Posted by Harlequin on November 3, 2000 at 15:21:22:
In Reply to: Re: I vehemently disagree. posted by Ophiuchi on November 3, 2000 at 11:04:48:
> You can't exchange ICQ # or agree to meet in mirc on CF without breaking IC communication. Then post it here. Face it, you can find a way to speak OOC. > > 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. > 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? That's what the application process is for... > Looses its appeal? So you basically play the cabal for the cabal powers? There's three reasons to join a Cabal. Powers is one of them. I neither condone nor recommend joing solely for that reason but that isn't what PB is saying. He's saying that if anyone can get in, it isn't worth being there. > 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". Uh, that makes no sense at all. Even if there is a definition of elite that I am not aware of, a newbie with deathblow is just that, a newbie with deathblow. He might get a lucky shot every now and then and kill someone but face it, he's a far cry from being 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. Little scenario for you: Newbie1: "Wanna join masters. Now." Leader: "Why do you wish to join our tower, young applicant?" Newbie1: "Don't know, don't care. Want nifty powers and kill, kill, kill." Leader: "Oh, well. I'm sure you'll learn our ways as you go. *poof* You're a Master." > 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. IMP, not IMM. That's the difference. Or do you think every IMM can do what the IMPS do on a day to day basis? Some might, no offense to those who can but hell, creating an area and implementing it is two completely different things. Imagine SS's hell without the expertise behind it. Nightmare to debug, doncha think? > 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 have to agree with whoever made the comment about the people policing themselves below... We could do it now if we wanted but too many people like to cheat and there isn't always someone around who can catch them. > I don't think the staff has anything better to do than to troubleshoot and help newbies wanting to make a contribution. PLEASE tell me you said this in jest... This is the part that made me laugh my head off. > > Rule #1: Roleplaying is required. If it's such a task for you, you have selected the wrong MUD to play. > Rules has been in since CF was founded. Hmm, your example is perfect for why rp is required. Names like you mentioned don't lend themselves to an rp atmosphere. > > So you are asking them to supervise lower level IMMs and any yahoo who can email in a coding idea? > You aren't willing to help? Yuck. I ain't touching this one. > > Or: "They wouldn't even know what is already out there." > Type "area" and press return. I disagree. Knowing the name of an area doesn't mean I know the content. That's what I interpret PB's statement to mean, at least. > 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? I'm willing to bet that 90% of the good authors out there are excellent roleplayers. The two may not go hand in hand but someone who lacks imagination isn't going to be a good roleplayer. Think about it. Look, the IMMs aren't going to go open up their doors to anybody who wants to code an area. I've seen MUDs that do it and very few of them have the coherency and consistency of CF. I don't like hodgepodge, pieced together worlds. Imagine a MUD where you had some areas from Asimov, some from Hubbard, and some from Jordan. The very thought makes me cringe. I didn't mean this as a flame, so if it came off as such, I apologize. Just my two cents. Harlequin
> 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.
> There goes your "they don't know what's already out there".
> > Or: "Many newer players aren't very good roleplayers, and it would show in their contributions to the MUD."