, really.  

Gaining experience this way isn't "OOC".  If your holy paladin-type rampages through town killing innocent children, we don't say "Oh.  It's for XP.  That's OOC, so it's OK."  Instead, you are probably an ex-paladin, unable to tap into divinely granted supplications, and facing retribution from the mortals and immortals you've betrayed.  It's all IC, like anything else.

You could also have an XP-based combat system on a MUD where no one roleplayed at all, and everyone talked about the NBA playoffs or what their cat is doing.  That's not our game, but there are many like that, and some people like them too.

Apples and oranges.

Dunestalker, thanks for pointing out precisely the type of elitism so many people here are bristling about.

As suspected, RPI is about elitism and a "higher level of role playing."

But of course, the truth behind your requirements is that they are just your preferences. The requirements you listed would absolutely NOT make for superior or "higher level" role playing.

Your first error was being against OOC channels. To use your own analogies, do you think Robert DeNiro never speaks "ooc" with the director or his fellow actors? Do you think actors never hang out between shoots to get to know each other better? Don't tell that to Dennis Quaid, Meg Ryan, and Russell Crowe. That's how Dennis lost his wife.

Your second error was saying permadeath is required for "higher level" RP. Sorry, but once again that is pure personal preference. You cannot argue that permadeath is a REQUIREMENT for "higher level" RP.

There is nothing more "unrealistic" about resurrection than any other form of magic or fantasy that might exist in a game. People in real life believe in resurrection for crying out loud. The entire Christian faith is based on a resurrection. I don't have any problems with games that are permadeath and I definitely think such systems can add excitement and thrill to one's character. But to argue that it objectively makes for better or more realistic RP is just absurd.

The core problem is the same: don't confuse your personal preferences with things that objectively make for "higher level" RP. When you start doing that, you accomplish nothing more than clearly labelling yourself as an elitist.

A single ignorant elitist does not change the original point - the fact that, to many people, "RPI" already has an established meaning. None of the points Dunestalker listed will inherently improve roleplaying, while IMO some of them actively detract from gameplay (eg hiding names, which is an inferior alternative to character recognition). But none of that changes the fact that using the term "RPI" to refer to your mud will give many potential players certain expectations.

People in real life believe in resurrection for crying out loud. The entire Christian faith is based on a resurrection. I don't have any problems with games that are permadeath and I definitely think such systems can add excitement and thrill to one's character. But to argue that it objectively makes for better or more realistic RP is just absurd.

Yup. It's not an OOC mechanism at all. The way we handle it is that each time you die, you return as a ghost at your temple, but you become (permanently) a little weaker. As time passes, you begin noticing that your body is regaining its old material form. If you die a whole heck of a lot, you become a ghost that gradually fades away, which causes the (wait for it.....) permadeath!

OOC, you want a mechanism that makes death unattractive (so characters try to stay alive, which adds to excitement), but it needn't confirm to RL "rules" of life and death. There are pluses and minuses to a single-death-equals-permadeath system, and it's a valid alternative that several games use well.

The important thing to remember is that it's a fantasy environment, and you're not really looking for "realism" as much as "internal consistency". When someone kills off an NPC (like Blarg the goblin soldier or whatever), and they log on several days later and Blarg is around the village... well, Blarg has a patron deity too! That's just how this fantasy world works. The residents wouldn't even think it's weird, for the same reason they don't find (most) wizards (*) or kobolds weird.

The second thing to remember is that just because your game does things one way, and other games do it another way.... does not necessarily mean the other games are inferior, poorly done, or "wrong". Just different.

(*) Kteng's wraith was unavailable for comment beyond asking that she remain walled up in her sprawling alchemical laboratory. After all, she has an experiment that needs a little tweaking.

So... is the argument on specific criteria now, or is it on wether or not there are criteria?

Isn't that exactly what you got mad at KaVir for to begin with Aristotle? Making broad statements like that? I do agree though. =p

I don't really see how at least some OOC communications would hurt any MUD in any way... and if it doesn't hurt the MUD, shouldn't players (not characters) be allowed the freedom to speak with each other?

A problem I see with imposing specfic conditions (ie permdeath) is that that limits RPIs to certain themes, or at least excludes some themes (such as some religious themes as Aristotle aptly pointed out.)

Still, there must be some fundamental criteria that we can all agree upon such as roleplay enforced at all times, advancement through RP, and some kind of (harsher than your typical HS) penalty for death?

And does anyone disagree that there is a definite distinction to be made to the stock rp enforced MUD with characters saying "Yay! I lvled!" and the more... distinguished MUDs such as Threshold, Armageddon, Harshlands, SoI... etc?

I will re-direct you all to the original post, and cite the phrases that everyone seems to be ignoring (blatantly, I might add) .

...what everyone THOUGHT was necessary...

meaning - what is your -opinion- - not meaning - what is the agreed-upon/popular/Mudder's Official definition of.

The post asks about Roleplaying Intensive MU* - now maybe John felt that spelling the whole thing out in the subject line would make it too wordy for the thread when it popped up on the list, and simply shortened it to RPI for brevity's sake. The content of the post has no mention of "RPI" so maybe y'all should just forget that acronym and stick to answering the question instead of dissecting a single phrase in the subject line, hm?

All y'all are a bunch of nitpicking twits who'd rather argue a point that doesn't exist than to actually give someone's post a bit of thought and answer it to the best of your abilities.

Harlan Ellison once said, "99% of science fiction is crud.  Then again, 99% of everything is crud."  He couldn't have been more correct.

Are "RP-enforced/accepted" MUDs designed with channels, no permanent death, levels, experience, etc. because they are part of the game's concept or because they're part of the base code or what the game's creator saw somewhere else?  I'd wager to guess that in 99% of the cases, it's #2 or #3.  That's symtomatic of any hack that can code creating a MUD.  Creativity and reason are two things most people lack and no where is that more obvious than in the field of computer and console games.  Originality, creativity, and thoughtful functionality are what's missing from nearly everything produced by the commercial and non-commercial sectors, MUDs included.  H&S MUDs usually have the courage to say that they're a game, designed around a kill-everything-in-sight theme.  My hat's off to those H&S MUDs, Necromium comes to mind, that admit they're H&S and don't try to claim "great RP in a realistic and beautifully-written environment".  These games in no way inferior to RP MUDs, they're aiming for different goals and a different playerbase.  But a lot of so-called "RP" MUDs are crap.  RP in an environment created for H&S, with elements of such games incorporated into them as an excuse for the game creators' inability or lack of thoughtful game design, is fine and possible.  But then again, so is belching out the notes of a song.  But why not use an instrument specifically designed to play music?  The same's true of MUDs.

Eleanor Roosevelt once said, "Noone can make you feel inferior without your permission."  The frequent cry of "elitism" to describe RPI indicates what I suspected all along.  The vast multitude of hacks running pathetic "RP" MUDs out there know deep down that they are hacks and that their MUDs are lacking.

Judging from a lot of the posts in this discussion, I'm going to guess that very few will agree with me.  That's understandable.  After all, as Mr. Ellison's comment points out, crud holds a clear majority.

Think about it for a minute,

Jason

Man...for calling someone ignorant...some of you are proving yourselves to be by NOT READING exactly what I said.

I did state that it was MY OPINION.

I said few very few, if any OOC channels. I did not say one could not be if they had ANY.

Yes, actors do have some OOC interaction...though usually NOT in the middle of the scene.

Threshold, if you are going to call someone ignorant, at least READ what they are saying before you respond.

As I had stated it's my opinion and I'm entitled to it, call it elitist, fine I don't care it's your opinion and you are entitled to it and it means somewhere between jack and **** to me.

Unfortunately you haven't established that at all.   I count maybe 3 or 4 people that think there's a specific list of criteria.   A list which would invalidate Armageddon, BTW.   It would seem that the list of specific criteria are nonsense as Armeggedon is certainly an RPI mud.   I don't see any disagreement with that here.  

I also cannot find history of the term in regards to the criteria you posted.  No not even in the conversations you posted from '97, which are laced with "IMHO".   Robbert implied that maybe exploring the history of the term wasn't a good idea.   I can understand why.   There isn't any.   Well actually there is a history of people apparently using the term quite loosely from 98 onwards.   (i.e. Nimud, SwordQuest).  

The term is obviously not pure, and never has been pure.  It's kind of late in the game to start enforcing some sort of specific criteria and/or ownership of some acronym.  If you've gotta say, well "RPI is Harshlands" then you might as well not even bother clarifying it as nobody is ever going to be remotely confused by the term RPI.

I've noted a few muds on TMC put RPI in the codebase portion of their listing.  What's up with that?
Will some committee be approaching MystariaMush to explain that they can't call their game an RPI?

Where is the list of criteria?
Who developed the list?
Who maintains it?

I've provided links to its usage going back 7 years, and the reference in question suggests it predates that by some time.

In what way does it invalidate Armageddon?

The post I linked to contains no instances of "IMHO". The entire conversation of 17 posts contains a single instance of "IMHO", which was specifically made in reference to whether or not levels in roleplaying games should be hidden.

Then I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree, as to me, people using the term over a period of 7+ years indicates "history" to me, at least in mud terms.

Neither are any mud terms. What is an "RP mud"? As has been demonstrated already, going by its literal meaning Doom is an RP mud. But do most people consider Doom to be an RP mud?

Where are the lists of criteria for "RP", "PK", "GoP" and "HnS"?
Who developed those lists?
Who maintains them?

If I talk about a PK mud, people familiar with that term immediately have an idea of what sort of mud that is. The same if I talk to someone familiar with RP muds - and the RPI is no different.

You dislike the term, and you're obviously not familiar with it - but other people are, and ignoring them isn't going to change the fact that if someone lists a mud as an RPI, many potential players will have immediate expectations about what sort of features that mud will offer.