Approved guilds?

[Prolix]

Jees. If people feel their contributions cannot have an impact in the game then maybe they are not contributing to the game. Maybe they are just looking at themselves in a mirror.

I think there is a distinction to be made between contributing to the game and contributing to the community. Here is a difference: If I were to create a jockey guild and you decide to include it as an approved guild (purely hypothetically, now) who owns the rights to it? I created it, can I refuse to allow you to take it over?

If I am on the team or participate by posting on the bug tracker that is freely given and I expect no compensation. That is contributing to the game.

What I do in the game as part of the community is mine. Is there somewhere, anywhere that allows you to take my creations and claim them for yourself legally? I brought the name bilbous with me when I came and created his character, can you take him away from me? I guess you can but is it right?.



Sure you can say I am getting carried away but the established means for having an impact on the game is to join the team or using the bugtracker, to a lesser extent post on the forums. Now if you want to entertain bug tracker feature requests to have user created content added to the game on a case by case basis that is another story. I do not agree with the developers just slurping up whatever creative content they like arbitrarily.

[Xillix Queen of Fools]

Slurping up creative content would not be the intent.

As I said, UTM overstated things a bit.

I think words like guide are better than own. A guild would submit itself to direct settings/gm guidance, this would tend toward the constructive as relates to events and such.

Example: "Paladins of Talad guild wants to take out the Onyx Dagger" settings and gms could help set up such an event between approved guilds for the entertainment of people associated with each, or onlookers.

Example: Settings desires that the religious orders be made more "manifest" in the daily lives of the players. Settings sets up the religious guilds with guild housing in fitting places and grants some tria or items to help facilitate a perpetual role play of those faiths contingent on the guild members following guidelines and criteria established by the gms/settings team.

No, we are NOT settled on doing this. This is merely a proposal.  I am only shopping for ideas.

Some have suggested the game grows boring to rpers . . . this is just one maggot of a thought whose intent is to help address that kind of thing.

[Prolix]

So would it be acceptable to say that the team is considering relaxing the rule that gms do not participate in player RP events and that this is about how best to go at it, if indeed it should be done at all?

[ThomPhoenix]

It's not really that GMs participate in player events, it's more that players participate in GM events.

[Dajoji]

When players request GM assistance for their events, all we can do at the moment is offer advice in order to avoid favoritism. Rewards, teleportation and all other GM powers are off-limits when it comes to plots created and hosted by players. However, if the approved guilds idea gets through, it might open the door for GM/dev involvement, after all, the guilds would have to meet certain standards and the events they'll need our help with will have to be approved just like any other GM event.

[Prolix]

Thank you for further explanation. I think that this initiative is pretty clearly expressed now, notwithstanding submissions from us in the 'peanut gallery.' Perhaps this idea can be posted as a feature request on the bug tracker.  That way something might get done, isn't that what we are always being told?

[Xillix Queen of Fools]

I always find it funny how many ideas are offered unsolicited, but when we ask for Ideas we get to hear crickets.

More ideas, what thoughts are there on "fair" ways to potentially pursue this?

[Prolix]

Here is an idea: Make an internal list of what types of guilds you would like to approve in the order of preference then have a contest for each one, maybe three running at a time, with the best submissions winning the approval. Prize would include setup fees, guild page space, general control of day to day actions subject to specific restrictions required for official use. A guild house, advance availability of new content for in game testing purposes. The restrictions could be along the lines of head office edicts to the local chapter's boss, i.e. relative autonomy locally but still subject to the organizing principles. New content might be extra rooms, crafting equipment or similar content.

I would think that if you are going to go down this path you would want fresh guilds that you have some control over rather than trying to fit in existing organization of which current owners will feel protective.

I have previously tendered my reservations, this post assumes they will be dealt with and this is how it might look if you go forward.

[MustangMR]

A famous quote applies more often than not... "Perception is reality".  What it means is despite the way things really are, you have to deal with other peoples perception because for them it is reality.  Regardless of all the good intents to encourage one type of game experience, you will have to deal with the idea that you are showing favoritism to one group of players.  Xillix through out a few examples of how an approved guild could benefit by new game content.... what about all the other guilds?  Why aren't those events available to every guild in the game?

If you want a suggestion on how to make it work, scrap the idea of "approved" guilds and instead focus on a game mechanic that can be available to every guild, events that have to be completed by the guild and not just random members on their own.  Develop a system that lets a guild work towards a goal.

For example:

1. The game GM's devise a series of quests that are designed for members of a guild... any guild.
2. All Guild Leaders can check an in-game posting, a bulletin board open to everyone say.  This posting will give clues to how to start the quest line.
3. In order for the quest series to be completed, the guild leader will have to have signed up to it.  After that, all members of the guild are allowed to pursue the quest.  Only members of a guild actively working on a quest will ever see any of the quests.
4. Quests are accomplished in sequence by any member of the guild. 
5. When all the quests are done or the guild has reached the last part of the quest line, an event is triggered by the Guild Leader to maybe spawn a boss mob, or any kind of encounter that you feel is appropriate for PS.  Boss mobs have been done to death, other things can be done.
6. The rewards could be gold, items, or even titles for the members of the guild.  Or perhaps a guild board on the forum or in-game that tells of all guilds achievements.  Maybe the first one to complete the quest gets an in-game area dedicated to them, a plaque or something.

This would be fair and open to everyone, would remove any kind favoritism, and then the only thing you'd have to deal with is non-guild members saying there is extra stuff for guild members, but the quests should be designed to be accomplished by a group of people, and not a solo player.

[Mythryndel]

I am inclined to agree with MustangMR, for the most part. I think the "approved" guilds thing is going to cater to one group and alienate a lot of others. While I understand that PS is a RolePlaying game, it has mechanics for a reason. I am not trying to start this flame war AGAIN... just wanting to point out that all types of players are here.

As to using stats to choose guild abilities... this is NOT OOC. You wouldn't hire a scrawny person who can barely pick up 20 lbs  to be a firefighter. There are physical attributes needed for the task, namely the ability to carry me out of a burning building. If a guild has a certain tria intake for instance, they could be given control of a handful of merchant NPCs. There are plenty of other OBJECTIVE criteria that can be used to assign duties, responsibilities or privileges to guilds.

As for rewarding RPers and giving them some control of settings or the like... I still have not gotten an consistent answer to the question of "what is RP?". This is going to be completely SUBJECTIVE and players are going to cry foul at every turn. People that don't just sit in the tavern all day are going to get upset that lazy layabouts that can't even bother to get skills to back their RP are getting rewarded and they aren't. I am talking from the perspective of those complaining, not that I am implying that RPers are lazy. I'm pretty sure.

I personally think that there are much better ways of giving players a chance to have an impact on the game. The biggest, and most important in my opinion, is merchants of some kind. (I know Xillix... i will not say anymore on this in this thread). There are several other ideas I have posted in other threads.

[Xillix Queen of Fools]

Mustang your idea has merits on its own but does not fit into this discussion.

I kind of WANT to favor certain types of guilds and bring elements of the settings into the game in a living way.

"Approved Guilds" are one POTENTIAL means to this end.

I would literally be requiring these guilds to embody elements of the settings and rewarding them in a way that is different and separate than the way that players are rewarded for engaging the mechanics.

There can be little argument that a great deal of work has gone into making many things for the people who enjoy the mechanics aspect of the game, this proposition, even if badly named, aims to address the needs of rpers as well as the settings team.

[MustangMR]

My main point is that instead of trying to officially approve guilds and have them be a part of the settings by default, let all guilds work for that honor, and have an equal shot at glory and the rewards that come from it.  My suggestion was just one way to encourage that.  All guilds can earn the rewards, but only the first one earns the prestige of being part of the settings.  Approving guilds can cause a lot of unintended side effects that I feel will hurt PS more in the long run, and I would bet that if you did build a system similar to what I suggested, a significant part of those settings and effects would go to the guilds you would have given approved status to anyway.

But just some ideas.  I do disagree with the basic premise of this thread, so sorry if it feels that I'm hijacking it.  I'll be blunt (what a surprise), I already feel PS is being built by the few for the few.  I haven't been playing PS much lately for that reason.  I have no vested interest in if my idea was to be implemented because I'll probably never be a part of it.  When I read this, I nearly just closed the page and said forget it, but I thought I would at least voice my opinion.  I totally agree with the desire to make the players more involved in the story and history of the game, but I think there are other ways to do it that will encourage PS's player base to grow instead forcing it into small groups.

[Donari Tyndale]

Well, PS is a game from roleplayers for roleplayers. And they are indeed a small group. Mechanics are supposed to support roleplay, and nothing else. Concerning MRMustangs ideas, I am inclined to disagree. Approved guilds are supposed to create roleplay, however, quests limit that roleplay to the specific guild.

[Xillix Queen of Fools]

mustangnr I did not oppose your idea, I suggested it does not fit into mine, there must be some nuance missing to how I am expressing myself (or you have not read the whole thread) I am trying to propose a means of having non gms play "official" ROLES that I need filled. This is not about favoring guilds or friends. It is about rewarding good role play with a role in the actual story of the game. What you have suggested could well have a place in the game, but the way you express it would attract people who enjoy mechanics and carrot and stick type progression.

I need someone to play the priesthood, actors, that would be around a lot of the time acting out their parts.

I need someone to play the gaurds, actors, actors that would be around a lot to "police" the game.

I am in no rush to get to this goal, and as I keep reiterating no decision to do this has been made at all.

THIS IS ONLY AN IDEA.

I hate "rpers" and "plers" equally, I assure you!

Donari also overstates things, it must be remembered we want people to role play, which I will define for you as playing a role. Right now there are few pre defined roles people can fit into, so you see a lot of baseless "godmodding" and the like.

Granting some well defined roles, with a transparent process for how to attain such a place, and a consistent means to review whether these groups are doing so perpetually seems a worthwhile endeavor.

[MustangMR]

You're right, Xillix, maybe I missed a nuance in the 5 pages of posts.  What you just described is much different than the starting premise of approved guilds.  Sorry, I am trying to be constructive.

The way I interpret the problem though, is how do you get an official story-line to the players, when multiple guilds are each running their own story.  Bringing in players to play defined roles is a great idea.  I still feel dealing with it at the guild level is the wrong place though, for the reasons stated throughout this thread.  How about dealing with it as in real-life?  Post for job positions the way you just did?  Positions could be posted on the forums or in-game.  In-game would be ideal, forums being the easiest.  Requirements for the position include having them submit their resume on how they would play the position.  The settings team could use the resumes to see which players would best fit what they want to do with the game world.  Once a selection was made, the player would be sent a supplement to their role and what knowledge they would have as that role and some guidance on what is needed.

And if I repeated something someone else submitted already and I missed it, my apologies.