Best posts made by Apos

@moonman said in [The Death Of Telnet: Is It Time To Face The Music?]

My instincts tell me it's time to face the music: Telnet is on its way out, and with it, MU*'s. It is the Internet equivalent of AM radio, except less relevant. If I were to start a roleplaying community today, I would make a Discord server, because I'm convinced people actually use that program for now. I wouldn't create a new instance of RhostMUSH, and I wouldn't write my own custom codebase, for fear that the command line would scare off perfectly sane, intelligent, capable, fun roleplayers. Clicking on things is just more straightforward to people. It's more comprehensible and frankly a superior interface to memorizing a thousand ad hoc commands. I love MU*'s and they will always have a special place in my memories but I think it's time for us to admit it: we lost the argument, this medium is going to die with us in our nursing homes, at the latest.

So, this thread is here to raise the question if I am right, and depending on the answer to the question:

• If I am wrong, how can we get the vast swath of roleplayers to join existing MU*'s and create their own?
• If I am right, what platform should we jump ships to?
• Should we even jump ships, or accept our fall into extreme RP obscurity?

On one hand, I agree telnet is a massive limiting factor and the hobby is intimidating and hard to join. Ares and Evennia are trying to make it much easier, but until they get to the point of having something plug and play that's extremely easy to setup, and transition to more of a web game with minimizing the archaic command line and using a mouse more, those problems are going to remain. It's not intuitive and very difficult for new people, and as a niche hobby there's an awful lot more resistance to trying to attract new people than I would expect. I'm relatively new to the hobby myself, but I remember clearly how offputting I found aspects of the medium, and I had to work at it to find things about it I really liked that I don't think are easy to duplicate out of it. So on one hand, sure, I think you are right.

On the other hand, how many players do you want?

It sounds like a silly statement but it's not. It is a lot of work to make a good game, but if you -do- make one, odds are strong that you'll have more players than you can really handle. Like if you're running a sandbox with full automation, you probably have no upper bound, but that's not really where MUs are strong as a medium. If you are trying to create a MU where the hobby really shines, with running a persistent world that supports a lot of interconnected roleplay, how on earth can staff coordinate 25,000 people without having some sprawling pyramid staff structure with like 5 levels of GMs? And that number isn't absurd, roleplaying communities are hitting in the tens of thousands, just not MUs.

It's extremely attractive to combine the intimacy of personalized GMing with the ability to involve a character in any number of persistent stories. That's a strong draw, and most new people that try out the medium find it really appealing. But it is incredibly labor intensive. I intentionally haven't advertised on big RP sites outside of the hobby because it would be impossible to support an influx of people and would just do them a disservice.

Dropping a sandbox and telling people to play amongst themselves offers no meaningful benefits over any other RP medium. GMing for them and making their actions matter in a persistent world does. But the setup and maintaining that right now is arduous, and until that becomes way easier and less time consuming, I don't even know if more players would help as much as it would seem.

@lisse24 In a perfect world, anyone not interested in a system or that doesn't find it fun just wouldn't participate in it and it wouldn't trouble anyone that exists on its own, but that's not really how I have to plan things, unfortunately.

So there's a ton of questions I have to ask for any coded system in order to keep the same atmosphere I want. Who is this fun for? What kind of RP does it help foster? What problems does it solve? What potential negative behaviors might it introduce as a consequence, and how to counteract that? What are the abuse cases and how do we stop those?

Those are the most basic ones, then you get into a lot more nebulous feel, because for any system with any kind of mechanic benefit, you have this really fine line of feeling worthwhile for players that are motivated mechanically, but also then you'll have a niche appeal of ones that will enjoy it and ones that won't, and you have to try to make it worth enough that most players will see it as a worthwhile endeavor without being so overwhelming that it feels mandatory.

One use case that you just can't help are players that are true completists, that feel extremely unhappy unless they have total mastery over every aspect of the game and are completely independent and self-reliant. Particularly when you design specifically to counteract that by trying to design collaborative systems that create scarcity by force reliance upon other PCs, because the former goal can lead to extremely problematic outcomes. The best you can do in those situations is try to balance by degree in trying to make the rewards scaled to give diminishing returns.

I'd go a step further and say I'm not even sure a majority of people playing MUs are aware of any of the community websites that exist for them, this one included.

I dislike people knowing what characters I'm playing because people RP with me dramatically differently when they know it's me behind the keys. I want sincere interactions in RP, not people being nice to me IC because they like me oocly. If I can create meaningful scenes that people get excited about, I want it to be on the basis of my RP alone.

@faraday said in What's your identity worth to you?:

Though I do think that many MUSHers are irrationally resistant to supplying emails. It takes sixty seconds to create a burner Gmail account for spam and even my mom has managed it. The entire internet runs off of email validation, and I seriously do not understand the resistance against it in MU-land.

So when I was getting started, I remember the violent reaction to what I thought wasn't a big deal, requiring an email to make registration fast and easy. People freaked out, so I was like, 'gosh, there must be a ton of MU players that won't use an email under any circumstances, even a throw away'. So I set up a special process to approve someone that was uncomfortable giving any email, spent a shitload of time on it.

Currently, I'm on character application #1809 on Arx and I've had to do that special process for the violently email-less exactly zero times.

@thenomain said in What's missing in MUSHdom?:

That we used to make our own fun and somehow can't anymore has baffled me for a while.

It has? To me it's clear as day. Being proactive rather than reactive takes more time and effort. As people get older and get more responsibilities, they have less time, and naturally default to a reactive rather than proactive stance in their hobbies more often than not. This means the decreasing pool of people that are proactive and can create come under increasing demand from the people that do not have the ability to do so to provide for the people that don't have the time or motivation to do it.

So I personally just think that systems need to foster and encourage proactive behavior that helps provide and nurture the kind of situations that people find more satisfying, otherwise they default to path of least resistance which is familiar social rp. I mean, I thought this was obvious.

Population isn't a great metric because like if there's a MU with 15 people on it that all are having a blast and having a wonderful time, I think that's a waaaaaaaaaaaaay healthier environment from 150 addicts that all hate one another's guts and play purely out of spite because quitting is admitting that their nemesis has won. I've been fortunate to avoid that kind of toxicity, and I really think that should be the goal far more than population numbers.

But I do understand wanting more games that represent what you wanna play. We'll release a public repo of code eventually, and I dream of eventually making starting and running a game accessible to the point of a single executable and a Make Your Own Mu startup utility. Faraday has done really impressive work in getting closer to that with Ares, and it's no surprise that FS3 is incredibly popular. The fact it seems to keep being used for things she specifically recommends against and never designed it for is simultaneously extremely complimentary towards her contributions and a pretty pointed lack of other people helping out.

And that goes back to the original point of the thread, as the OP was offering to create something. I think it is counterproductive to ever tell a creator, 'I don't like what you're making, you should do this other thing instead', whether that's a code base, a theme, sandbox vs storydriven or whatever. If they want suggestions, they'll ask.

@faraday said in Favorite Minigames:

@arkandel said in Favorite Minigames:

I don't think the focus is diluted, that's all. If WoW is too different then surely D&D isn't, and it's been incorporating both story and loot for thirty some years; sure, different campaigns (which I can argue is a similar concept to 'different MUSHes') can definitely focus on one over the other, but the default case is to have both.

Yes, for a tabletop RPG I agree. But I don't think MUSHes work well under the tabletop model. This has been mentioned ad nauseam on various threads here. It doesn't scale to larger groups and it doesn't do as well with strangers. I think that the hobby is poorer for trying to stick to that model. But you're right - this is probably veering off topic so I'll shut up now

I don't think it's too off topic if we redirect it very slightly. How about from a perspective of someone that really dislikes minigames and sees them undermining the narrative focus of storytelling on MUs, what would be games that aren't a big deal and aren't disruptive even if they aren't something someone is into? In other words, what would be ones that are tolerable for people that dislike them, and what are ones that would send them running to the door?

Definitely correct me if I'm wrong since I don't want to misrepresent your position, but it sounds like the objection is against anything that represents alternate advancement because it undermines the focus on RP by getting people invested in some kind of progression for characters that aren't narrative/story focused, in a video game-ish way. I can definitely understand that, and from that perspective I'd think things like coded pool games or card games or whatever might be fine, or emotive prompts for story hooks or flavor would be fine, but anything that represents building or investment in developing something progressive would be bad.

I don't really think it's an all or nothing thing for most people and kind of a slow slide between purity of story and crunchy elements that has people invested in feelings of progression that aren't really related to story. I mean, systemless play by post type RP and things like tumblr or whatever are unbelievably popular, and I have a feeling a lot of those folks would probably feel revulsion at using any system to put a more game element to their RP. I enjoy all styles myself, and don't really think anyone is right or wrong and it's just a preference thing to me.

@aria Ultimately there has to be a lot of sinks, but I want them to be interesting ones that people might find fun. So sure, let me talk a bit about what I have in mind and I'm tweaking.

So about prestige becoming relevant, essentially prestige is going to be significant in most interactions with NPCs, and particularly leaders. It will be a modifier to income, and it will be a modifier for any character on the amount of resources they generate. So, for leaders in particular, it will become a chase stat, even if other characters uninvolved in running orgs might opt out and largely ignore it, since their interactions with NPCs in any kind of automated way is probably a lot less frequent. Similarly, commands to permanently increase domain statistics (and thereby raise income), will also heavily play off character skills and their prestige. Economics, stewardship, propaganda, war, agriculture for example would be significant. The actual domain skills I kinda despise from an implementation perspective and will likely be reworked, because dunking resources in them for a flat mod is terrible from a design perspective.

Prestige itself is being broken up into three parts. Legend (an extremely hard to generate pool that does not decay normally), Fame (what will actually be raised, and raised quickly, but will decay very significantly every chron), and Grandeur (a percentage of prestige gained from assocations, such as family, patrons, orgs, etc). Almost all of the new prestige gain mechanics will be focused around fame, and be individual minigames, and the social skilled characters will be very, very good at them. Donate reworked, praise reworked, event prestige reworked, all the current options reworked with significantly more new ones, such as a fashion minigame, and eventually things like performances, champion duels and so on all being potential prestige gain options. The goal, ultimately, will be to have enough of a spread where at least some prestige orientated options someone will find fun and engaging, and failing that, at least being able to get the help from social characters or other PCs that do, and someone could keep a significantly high prestige in grandeur due to the association with people that are engaged.

Now, aside from that, I'm going to be making AP into a much more of an economic model than it is now, by creating org pools that can be generated by social characters and then traded/given away, and making a lot more consistent and spread out costs, so characters working on building orgs will be able to engage in more avenues to increase them, particularly with the help of social characters. That does mean that the vast majority of minigame type stuff will have AP costs.

Resource wise, I think that it just needs a lot more avenues to generate it in ways that make characters feel significant and that their skills matter. So the task rework is one, running off character skills. Characters being able to barter at the market is another, and trying to get good deals at them, or just gambling AP to try to turn a profit if they roll well.

Ultimately, the intention is to have a number of characters all specialized in their areas be able to contribute meaningful to developing orgs, or just in pursuing fun minigames that interest them, and generate RP.

It's really easy to build off of people that are enjoying themselves or enthusiastic, invested and engaged. Can see that just from how they RP, strictly IC, or how they communicate ooc. That really helps me when I see it. Conversely, if I think I'm boring someone, yeah that's mortifying and I'd never want to do that again.

@ganymede said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:

@derp said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:

At the end of the day, the rules don't get taken seriously because of desuetude, essentially. It's not that the rules aren't there, it's just that people have gotten so used to being able to break them that they have come to expect they will be ignored.

Let's suppose for a moment that the rules will always be enforced by staff when needed.

Would people still use social stats to resolve conflict? Why or why not?

I've only been MUing for a few years compared to most people and I can think of 3 cases off hand of someone asking some version of the question, "Can I roll my social stats to try to talk my way out of this and not die?" when they were faced with imminent execution. There is basically zero chance someone doesn't try that if social combat exists and someone is trying to PK them, and whether it's allowed and reasonable is one I'd have a handle on.

@sab said in How old are MU* players?:

I think there's a huge market to bring younger people of that sort into the hobby, it's all about marketing and offering the right thing, we just haven't yet.

I think MUs can offer things as an RP format that other formats just can't match, and I think a lot of people would find them very compelling, but the flip side is the very story driven 'table top writ large' type games just have a sharp ceiling on how many people they can really support. Like most MUSHes that aren't a 'do it yourself' style sandbox would just flat out collapse if their player bases doubled or tripled, which makes games always want new people but at a pretty controlled and steady rate, rather than huge influxes.

@tinuviel I don't disagree but this hobby is full of flakes. Any implication that a game runner is not incredibly dedicated is basically a red flag for anyone debating whether or not they want to invest time in the game. They generally won't if they think they'll do more work than the head staffer and see their investment evaporate due to someone else's flaking. Ie this thread.

Saying 'this game will have a one year run' probably means it is effectively dead by month five, since no one will want to join a game that's half over.

@three-eyed-crow said in Constructive (keyword) Criticism of Arx Systems:

I don't concern myself much with the Arx economy because it seems so ephemeral right now, and I kind of expect MU/MMO economies to be bloated and broken to some degree. I am kinda eyeing it apprehensively with an eye to how it'll impact whatever domain systems are put into place, though. Is your House going to be impoverished and your peasants miserable because you aren't sufficiently grinding the mini-game? I doubt it, as that's not the ooc mentality I've encountered from staff, but I feel a little guilty on the weeks I can't invest grind on my noble as it is, with the impacts as only what they are.

Double post but important. No. It's too important to not make people feel they are penalized if they don't engage, or worse, that inattention is punished. It's a terrible gaming philosophy that games do to foster an addictive, 'can't afford to not play' mentality that I find unethical in freemium games and I would never do that.

So it would be about having a healthy baseline that feels 'okay' when left alone, and trying to make fun minigames that only create possible consequences when you engage with it, so that people that enjoy it deal with possible crises that hopefully are fun, and people that could not possibly care about the minigames never need to think about it.

It is very simple to get people to want to spend time with you, by being extremely generous with your time, and making it be about them, and helping them have fun. It's just the simplest things can be very difficult to do, and require an intense commitment of time and energy.

Think of this way- some of the most utterly toxic, worst examples in the hobby are very popular because they realize this, at a fundamental level, that if they just keep giving and giving their time often to an unhealthy extent, people will appreciate that, and they can use that to then justify the unbelievably shitty things they do afterwards. Someone donating their time and energy is appreciated to such an extent that a large amount of people are willing to overlook truly atrocious behavior.

It's fine to say you don't have the time to invest in things, or you just feel too tired or unmotivated to do so. That's okay. There's no shame at all in that. Just understand that it's a very clear path forward if you ever feel disassociated with a game or RP group or whatever.

@faraday said in What MU/RPG opinions have you changed or maintained?:

@Ganymede said in What MU/RPG opinions have you changed or maintained?:

Unsurprisingly, I enjoy playing both bridge and poker.

There's nothing wrong either game, and certainly nothing wrong with liking both.

What happens too often in MUSH land, though, is that you have people who are:

a) Showing up to a bridge tournament expecting to play poker and then getting disappointed.
b) Trying to play both bridge and poker simultaneously with the same deck of cards and acting shocked when that doesn't work out.
c) Badmouthing those who prefer a different type of card game than they do.
or some variation of the above.

MUSH games are not very good about setting expectations of what kind of game they are, and players are not very good about respecting those boundaries even when they are established.

I've had so many headaches with players just not being able to understand cultural differences at all and game styles, even without the headaches of boundary violations. Just the very basic, 'how does someone find RP', 'how much ooc communication is appropriate here', 'how does the game handle conflict resolution', 'how formal is ooc communication', 'how much handwaving happens in the game', 'is it immersive and organic or more scheduled in style', etc, etc, these vary so wildly from game to game that the potential for misunderstanding is just enormous and pretty much nothing most players think is 'common sense' for unspoken MU rules are universal.

@saosmash Yeah lemme give an example. So my job deals with internal customers and external customers (general public). In 13 years, I've never had a coworker or internal customer be so much as slightly rude to me. I've never even heard of a conflict at my old office. Not once. If it was entirely inward facing, I would probably forget the incredible assholes I deal with for the other part even exist. Internally facing jobs with good teams and good environments? Sure.

@Prototart said in Getting Young Blood Into MU*'ing:

like, I basically agree w your points but I think it's important to realize that an environment that's "safe" by the standard of some ppl in this field is still going to be something that just, has a magnetic repulsion to a ton of normal people and i think people are so tunnel vision on what's become acceptable in MU culture that they fail to consider how insane it is to people who aren't in that milieu and when it gets brought up it usually just provokes sneering and gatekeeping when it gets acknowledged at all

I think it's important to understand that a lot of MUs, like Faraday says, have reeeeeally different cultures. Like reading the different comic MU threads are horrifying to me. The whole, 'it's just a joke bro!' or 'they are just misreading things!' from suggestive pages to me is mind boggling that it is tolerated, because of how creepy and offputting it is, and I would not be comfortable on games where that is accepted culturally.

Yeah, it does. The reason I haven't posted in this thread is because I didn't want to derail it but it's a core consideration if a game hasn't banned it entirely.

If a game is entirely collaborative and has no meaningful PVP, then you're mostly balanced around reinforcing a feeling of worth and satisfaction at how much someone can meaningfully contribute, and power is important to that but honestly there's a number of settings where it's just not that important and it's more a matter of balancing how much attention each PC is shown and providing satisfying outcomes instead of how relatively strong each PC.

Now if PVP is a factor, that changes really heavily, because you have a couple questions about dinosaurs and how -much- of a power difference is fair, and people are going to be really heavily biased on how that should weigh. And there's a lot of questions that determine the flavor of the game.

What kind of chance in a fight should a fresh CG, brand new character have against the strongest character in the game? How easily should a new player be able to grow and rival the most established characters? Should an extremely powerful character ever be able to take on multiple characters simultaneously, even fresh CGs?

These aren't trivial questions. If a dinosaur can defeat fresh CGs with no risk, bullying can become extremely common place. If new CGs can threaten a dinosaur easily, you can have uninvested players casually drive off the most invested players in the game. The exact line of balance for power ranges may have an extremely strong effect on player behavior, barring other factors. It's not just about protecting new players from dinosaurs, but also protecting dinosaurs from feeling their time investment is completely meaningless, and being unwilling to do that and having no one at all do that.

@Nein Log into a roleplaying server on an MMO, go to a roleplaying hub with a few hundred people, or a forum with thousands of people just for that game, ask who there plays world of darkness. Probably well under one percent. Then ask who knows what Undertale or MLP is. Probably almost everyone. 'Popularity crest' is probably inaccurate, 'generational divide' I think captures it better.

"Hey guys anyone want to play a vampire game where you need to buy or illegally download dozens of books for an antiquated text format and then deal with lunatics or a shit load of elitists that will mock you not having the game memorized?" It's not an easy fucking sell, I'll tell you that.