I've noticed a trend recently for people to create characters both at the request of others and of their own accord with significant backstory ties. In fact, I've recently approved a few applications that more or less say "Everyone in the game is my brother, ex-lover, niece, etc" and I find myself a bit uncomfortable with these.
On one hand, I think it enriches the game for people to have PC family members and connections. On the other, I'm sort of feeling that it's being used to give these players an in-game advantage and often skips a lot of hard work other people have to do to build relationships in-game. On a game where social currency is probably more important than skills in the long run, it seems like something that isn't earned or bought, but has a very unbalancing effect.
Right now, I'm pretty sure if I were to do a relationship map of the mud, I'd find it shockingly one-sided, and suspect new players would find it daunting to not be a part of these very obvious 'cliques'.
Should there be limits, or methods of measuring these? For my part, I'm inclined to say yes, and I'm thinking of instituting some sort of tracking around it as well as limitations. Family code has long been on the agenda in some form or another, though it'll have some impacts to introduce it if we say people can only have one or two connections for characters to start. Given my stance on this, and the very high chances that I'll be implementing something, I'd love to see thoughts about it as well as some solutions that the players would actually like to make the social game more of a real "game" that everyone can equally participate in instead of backscene deals for convenience.
Family Members and Backstory Links
Having just recently made a character connected to two other characters, I can't help but think this post is a little passive aggressive. At the same time, I understand why you feel there should be restrictions, and admittedly, cliques have started, which is harmful to some of the players who were unwittingly pulled into them, because it puts forth RP obligations that are rather difficult to fulfill. I would say be cautious with however you restrict them, because it may make said clique begin to leave, and if the relationship web is as one sided as you suspect, it might be a heavy loss to the pbase. I, for one, will stay on board no matter what you decide.
Olither, I am not a passive aggressive person. When I am upset, believe me, I'm straight out aggressive, and sadly, I believe a few players can attest to that. :(
To be specific, this is not saying that any player with someone else or multiple people in their backstory is doing something wrong. I did not mean to imply it. It is not against the rules. It's entirely unregulated. No one is trying to silently say anyone's a bad person/player, doing something wrong, etc.
Rather, I'm saying I've observed something that I believe is causing problems, and given the type of game we are, I think those things ought to be addressed.
To observe it being a problem, it requires multiple instances and observations. To whit, I can count four instances off the top of my head that give people relationships to others that are ICly powerful and completely nothing more than an OOC handshake before the game begins. For a social game, it's unbalanced. As a social game, we kinda have to look at that because it really is a type of currency the game relies on.
To be specific, this is not saying that any player with someone else or multiple people in their backstory is doing something wrong. I did not mean to imply it. It is not against the rules. It's entirely unregulated. No one is trying to silently say anyone's a bad person/player, doing something wrong, etc.
Rather, I'm saying I've observed something that I believe is causing problems, and given the type of game we are, I think those things ought to be addressed.
To observe it being a problem, it requires multiple instances and observations. To whit, I can count four instances off the top of my head that give people relationships to others that are ICly powerful and completely nothing more than an OOC handshake before the game begins. For a social game, it's unbalanced. As a social game, we kinda have to look at that because it really is a type of currency the game relies on.
-
Sephone
I don't think having family or background ties is such a bad thing, to be honest. It creates flavour and gives people a role playing point to start from. I don't see why we shouldn't be encouraging noobs to do the same thing.
If someone choses not to create ties for their character, then so be it, but I really enjoy having friends and family ties. If this was only open to certain people, I would believe it to be detremental to the game, but everyone has the option.
If someone choses not to create ties for their character, then so be it, but I really enjoy having friends and family ties. If this was only open to certain people, I would believe it to be detremental to the game, but everyone has the option.
I feel like the point is being lost in the discussion. No one is saying ties are bad. Having ties to -everyone- is the bad thing. You should not be able to enter the game somehow related to a majority of the population. Being a sister or friend or cousin to one or two people is not the issue. I think we can effectively put a cap at four connections with a playerbase our size, and if they want to become friends with others that are not on their applied connections, they can develop those connections through RP.
I'd say that even 4 is a bit extreme. The whole point of new chars is to encourage new interactions, no? (At least it should be). 2 would give you family, or friends with a previous past, or something, and still be a place to start. Those 2 could easily introduce you to others, as necessary, if you couldn't/wouldn't meet them yourselves.
TOTALLY and venemously disagree with "encouraging noobs to do the same thing". How exactly do you encourage a totally new player to have a pre-existing story/connection with people and places they don't know? How do you get someone to be linked to a family that is in the game, with family names and histories and connections when they don't even know how the game works? By telling it to them, because you the backgrounds/places/people and they don't. Then it is YOU giving them a character and story rather than one of their own creation. You would be molding these "noobs" to fit into the groups or play that is ongoing, and that's limiting by its very nature.
TOTALLY and venemously disagree with "encouraging noobs to do the same thing". How exactly do you encourage a totally new player to have a pre-existing story/connection with people and places they don't know? How do you get someone to be linked to a family that is in the game, with family names and histories and connections when they don't even know how the game works? By telling it to them, because you the backgrounds/places/people and they don't. Then it is YOU giving them a character and story rather than one of their own creation. You would be molding these "noobs" to fit into the groups or play that is ongoing, and that's limiting by its very nature.
Are we talking the limit of actual family members? Sometimes your family member may have known someone powerful, and in turn was simply an acquaintance of yours? If we are talking direct family members, then yes 2. If we are talking general knowing of another person, then I feel that should be at Imms discretion. Since, if they knew them at a younger age, only makes sense you have met that person multiple times as children, before they became powerful ICly
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 13 guests