How to Revive a Server?

[Necro-367]

How to revive a server? Well, I'm no -professional-, but I have gone through this before with my other server. Every single player plays a roll in the success, so read this and don't -ever- discredit yourself. And if you're a brand new player, you play an even larger roll; as you're the recently acquired and newly enthused addition that we need.

The Key Factors
- Everyone needs to do their part
This means that everyone who wants to see the server thrive and return to it's original glory needs to actively participate in making that happen. Meaning people need to log on and make an effort to Roleplay. Logging on is the primary concern with this, but Roleplay is very important. People get burnt out quicker from sitting on a server where you have a Aes Sedai AFK at the White Tower, a Ashaman AFK at the Black Tower, and a Factionless PC sitting alone in Four Kings. People need to make an effort to Roleplay with each other, even if it's pushing their character OOCly in a direction they might not wanted to have gone; just to provide/receive Roleplay.

- DMs need to be DMs
I'm currently a Dungeon Master on another NWN server called "World of Harry Potter", we've gone through the same crisis of hitting a low and trying to pull ourselves back out of the gutter; it can be done. Dungeon Masters are the key to everything. Not only do regular events/DM RP provide a desire for players to continue playing, but a DM's mere presence can play a big role in whither players want to be on a server. Now this also goes without saying that a single DM should -not- carry an entire server. Something we do on my other server is guarantee the players an event every Wednesday and Saturday (Random events are encouraged, but it's good to let the players know that a guaranteed event will happen. It guarantees a server population increase on those days, and can slowly bring people's attention back), and we rotate which DM handles it. The Main Plot however is handled by the Admin and Head DM so the other DMs can enjoy without knowing too much Meta. Rotating schedules helps relief the stress that a vigilant DM can sometimes find himself under.

- Constant Updates but not to disturb presence
What I mean by this is that you need to have constant updates going in. The server should be regularly resetting with new content that is slowly worked on. It's bad to wait until you have a HUGE amount of new content and then release it all at one; because by the time you're ready to do that your players have got bored and left. Now this isn't to say you should overwork yourself in the Toolset. Surprising enough, someone like a Head Builder or Admin can actually make a difference to the Player's motivation by showing up IC to Roleplay on a semi-frequent basis. Our Admin is our Scripter (I'm our Builder) and he makes his best attempt to log in at least once a night, and you can see the Players appreciate it. They greet him, happy to see him, ask him what he's working on, give him ideas, ask about new content that released... Working to create masterpieces in the Toolset is great, but it's also worthless if it's for a server you never see.

- Show a desire to see people return
This really involves people getting in touch as best as possible with all the old players they can, and reminding them the server is still there; and that people still log on. I've had to do this when my server hit a real low. I was honestly surprised by the amount of people who said "Woah, it's still alive?" and then got all the information from me and later poked their head back in. Not everyone stayed, but some did. And even if only one person returned; that'd of been enough to have made the effort worth while. Keep in mind it's worthless to get old players to return unless we can take care of all the prior first. That is why I list this one last. We need to have all our pawns set up before we start to move our big pieces and get people to return. It's the equivalent of a theme park breaking down, therefore losing it's customers... Then trying to re-open and remind it's customers it's still there, before ever fixing the rides.

Thank you to Capulet and all the numerous, current DMs/Admins that we have. Especially with the vigilance that everyone has had with insuring a server host is taken care of.

As to Flame ~ Seeing you post on the forums has been inspiration enough for me. I sincerely hope I can see you IG again, and I've been keeping a much more vigilant eye on the server due to those hopes. I miss your hard work.

[Deleted]

Cheers for the post. Glad to see your energy and commitment. Apologies for outdated points of view perhaps, but my thoughts are these.

If I were to write this, I would put less emphasis on DMs despite your important caveats but that is mostly because from experience it's been increasingly difficult to find people willing to DM and commit to events. This might not always be the case of course.

Regarding updates, I see what you mean: but we also have/had such few scripters and builders that I'm grateful for anything they produce for us and I acknowledge that everyone has their own particular creative process which may or may not fit in with the above.

Unfortunately at the moment my laptop's cooling system is wrecked and I can't really do anything that uses graphics without crashing, else I'd be tempted to run a one-off something or other. My time is limited at the moment, but will keep you posted if I invest in a new cooling pad or device that can keep the machine alive for a while.


I've taken the liberty to tidy up a few forum things:

1. Edited 'The Server is Down' to 'The Server is Up' - seems more positive on first viewing! The entire thread could be deleted, but it isn't really my place.

2. I've edited the Key Links Directory (http://srweaves.proboards.com/post/2668/thread) so the 'DM Profiles and Event Times' now links to Astarael's 'Current Staff Structure' which better reflects who is doing what I would guess.

3. I've used the content from Astarael's 'Current Staff Structure' to replace the content of the 'DM Profiles and Event Times' by Dreamchild & myself - so the link present on the right hand-side of the page in the 'Upcoming events' box will now take you to the latest information.

(I would have just replaced the link on the right hand-side entirely but I can no longer access the back end of the forum to do that. I also archived the old content if needed).

4. Can I suggest that srweaves.proboards.com/thread/471/wheel-time-pattern-faq (Wheel of Time: Beyond the Pattern FAQ & Rules) - particularly the rules part under question 2 'click here' - be possibly amended in light of the 'Community Values and Standards post' at srweaves.proboards.com/thread/595/community-values-standards?

Either way - please feel free to do as you please with content I produced for stickies to streamline information and/or reduce stickies that double up on information, or which are no longer pertinent.

I have everything archived personally

Cheers,
Flame

[Azelle]

I'd like to point out that this server has never been particularly welcoming to new players.

One of the most important steps would be to curb the petty politics that has, from what I've seen torn apart every WoT server. When you have a small group, you can't afford to have those few players fighting with each other. This is especially true when there's no clearly defined ruleset and it becomes a game of "Who can get the DM to like them more".

If that isn't dealt with, it's simply going to collapse again shortly after, as any conflict is going to leave someone feeling badly done by. Even someone trying hard to be objective will still have their decisions coloured by how they see the world.

Also the other obvious issue that it's had for a long time. Absolutely abysmal player retention.

At one point, TGS did have a number of new people deciding to join, only to leave not long thereafter once they found that the server was set up, (in blatant admission) by design, not to be intrinsically enjoyable for new people so that extrinsic rewards would have more impact (and also perhaps in my cynical interpretation, so that position holders could power trip over newer people by marginalizing them).

That's needed addressing for a long time, a game designed to not be fun until you're 6 months+ into it is a game that fails as entertainment. Though, at this point I'm worried that fixing that might come too late. The number of completely new people has dropped very significantly with the loss of the default server list.

[Deleted]

Obviously haven't been around for 8 months or so, but would genuinely be interested in hearing more details about what you mean exactly so as to have a properly productive discussion. I'm going to ask these questions in a very abstract way - that is, I don't really know what is going on, or if there are people doing things, but I'd still appreciate more clarity of your points (and here I'm just interested as someone who still very much cares about this server & its futures).

- How do you think the server is not welcoming? What more do you think could be done? Is it a general culture in your view? Is it information related or?

- What kind of petty politics do you mean? I think there needs to be a clear differentiation, because the server (referring here to the 2013 restart) has obviously had a lot of (political) discussion, debate, and server wide voting on various proposals in the suggestions forum etc.? And I know that these kinds of processes aren't perfect either.

- With reference to this server (referring here to the 2013 restart), what do you mean by DM favouritism? Do you think that's been the case then? Or are you talking about possible issues in the past? In relation to this, what do you mean by 'clearly defined ruleset'? Is this something not already within the FAQ & Rules, Staff Structure, Community Guidelines, or part of the general culture, in your view?

- Can you be more specific about the reasons why you don't think it's (intrinsically) fun until 6 months in? Is this something you feel is relevant to here exactly or is this in relation to issues you've felt on past iterations?

- Either way, how would you restructure things differently in your view?

[Azelle]

Nov 26, 2014 4:59:07 GMT -5 @flame said:

- How do you think the server is not welcoming? What more do you think could be done? Is it a general culture in your view? Is it information related or?

Primarily I feel that the competitive environment is to blame for that, where people care far too much for gathering personal power/positions. I know that I personally stopped logging on when I learned that it was getting even worse.

Nov 26, 2014 4:59:07 GMT -5 @flame said:

- What kind of petty politics do you mean? I think there needs to be a clear differentiation, because the server (referring here to the 2013 restart) has obviously had a lot of (political) discussion, debate, and server wide voting on various proposals in the suggestions forum etc.? And I know that these kinds of processes aren't perfect either.

It's not so much the fact that politics exists, but that those politics are directed against other players. It's primarily the in character clique politics that have been problematic. It kind of works in a large server, but having groups working against each other as opposed to against the NPCs splits the small server into even smaller groups.

Nov 26, 2014 4:59:07 GMT -5 @flame said:

- With reference to this server (referring here to the 2013 restart), what do you mean by DM favouritism? Do you think that's been the case then? Or are you talking about possible issues in the past? In relation to this, what do you mean by 'clearly defined ruleset'? Is this something not already within the FAQ & Rules, Staff Structure, Community Guidelines, or part of the general culture, in your view?

It's almost impossible to avoid the existence of favouritism when someone is making decisions on things. It doesn't even need to be intentional, it can very well be the result of seeing the world differently (e.g. One person might see honourable behaviour as something completely silly, while others might see it as something to test, but in the end reward; likewise with things like deception.)

When I stated a clearly defined ruleset, it was in comparison to things such as the built in mechanics. Which, while you can argue that there may be imbalance in them, are, in effect objective within those constraints. I'm not saying that that should be used primarily, but that it's inherently not fair, and that any conflict between two players with a loser isn't going to be like it is in any other game where you'd think "I need to work on my X", but is going to end up with whomever lost out feeling like they're not going to get anywhere.

It can get bad enough when everyone is on the same side and things get split unevenly. It's even worse when you're actively working against each other. This comes into even starker contrast with new people if their characters take issue with the way others act towards them and it becomes a choice of "Do what you're told, Enter a popularity contest as an unknown against people who the others know well, or leave." The former is, for a lot of people not fun to play, the second is pretty much a doomed venture, so, that leaves the third.

Nov 26, 2014 4:59:07 GMT -5 @flame said:

- Can you be more specific about the reasons why you don't think it's (intrinsically) fun until 6 months in? Is this something you feel is relevant to here exactly or is this in relation to issues you've felt on past iterations?

It's something I've seen occur in every Wheel of Time server (Mirrors of the Pattern came across as slightly better about it from what I saw, but I wasn't around during its primary active period), primarily in regard to female channelers, but it has occured with other concepts as well.

Starting with the most egregious example. The white tower's lower ranks have been admitted as sucking to play, by design every time there has been complaints over people not having fun playing it, usually followed by something along the lines of maybe you shouldn't be playing a novice, which would be great, but I've never seen a wilder's channeling accepted as happening (Despite there being examples in canon), and the one implementation of it made it almost completely unfeasible. (I did have one character that was able to manage hunting areas under the system, but he was specifically designed to overcome that weakness, and it would have been great if potions that non-channelers were using weren't effected by it...)

I'd even heard arguments against adding kin that were along the lines of "But then no one would join the white tower."
When you have to actively force people to join by cutting off other options, it seems like a signal that it might need significant improvements. As for the six months figure, it's just an estimate based on when my guess of when I joined to when the server shut down, as I was active during that time and primarily played my white tower character, and still didn't reach Aes Sedai until going to MotP.

That said, while they're the most obvious example, the same issue exists in other factions to an extent, where I've seen very little focus on lower ranks/factionless characters, which is where new people will end up. Again, the only exceptions to this where I've seen it work well have been... a group of IRL friends who were primarily playing amongst themselves, and people who had already been playing for a long time.

Nov 26, 2014 4:59:07 GMT -5 @flame said:

- Either way, how would you restructure things differently in your view?

The main things from my perspective would be; a favouring of NPCs as enemies as opposed to other players, a rule of... "Don't force other characters into anything unless their player consents to it", and a resolution to include characters even when it might not make complete sense.

Seems like it would be sufficient for the most part, assuming that people followed the spirit of it (Inclusivity, ensuring that people enjoy playing over the desire to go on a power trip). Female channelers still need either an improvement to the White Tower, or Wilders being accepted iC as actually working, and implemented in such a way that it doesn't completely break them mechanically.

Removing positions with limited slots may be necessary (Or making them independent positions without authority over other ranks) if people don't stick to the spirit, but I see no reason why such extreme measures would need to be taken unless people do insist on marginalising others anyway.

[Deleted]

Thanks for clarifying your points. My responses again try and address what I think are each of the key points. Apologies for any misunderstandings, please correct me as needed.

I'm going to preface this with a copy and paste of Astarael's community guidelines (as well as reference it later on), just because I think it does 'codify' some of what you asked for at the end. Obviously there's always divergence between guidelines and practical reality, but well, there's very little one can do about that really (I don't want a totalitarian order, and well, let's face it they don't work to close all the gaps either!)...other than sit down, talk, mediate, try and resolve as much as possible.

Again, my views are perhaps out of date, but this is just my perspective on all of this.

I'm also going to be quite candid with some my responses, hope you all don't mind.

First of all, just to copy and paste:

srweaves.proboards.com/thread/595/community-values-standards

Community Standards

Every member of this community should:

1) Play nice. Be respectful.
2) Be friendly to others
3) Avoid making others feel left out if possible
4) Speak their mind and listen to what others are saying
5) Make apologies when necessary and try not to repeat mistakes
6) Accept apologies and move on

Every member of our staff should also:

1) Serve the community humbly
2) Accept community correction gracefully
3) Defend community members from standards violations
4) Communicate and collaborate well

This community does not tolerate:

* Cheating
* Gossip
* Slander
* OOC factions, cliques, divisions, power-blocs, etc.


1. Power gaming environment (so I read this as a problem with in-character 'power gaming' in the first instance, later on I address this under when you talk about mechanics)

I don’t really know what to say about this, because to a great extent the desire for ‘power’ ought to be in-character related rather than from some kind of out-of-character perspective. I know a lot of old players did kill their oldest characters and start new ones, too, but you’re right that there has been or was a fair bit of vying for position – particularly in the White Tower. At the same time, however, that does seem to fit the in-character politics of the White Tower. But also there are lots of other characters that have no in-character desire for greater power or to manipulate others. Additionally, characters in White Tower positions don't always do this just to one-up others and so forth..

Some brief points mechanically before more below:

One of the concerns we addressed early on mechcanically was to change the shielding system to favour the defender, so more or less one couldn’t be shielded easily as that seemed to be a big fear (although I don’t think I saw this happen once here in a situation of actual conflict – only in Novice training). Nevertheless this was done and voted upon.

Mechanically, we also put a lot of time into altering faction gear so that the difference between rank 3 and epic was diminished too (especially Sere who had to do all of the toolset work). And this was voted on.

So my opinion of this, at least when I left, was that it was perhaps getting a little better rather than worse...obviously this is subjective!

In terms of the other factions, there wasn’t often much in the way of competition for epic ranks when I was around and I basically promoted anyone who was doing a consistent active RP job for their faction.

2. Politics against other players

So I’m reading this as you preferring the game become more completely Player vs. Environment in light of the fact that small factions can’t really be sustained with the numbers we have?

While I think that has some validity (in relation to numbers per faction, as such), the problem then becomes one of limiting creativity and player choice.

One of the reasons we introduced non-faction gear was because some people didn’t really feel an affinity with the existing range of factions (obviously the choice here was limited to the White Tower, Black Tower, Children of the Light, and then the Legion upon request) or because they wanted something different.

I don’t really know how to stop players being political in-character without forcing in-character play to be 100% nice which seems to run counter to the idea of a roleplay server. I think people just have to be mature that if a player makes an in-character choice to foil another during an event, for instance, by concealing information or falsely misleading them, for example, they kind of should just go along with the ride and roleplay that…

Maybe you disagree, but from my perspective I’m never going to police that kind of in-character creativity.

The only possible solution to what you’re suggesting would seem to be to force everyone into a single faction (essentially) or force alliances between the White Tower and Black Tower to be extremely close so that they absolutely get along.

During the time I was here, there were treaty goings on with the White Tower, Black Tower, and Andor, but part of the roleplay was the tension and fraughtness of those.

3. Favouritism

Indeed, no one can be objective ultimately no matter how hard they try. I’m still not sure I get your point here or whether you could provide more specific examples? I think the answer to this in general would have to be to carefully hear out and address grievances with players if they have them out-of-character. I’ve sat down and mediated many issues between players or between players and DMs and I think it’s important to hear someone out fully.

4. Objective mechanics issues

So you mean here something like someone with a Heron Marked Blade vs. someone without one? Because I can see what you mean here if we’re talking about purely struggling with another person in mechanical terms. But these objective constraints (mechanically) certainly don’t apply with the range of possible in character moves or words one could engage in without actually mechanically fighting them.

I know it's difficult for new players sometimes, but DMs should be able to help translate and sort out whether an issue is an in-charcter or out-of-character grievance. Again this is going to be ultimately subjective. I have no problem in suggesting in-character ways of handling issues to new people that might not be sure about what they can do here within reason. I've also been quite happy to speak to faction leaders about the kinds of things they do for their faction etc. For out-of-character, see above.

Maybe completely statless gear would be the mechanical answer to the first point then if that's what you mean? Or some other version of parity even more so than the already existing reductions to epic items and so forth?

5. "Do what you’re told / popularity contest / leave"

This is obviously a bad feeling to have. I don’t know what can be done or legislated about this neccessarily beyond what's already down in the FAQ, in the community guidelines and so on. To some extent it’s one of those things that it takes time for someone to get to know another, their character, and RP, and this isn’t a game where you are just given everything you could possibly want instantly... But I think this is true of anything, more or less – whether one joins a football team, a gaming club, a choir, or whatever. It takes a bit of time for the people to get to know you.

Of course we should always try and be considerate to other players out-of-character, and we should all encourage that kind of environment. And administrators should intervene in the case of abuse, harassment, etc. And seek to help out and respond quickly to any concerns, especially in terms of new players finding their way.

Sometimes there are certain in-character excesses, I would guess, but again I’ve always been happy to sit down and address any grievances and then mediate the issue on the players behalf if necessary. And I think the guidelines here advocate a similar stance. I’d hope whoever is in similar administrative positions would always do the same and work out the issues fully before doing anything else.

Again this seems in-part sort of an out-of-character issue with in character treatment. Whatever the extent this takes places, and it's difficult to quantify...I’m certainly as frustrated as anyone when higher ranks do act poorly in regard to lower rank characters. I don’t mean to say I’m complaining about them being ‘mean’.

I do think the onus is on faction leaders and epics to try and be creative with their lower ranked characters and not simply rehash copy/paste material or get them to do repeated/excessive menial chores that go beyond the idea of a general representation. This isn't a general critique of anyone specific.

I obviously do have regrets about promotions I have done in the past though, wherever it might be, when faction leaders or epics simply just don’t engage with their lower ranked recruits etc., after a little time.

6. Not fun until 6 months issue

Well I would say the Third Age iterations were fun within 6 months (I started when I was 14), speaking personally. Can't comment on Mirrors of the Pattern. But I had fun as a completely new player. Obviously don't have that 'new' experience beyond that.

The White Tower Novice thing is a tricky issue, especially with numbers low. I can say that there did seem a lot of effort put in by certain players here to help Novices (but not all). There was also a push to get promotion to Accepted happening more quickly.

I tried my best to include Novices & Accepted in events, sometimes in clandestine ways of course (in characterly). Or, by forcing the situation because it was inescapable. Or, by making an event entirely non-threatening. I know some players helped and did this kind of thing too.

I would say that you’d have been an Aes Sedai here sometime before 6 months though, with reasonable activity. I know that wasn’t the case with Third Age for example, but then that was somewhat different due to the server size.

I’d disagree with a lack of attention to lower ranks in factions personally – I feel that I have tried to split my attention fairly evenly, and often prefer to open events through lower ranked characters. I know this is not always the case in every instance, and would encourage people to always try and be as even and inclusive with this kind of thing.

7. Favouring NPCs as enemies only

It would seem to me that most events more or less do have an NPC enemy component, though. Or at least some kind of potential antagonist.

Again I’m not entirely sure how this works unless you DM ban players from ever doing anything conflictual between each other in-character?

8. Rules to prevent characters doing something without the other players permission

There are more or less rules about this in regard to: excessive punishments, possible deaths, loss of limb etc. Not even a DM can or would enforce them. I don’t think this has changed here.. Having said that, if you want to ignore warnings of consequences if you, say, walk into a trolloc horde on your own then ultimately I'd have to ignore the whole thing if you didn't want to accept them. But I've never seen this happen here. Maybe did see this once or twice on Third Age with obviously young age players.

Can you be more clear about what you think this kind of rule would extend to though, I'm not really sure?

9. Include characters even if it doesn’t make sense

Sure, I can agree with this and I’ve tried in the past to get everyone to do this as much as possible, whilst still providing some kind of IC excuse. Having said that, Astarael’s community guidelines do seem to cover a lot of what you’re saying – what's your opinion here?

srweaves.proboards.com/thread/595/community-values-standards

Community Standards

Every member of this community should:

1) Play nice. Be respectful.
2) Be friendly to others
3) Avoid making others feel left out if possible
4) Speak their mind and listen to what others are saying
5) Make apologies when necessary and try not to repeat mistakes
6) Accept apologies and move on

Every member of our staff should also:

1) Serve the community humbly
2) Accept community correction gracefully
3) Defend community members from standards violations
4) Communicate and collaborate well

This community does not tolerate:

* Cheating
* Gossip
* Slander
* OOC factions, cliques, divisions, power-blocs, etc.

10. Not capping limited positions

One of the ideas from the beginning of this server iteration was not to limit the cap of epic positions. I would guess it hasn’t changed much. I guess the final move of allowing several people or more to be the equivalent of faction leader didn’t take place, but there was plenty of room for multiple people to make epic 2 for example, if they roleplayed consistently for it. Was quite happy to work with faction leaders to invent multiple parallel positions, or things like ambassadorial roles and so forth, multiple Sitters from the same faction, honorary weapons masters for factions rather than being strictly part of the chain of command, etc. etc.. What’s your take on this? Is this not far enough?

11. White Tower improvement/wilders

Not too sure about what to say here. I’d certainly encourage things along the line of making things better for Novices and Accepted and getting them involved as much as possible.
So I’d leave this all up for debate.

As to the question of wilders etc., I guess the opinion has (I think) generally been that it’d be very weird for the setting. It’d also certainly further split factions which is what you seem to be against. It’d certainly generate a ton of player conflict because in in-character terms the White Tower wouldn’t really abide this.

At the same time, I would personally not be opposed to well thought out idea around a conclave of wilders or some kind of Knitting Circle, Seafolk solution. But again, these would all further split up the player base so I’m not sure how helpful this is..

Can you maybe say more about this in light of your other views, if I'm interpreting you correctly?

12. While I don’t necessarily agree exactly with some of what you’ve said, I would throw this suggestion out there that might alleviate some other problems for new players without legislating against in-character creativity:

I’m quite aware that the vault wipe option wasn’t chosen to favour the return of old players who’d come back to relive, build on, or give good ends to their favourite characters. And I know there’s always issues with this kind of thing vis-à-vis new characters with such a long server history.

Maybe this below would be a possible solution? Because I know forum style roleplay groups for instance often allow someone to start a slightly higher ranked character as well as a few others. So, just throwing an idea out and maybe it's worth considering now in light of the small playerbase:

So, the idea: "Every unique player gets a rank 2 or 3 character in a faction of their choice, receiving relevant basic information from the faction leader or available archive materials. After that, they can also create characters like normal in whatever faction. There would obviously be some onus on the player to read around their faction a bit, ask questions, the setting, and so forth in order to create a backstory for such a character".

[Azelle]

I had much longer point by point analysis that I spent a few hours writing up... but then I accidentally pressed backspace.

I'll try to summaries the points I was making in it while the memory is still fresh.

1:
- There are people who enjoy the act of gathering power.
- Not everyone is like that
- Just because someone doesn't care to cooerce other players, it doesn't mean that they enjoy being coerced themselves.
- The fact that people do the former, and that it can be used on the latter means that those who fall under the latter absolutely need to do the former just to prevent others doing so to them.
- Thus, people who would like to play for fun are forced into competition, which they don't enjoy, thus they don't play.
- Mechanically things were getting better, however, you misinterpreted what I meant when I said the problem was getting worse.
- I was referring to the decision that instead of the positions that were already in place, everything was going to be possible (So long as the staff like you)
- With the previous positions, outside of some events (Which may be their factions jurisdiction) and Channelers with wilders, you could fairly safely ignore them when they tried to throw their weight around, it's a lot harder when they single handedly set the policy of the place.



2:
- While not ideal, I'm quite understanding that some players do enjoy the politics dynamic. One of my good friends does the same on another site.
- Ideally people would be working together, but, it would be sufficient to fix the greatest problem.
- The main issue is that such things can be forced on people that don't want to, with any conflict decided by... the DM.
- On a Play by Post site that I currently RP on, there are political accounts, and they do come into conflict. However, in the event of conflict, the resolution is decided by the two players working together to decide on it instead of calling on the staff, (who, as we agreed will hold a bias, no matter how hard they try not to) to dictate it, with the aggressor losing if they insist on it without the other's consent.

I have never heard a single complaint over it, and it does a good job of keeping such conflicts as being between two consenting parties, and only occuring when both players feel that it would be an interesting story.

I can see a way that it could be potentially abused (Snatching up everything unclaimed and then using that to dominate every event), but I do still have enough trust in people to hope that it wouldn't happen, plus, if it does, it can be revised and the person that did give out things.



3:
- I don't have issues with the fact that it occurs, but with the fact that success in anything is determined by the feelings of the DMs, who, even if they try not to, will show favouritism.
- This, combined with success in such things giving power over other players/resources that can make other player characters practically window dressing in events is my problem with it.
- In the absence of an objective, or forced consensual resolution to conflicts, it essentially becomes a popularity contest with the DM as the arbiter, or other people in general in the case of one not being on.



4:
- This was a misinterprettation. I wasn't complaining about faction items. In a way, I think (in the case of non-channelers) they might be the fairest compromise that has been made. While I definitely wouldn't mind faction gear being on par with what anyone could find/hunting area gear being brought on par with high ranking ones, it's nowhere near the top of my list of priorities.
- In a sense, it's actually a fair compromise between a level playing field and a sense of progression. The advantages granted by non-channeler high ranking faction gear are definitely an advantage, but they're not an insurmountable advantage, getting lucky, or having a style specifically designed to prevail in a certain circumstance can let a lower ranked character overcome a higher ranked one.
- This was just mentioned as an example of an objective system, it wasn't a complaint, I'd actually like to see it used over the popularity contest that is currently used, as it gives everyone a chance.



5:
- The analogy breaks down due to one main reason, the fact that your performance in those isn't determined solely by how people think of you compared to others.
- This is a problem because of the fact that a popularity contest is essentially how every conflict is worked out.
- I already mentioned an example of a consensual conflict resolving system above, but for one that you do see in gaming circles, and that isn't about "Playing Nice":
- In the fighting game community, when people take issue with someone, usually such disputes are settled with a public match of an agreed upon game (Possibly with a wager involved). In the event that someone challenges you, it doesn't matter if the person who did so is a complete unknown or one of the most popular players in the community, you can still win by reducing their life bar to 0, and in the event that you lose, you know that it was fair and square.
- In this, if someone challenges you, if the other person is better liked, you really have no chance whatsoever, and no amount of practice will fix that.



6:
- The issue isn't that lower ranks aren't 'there'
- The issue is that lower ranks aren't 'contributing'
- In the one example I can remember of playing a lower ranking character here, it was a battle in the blight. There was at least over an hour of time before it, and I believe over two hours, and less then around 10-20 minutes of the actual battle itself.
- The time before the battle was almost all spent with planning between high ranks and NPC officers. The one time that my defender went and made a comment on it, there was complaining.
- With how much time I ended up spending doing practically nothing while everything was focused on the Aes Sedai/officer discussion, I will actually go so far as to say that if I had known how it would have turned out (and the option of only turning up for the ending wasn't available), I would have rather not been a part of it.
- Anecdote: Fleur Isabelle Corrine has the rank progression of the very first character I ever made. I was active throughout most of the later period of SR, and the entirety of TGS. She's still an accepted.



7:
- I can accept that people might enjoy conflict with each other.
- The most important thing is that the conflict/the consequences of that conflict don't carry over to people who don't enjoy it.



8:
- This is an important issue for me.
- My very first experience with the factions on this server continuity was having an Aes Sedai 'happen' to walk into the inn that I was casually RPing with someone in and abduct my character, I should have left there, but I figured that it might not be so bad since I could still RP with him.
- I then had another Aes Sedai kick my character's friend out of the city because she took issue with him being there, I would have left there if IRL events at the time hadn't left me in such a bruised state that I made was trying to rationalise things, thinking "If I just do this, I'm sure things will turn out better..."
- I had nothing but bad experiences until TGS, where I decided to play a wilder again, and it was fun, until I started getting complaints about it. Back to the White Tower, and back to hating the game.
- That's my personal example of people using rank to force you into things absolutely ruining the experience, I'm sure the others that left had their own.



9:
- Agreed, nothing more to say



10:
- If that was the intent behind the server, then it's lost its way. As mentioned early on, the fact that every possible position is considered attainable (If the staff want you there!), seems to run contrary to those aims unless you're suggesting things like multiple amyrlin seats, or three monarchs of Caemlyn.



11:
- Wilders that control their powers aren't "Weird" in Wheel of Time. The books have examples, very rare examples, but existent examples.
- Active player characters make up less than a hundred people, and that's a conservative value, out of a population of millions.
- Even if every single player character was one, it wouldn't necessarily be pushing the quantity all that much, as the player character population is such an insignificant sample of all the characters in the lands.
- Additional channeler factions wouldn't split the server unless they were set up to do so.
- Factions don't in and of themselves split the population, factions that interact peacefully with each other may as well be a single faction in that regard.
- Conflict/Exclusion of players is what splits the population.
- I believe that at this point in the series, the knitting circle has already been revealed/membered offered another chance to join the tower as students, thus, there would be no reason for them to hide, and those that decline the offer can work together with all of the other factions, thus not splitting the server.
- If it hasn't been revealed yet, then there's no reason that it couldn't be. We're already playing fast and loose with canon, why not do so here when it solves one of the greatest issues that the server has suffered from in every incarnation?



12:
- That would have fixed a number of issues in the old server, but the new direction introduced new ones that negate the value of such an action, this is especially problematic in the fact that it has been stated that "There will be less emphasis on 'combat' mechanics.", the only objective measure that exists, in favour of the popularity contest system.

[Deleted]

Thanks for further refining your points. There is obviously some agreement as above, so I'll not discuss that any further and move on to distill my response to what I think are the remaining concerns:

1. Resolving politics without DMs

Staff are potentially biased. Players resolving things themselves are potentially biased. Does it impact on people beyond their own contained story? How does it affect the server population and context as a whole?

Often players do agree on how something has played out here and go with it. Other times players agree and a DM just goes 'yeah ok'. Sometimes a DM looks at a situation, but they take into account the various RP actions of all, as well as the context of the situation.

I don't agree that DMs have decided things based purely on favouritism. Many things are taken into account.

I would have loved to withdraw more from the server as a DM but it just wasn't possible. I put in hundreds and hundreds of hours into things for people.

As well, in your system purely without any DMs, who does help with the revising if neither can agree?

2. The game is a popularity contest in player mechanics

I don't agree with everything being win/loss but only because I don't judge everything my player characters do in terms of a calculus of profit or loss.

If something happens badly for me, I don't personally care. If I find myself taking something too personally because I didn't get what my character wanted, I take a deep breath and remember it's a roleplay game.

You'll note that my highest ranked character is a Dedicated (Rank 2).

- Reducing people to 0 life

So dueling is the answer? I mean, you could challenge someone to a duel here from the military factions at least.

The epic gear contained in the module brings one to parity with rank 3, pretty much, and within reach of most epic gear except maybe the faction leader.

3. Lower ranks aren't contributing

Sounds like you've had bad experiences then. Sometimes events are tailored more one way or the other and it can't always be avoided in creating 'believable' situations.

Having said that, there are many ways to interact as low ranked characters.

I remember the reason your character in the blight event was complained about was because he was giving incorrect advice (judged by in character standards) to soldiers and generals in front of high ranked players and people like Lord Agelmar of Fal Dara.

I apologise for sometimes doing things that allow higher ranked players to feel high ranked at the end of a very long event chain that I put a lot of time into it.

I also was on 2 DM clients for that event and I did interact with you and with anyone who was doing things, not just the high ranked council where the NPCs more or less stayed silent and let the players discuss things.

If you'd had wanted to do other things other than openly shout at generals etc., then I would've interacted with you. It's a bit hazy, but I'm pretty sure I did with some of the NPC soldiers. There were also other players you could've talked to there.

4. Positions

Michelle, your character, was promoted to Mistress of Novices (equivalent rank epic 2) here before you sort of dissapeared.

Most people don't get to have 2 Aes Sedai. I don't know if anyone does. That isn't to say it's not possible, but you were dividing up the time a lot.

5. A quick response to your other points

Point 8 : You had tough early roleplay experiences, I'm afraid I can only suggesting letting it go, forgive and move on.

Point 11 : Ok, needs to be a big debate which would be fine with me. Still sure it would create in character conflict and not harmony so easily.

Point 12: So, encourage more PvP is the answer? I'm not opposed to it, but there are other RP consequences that come after beating someone down...

6. My position - I'm going to take this personally because I was obviously heavily involved with more or less this playerbase in different servers, as well as this particular iteration earlier on

I've put in thousands of hours as a DM and Administrator, or Officer, under multiple hosts, different styles of staff hierachy and rulesets, and so forth.

I've done everything I possibly can here in the hundreds of hours put into this iteration to be as even handed as possible and to give players every opportunity to work things out themselves.

I apologise that sometimes my events don't go according to plan and make everything better for everyone. I have put in a hell of a lot of effort into doing events, helping people with their own ideas, stories, plots, explaining things, mediating or resolving (though wasn't really many problems on this iteration compared to others for that), taking the time to give new players as much info as possible to make informed decisions etcc., for people here.

I began the drafts for numerous modifications to items, gear, and other things, that took a lot of time, and taken that before the player base to vote on.

I wrote up guides and information to a whole host of things to facilitate new players especially.

The reason I offered to do an event this week was because I received a PM from a potential new player who wasn't getting a response from others and was personally upset by such a situation and wanted to help.

If you think overall, Asche, that I am someone who more or less favoured the game being a DM popularity contest then tell me right now, please, and I will leave for good.

I will offer no defence because it wouldn't be worth any more of my time. I would be personally offended, but I would try and forgive that and forget the whole thing.

Just let me know.

[newspike]

The reason the server worked before was because of the large community it held. Due to this everyone could focus on their own experience while being tangled within various other interactions that were exciting and different. The community is tiny now, due to lack of interest, the fact NWN is an outdated game and that it's almost impossible for new players to find servers let alone even try. Since the community is so small not everyone has the same playing time capabilities and the potential for massive RP Stories unwinding are non-exsistant.

With a big community, everyone had their own story in a large world, where other players always seemed to be. The world is too big for the small amount of players at this current time. That;s just my personal opinion, you may disagree, I may be wrong but that is how I see it.

Now not to sound too negative, haha. Perhaps giving players even bigger roles then they have now could make use of the large world we have. We know everyone who plays at the moment, put less restriction on them. I believe politics is one of the greatest parts of the Wheel of Times. The characters that the players control should be at the height of the politics. Kings, Queens, Seats, Lords, Commander Generals, Lord Captain Commanders, so if their is conflict between two players they use NPC armies instead of scrapping in Four Kings. Of course that idea takes up a lot of DM time.
New players, if and when they come, could be quickly involved into the politics and story line, perhaps make a link in the beginning area to this website to allow them to apply for a position within Randland, but it's all about stretching the norm of what we are used to. I'm not sure about how exactly to do that but I'm not the idea man haha.

Another idea, maybe go in the other way. We close the gap. The players become a sort of reflection of Rand and his group. Located in one area, working together and on an ongoing story line that greatly affects the future of the World. Again, this idea takes up a lot of DM Time, and could be hard to put into place. It would be cutting down factions to the point of the players characters being the main characters of a story instead of pieces on a chess board. That idea works better for Roleplay that consists only of writing thought.

Just a few random ideas I thought I'd throw out as I do care about this server and the time people put into its creation.

[Azelle]

1: I think the main point got lost here. The issue is that, so long as people are being put in positions of power over others without any safeguards, those who want nothing to do with it are forced into having to do so purely to protect against it. If you were only present on this string of servers, it might not seem like a big issue (Outside of channeling factions, as explained in an earlier post), but it was a huge one in MotP, which is the direction that I have been informed things are proceeding in.

The system I proposed was not about completely removing bias, but about protecting people that neither wanted to get involved in politics, and also didn't want it effecting them. (Live and let live). As was stated, if both sides didn't agree, conflict either didn't happen, or aggressor loses. Thus ensuring that it only happened for the right reasons (Because it makes a fun story, as opposed to a player wanting to get more power for their character at the expense of someone else).



2: I completely understand the sentiment, I used to think that way about RP servers too. The problem emerges when people use their power to bully those without it and it becomes a case of "Keep up with it or keep getting bullied".

I never stated that dueling was an answer, merely that it is an example of an objective system, and it does work in certain circumstances. Personally, I prefer the collaborative story method of handling disputes with the aggressor losing when both parties can't agree.




3: I'm not even going to touch this topic. The wording implies that details would risk it developing into an argument that would detract from the point being made. The only thing that needs to be said, as it's an indication of an overall trend is the predilection for characters to lack common courtesy, even when doing so would cost them nothing.


4: Yes she was, after reaching Aes Sedai through another server. This isn't just about me, but about addressing the problems that new players would suffer from. In that regard, I haven't seen much improvement. Especially with the requirement becoming a vote by Aes Sedai players. (In regard to my own case, I don't even want another Aes Sedai, I just want her to take the test.)



5.8: This is diverting from the point that was being made. I simply used myself as an anecdote. It doesn't matter if I forgive if it still has the potential to happen.

5.11: I wouldn't object to more discussion

5.12: I'm not a fan of PvP (Ideally people wouldn't be against each other at all), and I definately don't want to encourage it. But in the event that it happens (and it does), game mechanics are the only objective measure that exists in the game right now.

Personally I prefer the collaborative storytelling idea, but I can see a lot of potential dislike of it coming from people that insist on being able to abuse their position to bully others.

However, in regard to events having the potential to marginalise players, the other potential solution would be to marginalise everyone equally. Enforce an inverse relationship between political and personal power, and hold both events which are more political (i.e. Wars) where such things can be brought to bear effectively. In these scenarios, individuals without much political power of their own are marginalised.

Meanwhile, have a separate style of event with roughly equal numbers, more along the lines of say, Eye of the World/Breaking into the Aelfinn towers, where personal ability is more important than political, and those who traded personal power for political are equally ineffective.

While I don't favour that method, as I'd rather have everyone contribute at all times than everyone being equally marginalised (and because you could very well have the people who wouldn't be effective in the latter just make a character that is and have them serve the goals of their primary character). But it's there.



6: I never meant for you to take anything personally. I disappeared at first because I needed to sort out IRL issues. I disappeared again long after you did, and that was because of the "It seems like it's getting worse". Hopea seems to feel similarly to me in that regard.

I actually do have a lot of respect for you, and the direction the server seemed to be going up until that meeting. If you check through it, most of the problems that I brought up were in fact lingering issues from the previous incarnations, or issues that come up from the MotPing of the server that started after you left.

As I stated before, your proposed solution would have solved a lot of problems on the servers that you were around for and is a good idea based on what you were around for. The problem it suffers from is the fact that the MotPing of the server creates a situation in which rank 2-3 in a faction of choice can mean basically nothing in regard to the potential things that can now be reached if the staff like you.

It's not an issue because of you, but because of someone else who shall remain unnamed out of common decency. When I ended up in conflict with their personal friend, they applied as a DM, and in their very first event that they were in, began turning NPCs hostile. (in intention, not like, literally the hostile flag.)

[Deleted]

1. I still don't think the general system ideas you suggest do anything substantial or possible to 'enforce' to protect people against politics beyond what seems to me to be already codified here. I obviously didn't write such things as formally, because I've felt it can generally be done in spirit (as per what I wrote in the FAQ & Rules) - I obviously don't know how it's been operating practically since.

2. As the above.

3. I still think you're blending in character and out of character perspectives problematically here.

4. What would be a better way of deciding when an Accepted is ready to take the test if a decent number of players can't be trusted to make a decent majority decision? I'm not sure where to go simply because you generally seem against DMs intervening in things too. It's been done in the past that DMs did decide as well, or with discussion between DMs and the Faction Leader.

5.8. Nothing can be eliminated 100%, I just think you're making rather broad generalisations when it should be clearer (see also point 6.).

5.11. Agreement.

5.12. As number 1. Well, I think events favouring different types of characters will generally occur as a matter of course and this is difficult to avoid unless everyone is a Mary Sue who is both a political genius, master of spies, and god of battles. So, generally, certain events are always going to more or less favour different characters and I don't see what you're proposing that's different from how a mixture of DM events, ideally from a mixture of DMs, would exactly be. Some events too do 'level' everybody, for example where for whatever reason no one is able to reach the source.

6. Ok, but I obviously feel a lot of responsibility toward this server, the examples you tried to reference were more or less memorable to me, and the majority of the playerbase when I was around had more or less been known to me from more Third-age-ish playerbase iterations (or Third Age).

I would've appreciated greater clarity about your references when you said 'the server', because it's easy to read it from your first post onwards as a general feature of the server as a whole (vaguely), and thus obviously I would have to take that quite personally considering how much time I put in to help lay the ground for things in the first 3 months of the server's return (as well as what things I have done in the past).

I'm truly sorry to hear your assessment of this situation since I left, then. I can only see the codified things on the forum, so can't judge for myself.

7. Still, bearing in mind point 1 & 5.12, it seems like the suggestions to take forward for discussion so far essentially boil down to (and I think these are all valid for wider discussion):

From yourself:

- I think we agree on the principals, so maybe you think we need better implementation of Astarael's community standards or something?

- Players decide the story more? I still don't see what is different here though, that really is to work in practice beyond what already 'should' happen. Maybe you could flesh it out more clearly if you think it useful, because I think this has maybe been lost in relation to a critique of the server. Like, how would it work from the ground up? Would there need to be OOC discussion around RP to figure it out? (And this sometimes does already happen, sure) To what extent? What happens when others might be affected by a story going on between 2 players? How does that work? What if people can't agree? Though, if the culture of player politics is as you say it is I also don't see how it would work without a massive shift in that.

- Could the Circle or Seafolk be recognised, installed, and/or have some kind of position with or in relation to the Tower that would let players join? Or could some kind of wilder solution be proposed?

And then some different ideas from Spike:

- Could we pursue a system where players essentially all apply for very high level positions - Kings, Queens, Seats, Lords, etc.?

- Or, could we we pursue a system where the players are more like Rand and his group on a quest (rather than having or relying on the current factions)?

- From myself:

- Let everyone start with a rank 2 or 3 character.

- I could probably think of something more radical, but I think there's enough to discuss already!

- I would note that there was a long and varied discussion of Nobility in several threads buried in the forum somewhere that may or may not be helpful in considering more alternatives or ideas.