Best posts made by crusader

@Miss-Demeanor That is a problem on games where +votes are limitless, and you have things like +room/vote. I rememer how silly it was on Metro. More restricted votes, contrary to popular expectations, do encourage the majority of players to reward the best RPers.

There will always be cliquish/circle jerk behavior, but most people on mushes don't even have 5 real friends in their inner circle, and they really do try to give their votes to the most deserving, while presenting themselves as the most deserving.

Nothing on a mush is true or false with anything more than scattershot precision. But some policies do hit more of the intended target than others.

@Arkandel Of course there is a best solution. There's always a best solution. It simply depends on your priorities. If you have one set of priorities, then the XP solution which is 'best for you', is the one that hits the most high notes and the fewest low notes that you're trying to prioritize or de-prioritize.

To my own priorities, which is maximizing activity on the grid, I find a limited vote system to have worked best. I've drawn this conclusion from nearly twenty years of observing various systems in action, and what they encouraged or discouraged. Someone that has different priorities is free to disagree with me.

But I would have reservations about anyone who approached the XP system as anything other than an incentive to encourage activity on the grid.

@Coin said:

Nnnnnot the same thing when you're offering a product you expect people to pay for. Not even close to the same thing.

It's not the same thing. But it's close to the same thing. You're trying to draw in strangers, and make them interested in what you have to offer.

I've over it, though. I had my immediate reaction, and now I hope Supes and the game all the best. I hope he attracts enough likeminded people to create a fun and sustainable RP environment.

@Arkandel
Honestly, what you have described sounds less like a Consent-based game (which I find boring) and more like an ICA=ICC game, which I approve of.

All games should be ICA=ICC. Purely consent-based games always end up as very dull, sandboxed affairs.

Not to mention, the more agency you take away players to affect things ICly, the more they turn to OOC methods. Which is probably why every purely Consent game I've ever seen, was a hotbed of drama.

As unpopular as this opinion will be, I actually think that PrPs have had an overall negative effect on MUSH culture.

Some of them are great and well done, but a lot of them aren't. I've also never seen players take them particularly seriously. They phone in participation, never expecting that they'll face any danger from a PrP that could threaten their character.

There's something about staff running a plot, which has always made players sit up and take notice and invest more in the outcome, even if XP wasn't given as a reward.

I'd rather create more vehicles and conflicts for players to ICly hash out on the grid amongst themselves, because at the end of the day, only players can keep up with other players. A cadre of dedicated storyteller staff (not headwiz types, and not approval or administrator types...just storytellers), kept around to spice things up, would be better than random PrPs.

If someone has a great idea, or a great story to tell, then they can get 'deputized' for a temporary duration.

Obviously, current culture is almost 90% prp and 10% staff-run, where it used to be 90% staff-run and 10% prp.