Revamped: Non-Unique Quests, Event Impact

[Sangwa]

This wish has been edited to account for the conceptual progress made. The first version is quoted at the end, for those interested in how the concept progressed.

1) I wish for Non-Unique Quests
I believe it would allow for an easier immersion if the quests were not unique.
This would mean revising the current Quests and changing their style to meet this standard. If well done, players will no longer need to pick which quest experiences they can roleplay with other players, allowing for more fluid immersion.

Illustrating:
By unique quests I mean quests that involve some sort of event that couldn't happen twice in Yliakum, like, for example, changing an NPC's religion. A 100 different adventurers couldn't possibly change the same NPC's religion that many times, though a 100 different adventurers might clean the Broken Door from rats... Damned rats keep coming every week and Brado doesn't like paying the same adventurer twice.

2) I wish for every official event to have impact
I believe it would add more material and dynamic to the roleplay environment if we made it a rule for every official Event to have impact on said environment.

Illustrating:
By impact I mean visible changes in the components of the environment. Currently some of our events come and go leaving marks only in the players who participated. This makes it easy for people to disregard said events.
However, if events leave a visible mark, like a NPC changing place, or a house becoming a crater, or a NPC changing one of his lines, then everyone will come into contact with the event, or better, its outcome.



Old Version:

1) Changing Quest Structure
We don't need Single Players Quests (quests that are so specific they can't be used in multiplayer roleplaying). Though we already have plenty of quests that are plausible, we need them all to be like that. But better organized.

Quests should have this layout: This NPC needs something to be done daily, weekly, monthly. Easy stuff can be asked of any PC, harder stuff is given to PCs which have worked more for the NPC. During these tasks the NPC sometimes does polite chat, allowing the character to know more stuff.

This way every PC can talk about its quests and about what it knows of NPC "A", "B" or "C." NPCs become better integrated parts of multiplayer roleplay.

2)Creating General Plots
"Oh, but that's so boring Sangwa you handsome, wise cat. We want to save princesses!" Oh really? I guess you'll have to read the rest then.

If our Settings Team creates General Plots that depend on interesting NPC quests (lets call them plot quests) that are advertised by GMs and playable only once (first finishing, first served), we'll have some pretty interesting stuff going on.

Not as hard on either of them as you think.

GMs just show up to give the plot a start. They point the lucky PCs towards the NPCs who will hand out the plot quests and then give them time (some days) and space (Yliakum.)
It should be done in a way that different PCs play out different plot quests. (like GMs make two appearances, tell half of the information each time). Some of these plot quests should be interdependent to force some level of interaction between PCs (plot quests that depend on items different players obtained on their own plot quests).
The General Plot should also have a limit time, some weeks or a month, in case not all the plot quests are completed (because characters didn't share info/items or because someone went inactive.) Either way, the GM's come up with the outcome and it gets imprinted on the concerned NPCs and relayed to the community... The rewards should be the roleplay itself and they could be positive or negative, depending on the plot itself. This way players will only do a quest if they feel like it's good for their character's experience (and not for its inventory.)

Now, why would I want this implemented? The benefits are immense. It brings the roleplayers closer and the best part: it allows for visible development of NPCs and story. It also makes some NPCs have a continued presence in the concerning PC's development.
Even if these General Plots develop not-strictly-but-semi-yearly (i.e. the Settings/GM intervention part happens yearly or similar), they will motivate most of the community to yearn for the next occurrence to see what will happen.

[Earowo]

As a hole I like the idea, but dont expect me not to nitpick

What GMs have to do here is basically spread the word at the start and then give the lucky PCs time and space to go out and interact with the concerned NPCs that this time have the 'interesting' quests .
It should be done in a way several PCs play out different parts of the plot (make two appearances, tell half of the information each time). Not all, but some of these parts should be interdependent to force some level of mingling between PCs.
These plots should also have a limit time, in case they aren't completed (because characters didn't share info/items or because someone went inactive.) Either way, the GM's come up with the outcome and it gets imprinted on the concerned NPCs and relayed to the community.

1.) with th small number of gm's they wouldnt have time for this, which im sure you already know,
2.) many people, such as myself, experience too much lag in this game, for  a 'time limit' to be any fair, in my case, it takes around 5-6 minutes just to load east hydlaa, if im not 'just' logging in

[Sangwa]

If it's done once a year, the Settings Team has more than time to come up with the plot. They're the ones who have the hard part here, not the GM's.

As I said, GM's just intervene to spread the word and then to end the plot, and maybe to solve some doubts along the way. The NPCs are the ones doing the work here. I'd say it takes as much or even less effort than an event for the GMs.

The time limit should be weeks or months, to allow players to get done with the NPC 'plot quests' and with the interactions between themselves. I've edited the post to make that part clearer.

EDIT: I've edited the main post to make it clearer. Thanks for the feedback. Earowo

[novacadian]

Your idea is a good one. Have you ever considered applying to become a GM. It doesn't mean you can't play. 

- Nova

[Sangwa]

I think I tried once and they told me I couldn't be in a guild or was it leading? Well, either way, I play this for the Dark Empire

EDIT: Added something in the post about rewards.

[novacadian]

I think I tried once and they told me I couldn't be in a guild or was it leading? Well, either way, I play this for the Dark Empire

My understanding is that that is no longer an issue. Besides, you'd expect the Dark Empire to have an inside man/woman/kra.

- Nova

[Sangwa]

We actually own the developers and GMs, so there's no need for me to add to that number. We just don't advertise it... Much.

Anyway, part of this is being discussed in the "I need help..." thread.

[Sangwa]

Sorry for the double-post, but it's just to advertise the edition I've made to the first post.

I've edited the Wish after learning more about the Development's concerns and after spotting some flaws by myself. In short, I made it more concise, I believe I've improved the presentation and I've made it less complex, thus reducing the difficulty of its implementation.
The initial idea remains the same: to improve the quality of roleplaying.

[Ruya]

Question: how would non-unique quests affect quest rewards, especially glyphs?  If the object is to avoid having the quest system be fully integrated into RP, then it seems to me you'd have to scale back rewards, or have every NPC be ICly an Uncle Moneybags.   With a handful of exceptions glyphs aren't supposed to be cheap enough that NPCs would willingly distribute them to every smuck who comes along and helps them move a box from one end of their city to another.   They only make sense as rewards for single-time quests.

(And yes, I understand wanting to stress RP rewards over inventory rewards - but that doesn't mean wanting particular inventory rewards is always inherently bad.  Magic plays a role in RP all the time, and for that to work, players need glyph access.)

[Sangwa]

These Glyphs can be rewards of complicated missions that NPCs only give out after you've done some of the simpler things. Instead of making always the same NPC give that same reward, you can have other NPCs awarding it, to make it even more plausible.
Example: Kirius hands out a Vortex Glyph if you've delivered one of his important messages to the Bronze Doors (where he has a correspondent, who he has to contact now and then). But Larf also does the same, if you got him some good reagents he needs to use to create a cool potion.

Messages are something sent often when you don't have internets. Reagents are things you always need. These two people are obviously rich enough to pay their travelers well and they're usually surrounded my magic stuff.
It's easy to roleplay these things, since we can consider each traveler did it at a different time. Harder when things are family heirlooms.

Currently NPCs are Uncle Moneybags all the same. But you can make lesser reward quests belong to poorer NPCs and bigger rewards belong to richer ones. I can see this only as positive, since in this new world I picture where you speak about NPCs and their quests, you'd actually have their health illustrated.

The only thing I consider hard here is the actual revising and remaking of some quests. But it can take time, right? And the results will be amazing.

(Also, we're considering Glyphs must be acquired through quests, which is just true because we want to.)

[Ruya]

It still seems a little weird to me.   As it stands, NPCs are OOCly all Uncle Moneybags, but ICly some of the glyph reward quests have the NPC saying things like, "This is a rare glyph I received from so-and-so, but since I don't have a use for it and you've been so helpful, it's yours."   It's clear that ICly they don't have stacks of glyphs sitting around.   Same with many other items received in quests.   Thus, as you've pointed out, these quests cannot be incorporated into RP, since they create a kind of temporal sinkhole with all the NPCs stuck in some kind of Groundhog Day scenario.

Mind you, I wouldn't complain if the acquisition mechanism for glyphs was changed, and they all became purchasable items or whatever.   And I do like your idea, I just suspect it would cause more problems than just requiring the Devs to redesign most of the quests.

[Sangwa]

As it stands, NPCs are OOCly all Uncle Moneybags, but ICly some of the glyph reward quests have the NPC saying things like, "This is a rare glyph I received from so-and-so, but since I don't have a use for it and you've been so helpful, it's yours."   It's clear that ICly they don't have stacks of glyphs sitting around.

Currently it's not actually quite clear. Because most time you can't even include the reason why or the actual NPC that gave you the Glyph in your conversation in the first place, because it makes no sense that someone else did the exact same "unique" thing. What happens now is that people say this Glyph and that is rare because the quest required has a certain difficulty (who and how it was acquired is rarely mentioned and makes people feel uncomfortable when it is).
The way I suggest, rareness is still linked with difficulty, but you can actually name the moneybag and the circumstances that lead to you acquiring the Glyph or item. If there are plenty of moneybags giving the Glyph, it's easier to consider that neither of them has a great stash of Glyphs lying around, but everyone knows they're the only ones who can get their hands on those items and that they won't sell it for a reason (i.e. they want it to fall in the right or wrong hands).

Mind you, I wouldn't complain if the acquisition mechanism for glyphs was changed, and they all became purchasable items or whatever.   And I do like your idea, I just suspect it would cause more problems than just requiring the Devs to redesign most of the quests.

I agree that a much simpler and cleaner way would be to combine this with making rewards less unique as well (i.e. having NPCs sell them for big prices, while others give them as rewards.) But one can still make them quest linked with a bit of added trouble (making more than on NPC handle the same reward probably means more quests.)

[Ruya]

Currently it's not actually quite clear. Because most time you can't even include the reason why or the actual NPC that gave you the Glyph in your conversation in the first place, because it makes no sense that someone else did the exact same "unique" thing. What happens now is that people say this Glyph and that is rare because the quest required has a certain difficulty (who and how it was acquired is rarely mentioned and makes people feel uncomfortable when it is).

I could swear there are quests that do specifically state that a particular glyph being given is meant to (ICly) be rare and precious.  Unfortunately I can't check my logs, as the computer I play PS on is at the shop.     But I could very well be mistaken.

I agree that a much simpler and cleaner way would be to combine this with making rewards less unique as well (i.e. having NPCs sell them for big prices, while others give them as rewards.) But one can still make them quest linked with a bit of added trouble (making more than on NPC handle the same reward probably means more quests.)

A thought: I wonder if it would be feasible to redesign the NPC shops so that they reflect the NPC's feelings about the player character?   Prices at which items are purchasable would go down, prices at which you can sell items would go up, and perhaps rare items would only appear as purchasable if the NPC considers you trustworthy.  This would give a reason to quest (to build up relationships) while dodging at least some of the quest reward problems. 

[MishkaL1138]

A thought: I wonder if it would be feasible to redesign the NPC shops so that they reflect the NPC's feelings about the player character?   Prices at which items are purchasable would go down, prices at which you can sell items would go up, and perhaps rare items would only appear as purchasable if the NPC considers you trustworthy.  This would give a reason to quest (to build up relationships) while dodging at least some of the quest reward problems. 

I love this.  I wish someone hears you 

[Sangwa]

That would be a fun way to do it too Ruya, totally agreed.

And you are right when you say that in some quests NPCs say that this or that item is rare. But it's still no use, when you can't say you've done that quest where the NPC said such because 100 other characters did as well... When they couldn't have, since you can't change a NPCs religion 100 times (as title of example.)