[MUD-Dev] Guilds & Politics

[Stephen Zepp]

>[snip about having an increasing number of jerks in muds]
>
>> >I've got one question here.  Both UO and M59 was marketed as
>> >roleplaying games right.  What's wrong about being a jerk then?  Will
>> >this tendency translate well to non-roleplaying games?
>> 
>> Theoretically, nothing _should_ be wrong with playing a jerk.  The problem
>> is that, as currently constructed, online rpgs favor the jerks, the
>> killers, and in general the aggressors, while limiting more severely those
>> who choose more traditional/edifying roles to play.  In effect, "killing
>> things" becomes the path of least resistance, and dealing with characters
>> that have borne the brunt of this becomes a large focus for the game (and
>> the support organization).

New to the list, so pardon if I step on any toes or violate any protocols :)

So why note code it so that the "jerks" pay for being jerks?  If
shopkeepers, guards, entire kingdoms learn the reputation of "jerks" (
meaning chaotic killers, etc. ), and _do_ something about it, the "jerk"
just won't be around.  It's sorta hard to kill newbies when you are hiding
for your very survival from the Kingdom of Kasgar's elite killing team (
npc OR pc ).


>Rightly so. Roleplaying is a cooperative environment. If somebody deci-
>des to ruin my fun in the game  because he thinks it is 'in character'
>then he is definitely not playing the same game as I am. Roleplaying a
>conflict with an evil character is definitely possible.  You could try
>to log on to e.g. Elendor mush. This is a tolkien based game and there
>are players for both the good and the evil side of that story and main
>part of the game is about the conflicts between those two groups. How-
>ever  there is a lot of communication going on  to ensure that this is
>fun for all players. An orc character can not simply walk into Bree to
>kill every inhabitant. Or if they tried they would be ridiculed by the
>other players.

Hmm..I tend to disagree on this point.  Instead of ridicule, use diplomacy,
then force if required.  Again, if an orc walks in and slaughters Bree, a
war would start, neh?  Tightly designed reputation and diplomacy code will
help to 1) not allow a player that is this chaotic to ever get powerful
enough to actually perform an action like that, and
2) if they do, their own "side" will do their damndest to eliminate the
threat to the current diplomatic status quo.

Finally, there can always be more opponents than friends for a player like
this.  Eventually, the combined weight of his enemies will keep him from
being able to act in such a manner.

>
>>  If instead, playing a jerk/thief/killer carried with
>> it some discernable risk or consequences that were as onerous to those
>> players as being killed is to most others, fewer people would take this
>> route, and the rest of the online society would be more able to deal with
>> those remaining on its own.  

Nods, as I stated above...guilds, areas, kingdoms, races, what have you
keeping track of reputations of various actors ( players or npcs ) they
intereact with will alleviate the major drawbacks of player such as this.
Initially getting rid of the powerful ones with a new implementation of a
system like this may be difficult, but new ones just won't survive long
enough to get powerful enough to be a problem, IMHO.

Zoran