Posted by Ophiuchi on November 3, 2000 at 11:04:48:
In Reply to: I vehemently disagree. posted by Proud Blade(VIP) on November 3, 2000 at 10:26:38:
> I disagree strongly. "chat" channels break the feel, and would just pull people out of their role. Wanna chat? Go to IRC or ICQ or something. Otherwise, you're just teaching newer players that their role is a "sometimes" thing. The Newbie channel breaks this rule, but it does so out of necessity, not out of boredom. You can't exchange ICQ # or agree to meet in mirc on CF without breaking IC communication. I'm glad it's easier now. I wouldn't know. My last char was Sept. 99 So you're against the idea of "have disciples in the church and have the elders teach them". Or further rankings within the cabal itself? Looses its appeal? So you basically play the cabal for the cabal powers? Face it, the only reason why it'd loose its "appeal" is that the newbies would have the opportunity to become just as powerful as an "elite". As far as RP'ing to the standards of the cabal, they're inducted on the premise they will learn and follow the tenents the cabal stood for. Nothing I've said so far even remotely suggest people shouldn't be kicked out of a cabal for flagrant violation of the RP standards. > Nope again. Designing areas requires a strong grasp of game balance, and a grasp of what has been done before. Newer players don't have this. Could an IMP shadow them and guide them along? I'm sure they could, but it would be an inefficient use of their time. Also, newer players are not held to the type of confidentiality that IMMs are bound to. I'm sure you've read the 1800 page e mail that specifies some of the guidelines to design an area. Suggested mob stats, item stats, etc. Once you read that, I'm sure a half wit monkey can crank out an area based on the theme. As far as "inefficient" use of IMM's time, I consider training a trainee to do an IMM's job not an efficient goal. > They are. They are handled by the same people, but they are wearing different hats when they do it. Both policing and administrating are OOC decisions. Separate the people. It's a LOT easier to point to an imm and say, it's all his/her fault. They are in the seat of power to do something and they fouled it up. Get the players involved, get them to participate. Make a guideline. So long as everybody follows the rules we all agree to, finger pointing will be reduced. Why? Players are helping making the decisions imms use to make. What's easier? Put a monkey in charge to find all the cheaters, or, get people involved to police themselves? I don't think the staff has anything better to do than to troubleshoot and help newbies wanting to make a contribution. Rules has been in since CF was founded. > You sound like the guy that thinks every co-worker that gets along with the boss is an "ass-kisser". Sometimes, a senior person with greater experience than you is better suited to make these sorts of decisions objectively. Sometimes. *smirk* You aren't willing to help? > > I don't see any reason why a computer literate, lvl 1 who's never mudded before can't write an area or a feature for CF so long as they can stick to the themes, be willing to work with someone who were there before them. > How about: "They don't understand the game well enough to improve it." How about, read the area design guide, don't deviate from the suggested mob/item stats, don't make a sword +55/+55 avg 120 dmg. and I already said, separate from programming from area design. IMMs and potential programmers congregate and talk about coding and stuff. Type "area" and press return. every player makes up the player base. really? I don't consider ability to role play and the ability to write the same. R.A. Salvatore may be a lousy role player, who's to say he can't write an area based on his novels? > Sheesh. You're right. Sheesh.
> Bah. All of the times I have recently been interviewed, it was purely a test of my roleplay. Only once was I sent out to do a "task", and it was by a mortal, and I was inducted even though I half-botched it. Why? Shinkoujinei seemed to like how I handled the botching, and my failure was partly for OOC reasons. (The involved parties just didn't log in very often.)
> Getting into a cabal should demonstrate that you can roleplay to the standards of that cabal. Nothing less. Getting a tattoo should show that you have mastery of the tenets of that religion. Nothing less. Making them so easy that anyone can get in means that the reward is meaningless, and loses its appeal.
> No. See above argument about "game balance", "originality", and "experience". It is damned hard to create a level playing field among the classes. Newer players don't appreciate this as much. Proof? Read the ideas posted on the Forum. Some are good, some are awful. They're all over the map. The staff has better things to do than troubleshoot all of them.
> Rule #1: Roleplaying is required. If it's such a task for you, you have selected the wrong MUD to play.
Interpretation has changed. Nobody can argue that it use to be fine just to have a description and with a name like Terminator, Juggernaut, and Nighthawk is totally legal.
> So you are asking them to supervise lower level IMMs and any yahoo who can email in a coding idea?
> Or: "They wouldn't even know what is already out there."
There goes your "they don't know what's already out there".
> Or: "They don't have a feel for what the playerbase wants as a whole, only themselves."
sides, your voice count don't it? make yourself heard.
> Or: "Many newer players aren't very good roleplayers, and it would show in their contributions to the MUD."