[MUD-Dev] New Topic: Butthead features

[Matt Chatterley]

On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, Jon A. Lambert wrote:

> > From: Jeff Kesselman <jeffk at tenetwork.com>
> > Subject: [MUD-Dev] New Topic: Butthead features
> > 
> > Once they have one who been good enough to attain high standing, what keeps
> > thsi oen froom bootstrapping up a Butthead hriearchy?
> >
> 
> This is character development advancement and does not entail getting 
> security or "staff" powers.  Players have limits on how many RPs they
> can give.  It would be a large butthead invasion indeed to begin to 
> conduct a campaign of character bootstrapping. 

Right. You'd need RPs from a selection of players - even if players could
give lots, I'd imagine. I'd certainly take that tact (not too many players
as a proportion of the base, otherwise you vastly favour those who have
more online time).

You really will not get a large influx of idiots at one time to cause this
- what can happen is a gradual accumulation of an idiot population among
the playerbase; I've seen the latter happen several times, from both ends
of the mud.
 
> Our goals in player-base size are quite different too, I would imagine.
>  
> > Two guys i know got killed b ya guardsman last nigth ebcause they
> > accdientally targetd each other TRYING to click on a pig.. and the
> > gaurdsman immediately rushde in swinging his sword.
> > 
> > Problem with bots is.. thye are stupid.  Accdients can cause reactions, and
> > if theirt actiosn are preprogrammed, they just becoem another part of the
> > system to "beat." 
> 
> Fatal 'bots in civilized areas should be rare.  The city guards attack to 
> subdue not to kill.  Those guarding special areas can certainly be fatal.
> We will have imprisonment, trials and all that.  If no one is on who
> can play judge, players rot in their cells until it's convenient.

This was one of the first decisions I made with automated law - the guards
will only set themselves to 'kill' if given little alternative (although
this is locally configurable by area builders - a "leniency" score, if you
like). I don't by default plan on using players heavily inside the judging
process, though.

> We have touched on a little of the 'bot stuff on the list and I hope to 
> make my 'bots a bit more unpredictable than the norm.  The "unseen" mud
> city population with it's rumor mongering and crime reporting might
> be a good way to make these devious acts a bit uncertain.

Yeah. :)
 
> > Ah...  human moderation.  Thsi indeed helps with the bot rpoblem, but it
> > brignins its own qaundries.. levels of staffing fro instacne, what kind of
> > survailance mechanisms do your peoepl have? Do tehy get notified of events
> > thropugh out the worls or do teh yhave to be there?
> 
> Snoop is available.  A form of logged 'wiznet' will be available; quite
> similar to the one available on the newest ROM versions.

Wiznet? Similar to Intermud[2|3]?

Snoop is an extremely useful tool - and certainly fits in here.
 
> > 
> > Oh and i TOTALLY disagree with your next statement. To the butthead, staff
> > powers are just the higherst level of "power" he/she will ACTIVELY try to
> > con you into giving the to him/her a  freind they can easily manuilpulate.
> 
> I thought you were originally referring to the abusive player.  These
> are a distinctly different breed than the abusive immortal.  Quite
> different issues are involved here.  I guess this is likely considering
> how many HnS muds promote their staff.  A lot of times this involves someone
> winning the game and having nothing to do except waiting patiently for
> promotion.  

If a game promotes you to wizard status of some sort simply for the virtue
of having reached level X (or other standard game objective), there are
going to be problems with that game.

Having the qualities required to reach X doesn't automatically mean you
have the qualities requried to be a useful member of staff. Obviously.
 
> On a role-playing mud, one has to gamemaster a goodly number of events and 
> contribute to the storyline of the world before promotion occurs.  There
> just isn't a game-end or level where this interaction would stop.  I 
> simply cannot see the abusive player passing this test.  
> 
> Can any Mushers comment on this?

Theres an approach to staffing relevant to all games (but perhaps
prominent in RP intense games), whereby the powers you have for your
status are vastly less important than your responsibilities, which involve
people as much as, or more than code.

Regards,
	-Matt Chatterley
	http://user.itl.net/~neddy/index.html
"Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's
	mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them." -George Orwell