Need more players, not less guilds

Discuss ideas for how to make the game better. Wizards, take note!
Forum rules
- Use common sense and be respectful towards each other at all times, even when disagreeing.
- Do not reveal sensitive game information. Guild secrets, player seconds are examples of things not allowed.
User avatar
Vyasa
Wizard
Posts: 20
Joined: 18 Aug 2016 09:30
Location: Bharatavarsha

Re: Need more players, not less guilds

Post by Vyasa » 16 Feb 2020 19:33

sylphan wrote:
16 Feb 2020 18:19
On your first point about neutrality: Is your view that we have "too many neutral options" based on any analysis of what makes other MUDs successful, or what has made Genesis successful at certain points in its history? It seems like you want someone to create a character, finish the tutorial, and then immediately be thrown into a conflict. I understand the importance of conflict, but I also think there is a lot of room for different kinds of conflict (though it might be more productive to focus on "engagement"), and for even MORE neutral guilds. The SU is neutral, but not "safe," not "bland," and certainly (from an outsider's view, anyway) very immersive. And the monks, for all their neutrality, have had a couple of really active periods since their inception. Do you think the less active periods are a result of "neutrality," and if so, why do you think so?
Partially, yes. In every successful MUD there are two options as far as I know: you're either in it for the social aspect and fun of roleplay, or you have a higher pre-determined mission to accomplish in life. If you want a list of specifics I can try to write one up, but it'll take me a few days.

I don't think being thrown into the conflict after the tutorial is a good idea. We still somewhat do it with the alignment mechanics but I don't think we should have that sort of conflict. Especially not when quests are restricted by alignment. We do, however, have neutral paths open until someone decides what side they think is best: cadets/academics -> mercenaries/sohm.

What I mean about too much neutrality is that some evil and good guilds have an alignment restriction but no penalty for crossing the boundaries of their alignment. A calian can go evil. A dragonarmy soldier can go good. Design leniency I guess.

About neutral guilds in general, we have a lot: ogres, gladiators, monks, mercenaries, sohm, SU, etc. Too many options to play it safe and get the best of all worlds and be liked by everyone. That in itself is not a problem. I don't completely agree with the alignment system, but it's something set in stone so we might as well work with it instead of trying to avoid it.

I agree there are many possible conflicts without recurring to alignment/faction ones.

I don't think that neutral guilds influence the game's success as a whole. I think neutrality should always be an option. It just has to make sense. There has to be a reason for your neutrality, and some sort of penalty.

I don't think monks are doing particularly bad because of their neutrality (or bad at all, really). The reasons for the lack of activity in the monastery can be traced back to many other things, and I'd bet that if we had faction wars there would be a lot more monks mainly because some people would want to avoid being part of that.

As for SU, I'm not judging their level of immersion or the depth of their lore. I'm judging their neutral stance. The idea that within a domain their actions mean one thing, but outside mean another is something that any guild could claim. Morgul Mages see themselves as the good guys in Middle Earth, but objectively they're still evil. There should be a difference between how a guild understands their mission and role, and how it objectively should be handled by the game's design.
sylphan wrote:
16 Feb 2020 18:19
On your view of the monks: You're not wrong that they value self-discipline and peace. On the other hand, how "detached from the world" are they? Grampal (yes, I'm aware he no longer seems to be playing) was one of the most well-known figures in all of Genesis history. Goldbezie is less of an icon, but she is frequently in touch with people and especially newbies, helping them find their ways. When Elderan was a monk, he was far from "detached from the world." Are there more reclusive monks? Absolutely. Does the guild itself funnel people into a reclusive role any more than some others? I would argue that is very far from the case.
I used that phrase thinking of my preconceptions about what a monk is, and not judging how involved a particular monk is in matters of the world. I understand the monks' mission to be different than wars and conquering, finding the one ring, protecting magic, selling themselves for coin, worshipping a deity which grants them power, etc. So, detached in the sense of ... A path unconcerned with those kind of issues? I think those individuals are even more able to help newcomers than ones committed to a faction because they're not doing what they do in order to recruit or convert. So, no, I don't mean detached as the SU, but rather detached as in not participating in the wars and struggles of Krynn, Middle Earth, and so on.

I hope that somewhat explains where I'm coming from.
Curving back within myself I create again and again.

Post Reply
http://tworzymyatmosfere.pl/przescieradla-jedwabne-z-gumka/