[MUD-Dev] Ray Feist interview

[Travis Casey]

Tuesday, January 09, 2001, 11:07:57 AM, Lee Sheldon <linearno at gte.net> wrote:
>> From: mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu
>> [mailto:mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu]On Behalf Of
>> Travis Casey

>> Paper RPGs can offer the same challenges; you definitely have lack
>> of narrative control if you're doing them properly, since the
>> players also have some control.  You can have multiple simultaneous
>> stories, since again, you have multiple players.  Some GMs run more
>> than one group through the same world at the same time
>> (conceptually, not literally -- they might have two groups that
>> each meet once a week) and let events "leak" from one to the other,
>> which allows for even more simultaneous stories.

>> Something I've done as a paper GM and enjoyed is run the same
>> group, with two different sets of characters, in the same world at
>> the "same time".  This lets both them and me see the same
>> overarcing events from very different points of view, which makes
>> for a very interesting experience.

>> Some groups have multiple GMs, who may each have their own
>> individual storylines.  For example, I played/GMed in a Star Trek
>> campaign where a friend and I took turns as GM; like a mud, this
>> requires giving up more narrative control (since you're sharing it
>> with someone else on an equal level) and creates more simultaneous
>> stories (since we each had our own subplots).

>> There are even some paper RPG groups who use what's called a
>> "troupe" style of play, which is close to what many MUSHes and
>> other heavy RP muds do; in that style, any player is allowed to
>> come up with an run plots, so that everyone (or at least, everyone
>> who wants to) takes turns as GM.

> Travis,

> I'm not really disagreeing here.  Your examples just reminded me of
> the following.

> Trying to apply the paper RPG analogy to larger scale MUDs is
> dangerous because in online games you sit side by side with
> strangers.

Trying to apply any analogy can be dangerous, because it can be easy
to forget that analogy is not identity.  Analogy, IMHO, should be a
starting point for getting ideas -- look at what worked and didn't
work there, and why, and use those as starting points for thinking
about the problem.  The problems come when people use them as ending
points instead of starting points.

It should be noted, though, that there are situations with paper RPGs
where all or most of the players are strangers -- for example, GMs
running games at conventions, or when a GM is invited to run a game
for a group by one member of the group he knows, when he doesn't know
the rest of the group.

> We carefully police our RPGs at the kitchen table, making sure that
> the other participants are of a like-roleplaying bent, and have the
> necessary level of savoir faire to contribute to the entertainment.
> It's easy to throw somebody out of your MUD for sexual harrassment.
> It's harder to throw them out because their role-player or
> storytelling instincts aren't all that great.

IMHO, the problem isn't those who aren't great role-players or
storytellers -- I've had plenty of people who weren't "all that great"
in games that I've run, with no problems.  I'd say the biggest problem
to a storyline on a mud (or in a paper RPG) is players who actively
work against the story or theme of the mud.  (E.g., a player who wants
a silly game when the GM wants a more serious one, or a player who
wants to go off on his/her own instead of staying with the rest of the
group in a paper game.)

Now, this is just speculation, but I can see two types of "problem"
players popping up in a mud:

 - Players who work against the theme.  Examples might include someone
   who won't RP on an RP mud, a player who wants to treat everything
   as a joke when the mud is supposed to have a serious theme, a
   player who wants to put SF elements into his/her character in a
   fantasy mud, etc.  (Note that any of those could be reversed and
   still be a problem... e.g., a player who insists on RPing in what's
   supposed to be a non-RP mud.)

   These people generally don't mean to be a problem... they're just
   trying to have fun, and don't realize that their idea of fun isn't
   the same as other people on the mud.  Sometimes they can be made to
   see that they're causing a problem, and to change their style of
   play.  In other cases, it may be necessary to suggest that they
   might be happier on a different mud, where they can play the way
   they want without disrupting things for others.

 - "Plot grief" players.  These are players who are actively seeking
   to disrupt things.  Examples include someone who goes out of
   his/her way to kill NPCs who are needed for plots, to steal needed
   items and prevent others from getting them, etc.

   These people do mean to be a problem.  If you're set on having
   fixed plots, the only real thing you can do is get rid of them.

   (Please note that not all players who do things like kill NPCs
   needed for plots or steal needed items are necessarily "plot grief"
   players; it's a question of motivation.  Some may fall into the
   first category -- they want to play as if on a hack-and-slash mud,
   where all NPCs exist to be killed and all items exist to be power
   boosts.)
   
If you really want to run a serious, heavy RP mud with involved
storylines, the most effective way to keep out these two kinds of
players is to have an application and review process for accepting new
players.  However, this is likely to be infeasible for anything other
than fairly small muds.

Some other things to do:

 - State clearly up-front what sort of mud this is meant to be.  Make
   sure that no one can make a character without seeing this
   information.  This will help week out players who are looking for a
   different sort of theme.  Doing it before character creation is
   important -- once a player has created a character and played with
   it some, the player is much less likely to want to leave and "lose
   that investment".

 - Design robust plots.  As far as possible, a plot should not have
   any single points of failure.  "Rescue the princess" has an
   inherent single point of failure -- someone can go in and kill
   the princess.  However, the plot should not fail simply because
   someone kills the king (after all, there are probably others at
   court who want the princess back).

 - Think ahead about what players might do.  If someone does kill the
   princess, what happens because of that?  Does the king think the
   kidnappers killed her, and declare them to be wanted, dead or
   alive?  Is there evidence that the kidnappers didn't do it?  You
   need to be ready to take whatever happens and weave it into the
   startings of a new plot.

IMHO, the ideal game world is one that appears "organic" -- where new
plots seem to naturally arise out of the known motivations of NPCs and
groups, crossed with what has already happened.  Rather than having a
preset plot for the players to follow, what the players do *becomes*
the plot.

With such a setup, "plot grief" players aren't necessarily a problem
-- since you're not fixed onto a particular plot, they don't derail,
they just redirect.  In effect, if they behave the way they usually
do, they're going to become villains for you.

The GM (or GMs) in such a setup no longer creates the plot, but simply
gives it bumps and nudges.  This is done by throwing in new plot
elements/seeds.  These are things that NPCs or NPC organizations in
the game world decide to do.  It's then up to the players to get
involved in these things -- trying to stop them, trying to help with
them, or whatever.

To keep things "organic", the main thing the GM has to look out for is
continuity.  This is done by thinking about how the NPCs that are
already in place would react to what's happening.

If you want to make a major plot shift, like an invasion, then it's
necessary to either find an NPC or NPC group that already has the
motivations to do it, or create a new NPC or NPC group that can fit
into the world, and give it/them the proper motivations.


All of this is simple in theory, but it's not easy to actually do.
Even on the scale of doing it for a small group of players, it
requires a considerable amount of effort; on the scale of doing it for
hundreds or thousands of players on a mud, this is likely to be a
full-time job for multiple people.  It may be possible to create
automated tools for helping out -- which is basically what my idea
from a month or two back about a "plot generator" is -- but it's still
going to require a good deal of human effort.

--
       |\      _,,,---,,_    Travis S. Casey  <efindel at earthlink.net>
 ZZzz  /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_   No one agrees with me.  Not even me.
      |,4-  ) )-,_..;\ (  `'-'
     '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)   


_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev