What I propose (hence the addition to the sig... pick up the banner if you agree with me) is to move RPGs away from their current state, and into something more perceptible in which your character can make a difference (or not, as you so choose... the game should let you do this) via means alternative to the current brood of so-called roleplaying games. Freedom to innovate societies based on public or popular opinion. Creating an experience that far surpasses dungeon crawling, such as exploration of new territories, playing the role of a living breathing intellectual, watching (or aiding!) dynasties and kingdoms and empires rise and fall. All in which your character might take an active role. How to do this? Treat the game as an evolving screenplay. Have dedicated "actors" who create personnages for others to enjoy interacting with. Define limitations of activity before actually roleplaying them out. Coordinate "storyteller" players who (rather than run the show) subtly nudge activity in different directions or introduce new societal and plot concepts into the game. There are a finite number of itineraries that such a game must meet before it can fit into what I have planned. Some of what I may suggest may be considered shocking, and may offend some "hardcore roleplayers". Reader discretion is advised. Please consult your local cable listings. 1 - The world must be living and breathing. The players may become "part of the scenery", or they may become "heroes". Many may initially want to become heroes, hence the game should have a common enemy for players to band against. Like it or not, most interactive entertainment is based on conflict. Movies particularly. And games seem to be evolving more toward interactive movies. 2 - Player-vs-Player combat should be used as a tool to evolve a game-plot, not further personal (greed / adrenaline rush) goals. Nor should it run tyrranical. The point of PvP combat should be for a higher purpose, such as soldiers in a war, assassins striking fatal hits, etc. But PvP should have a couple of caveats: (a) unconsciousness should be possible... a player can choose to "take it easy" on a fallen opponent, letting them lie knocked out until tended to; (b) PvP should be completely consensual, except for the case of "plot characters", the dedicated actors who may play many roles and have many characters live and die for the purpose of evolving the entire game structure. 3 - The game must have dedicated staff to evolve the plot. They should not be afraid to have characters die (see Death and Character Recycling, below), because it''s intended as a tool for game evolution, not personal strife. 4 - Characters must be recycled. Death is permanent. There are no resurrection spells. There are no resurrection means (save for the purpose of plot dramatics). Characters are born, age, and die in a set amount of non-extensible time. Fictional characters may have children, whose players may be the parents'' players. Likewise, death should only happen for a good reason. If people are dying daily and for silly reasons (massive PvP outbreaks would be the likely cause) then the game isn''t being utilized to its intended purpose. 5 - The game setting What I propose (as a start, what I have been mainly concerning myself with) is a between pre-Egyptian and post-Roman time period, whereby characters have a good opportunity for massive governments and tales. Also, technology is not greatly advanced; simple to implement technologies. Current games seem to have one thing involved only: personal gain. So if events are introduced on a regular basis by players who are dedicated to playing "sideshow" roles that allow the main player-base to shine, then the main player-base has more offered to it than simply tossing monsters out at a dungeon. This is the difficult part though. There must be developed systems in place that allow these dedicated "staff-players" room enough to communicate properly and easily, as well as collaborate different ideas to maintain and drive the overall game evolution. More to come in the future. Any and all ideas are welcome regarding this. MatrixCubed
http://MatrixCubed.org

OK, so you're talking about MMORPGs exclusively. Alright. Don't take this the wrong way: These are good ideas, but you won't evolve jack until you deal with the brass tacks of what it is that players actually *DO* in this hugely populated game world of yours.

So the world is more alive... death is permanent... PvP advances a plot that people are empowered to further... the setting changes (praise the Gods, finally!!!!)

What good is all of that (and I do think it's good, btw!) if the only interaction possible is the same d*mn combat and puzzle solving gameplay that dominates in cRPGs now?

The world is more alive... so you can kill it!

PvP advances the plot... thru combat

The setting changes... to yet another land that you can sling swords through.

Even with all of these cool additions you propose, and even with a plot, I see players getting bored and hacking at one another simply because you've not found a replacement that is as exciting as combat or as interesting as puzzle solving.

If you want a banner for anything, it should be getting gameplay out of the dungeon!!!

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Edited by - Wavinator on April 13, 2001 4:49:23 PM

I´m sorry but I have to agree with Wavinator there, what you´re saying sounds nice enough, but in the long run players are not going to be too happy with it.

Death - no one wants to see a character die after two months of play, if you kill players like that, they´re going to quit, cause MMORPS are usually die-fast games. Combat will always be there, and not just against monsters. I guess the only way to channel this is to divide the player community into two or more warring factions... but then there´s the death again.... you just can´t abolish combat.

Dedicated players? Who´s going to pay for all that? And I don´t think that "actors" will be much appreciated. Players want to make their own world, even if it means killing and puzzling thru dungeons without end. If I wanted a game that goes it´s own way anyway I can buy a singleplayer RPG, there I have a much denser story without the hope that i can actually have an impact on the world.

I don´t know if there is a possible way to reconcile all these demands into a game. You have to allow for frequent combat, the game universe has to allow everyone to be a "hero".
And by that it is inherently incompatible with the kind of "nice" realism that you propose.

More story instead of puzzles would be great. But there is no way that everyone can be important (..aiding empires rise..). Lets face it, the more realistic the whole becomes, the less interesting things there are to do for the individual. And that´s why there are puzzles. There are enough for everyone. And one more won´t affect the stability of the game world.

I''ve always thought players should be allowed to kill other players. However, they should suffer the consequences. First of all, as a defense against getting killed by other players, you should build a reputation that is revered or notorious. Such a reputation will deter individuals from kiling you because they realize they will pay the consequences.

Also, if a player kills another, there should be a good chance he will be hunted down possibly for a bounty. Imagine a whole troop of players going after another because a bounty is on his head.

If the player is caught, perhaps a public lynching would be in order. Or maybe a trial by a jury of peers. Imagine playing and being called upon to sit on a jury to prosecute another player. Imagine being the player whose future is in the hands of a jury.

Players will kill other players. If there is some agreement where it is frowned upon, then you are creating an artificial boundry that feels imposing. Instead, work it in so it becomes a part of the game.

Wavinator:

PvP isn''t the engine that advances the plot, but the main point of PvP should be to advance any plots in which it would make sense. The point of talking about PvP above is to contrast current MMORPGs to what I am planning, not to make it the main concentration of the game. I understand the possibility for PvP abuse, but if assholery runs rampant, I would rather see legitimate player complaints get jerks kicked off the server rather than change the entire system to accomodate the mistakes of a few. The game is intended for roleplayers, not those seeking to get off in a Rocket Arena equivalent. If players are getting bored with the game, and decide to take it out in arms, then they will have to deal with such issues as taking things out of roleplayed context. The game isn''t intended for these player types.

Hase:

The intended lifetime for a character is about 8 months (this figure is based on an average lifespan of 70 ingame years, coupled with the "seconds per minute" rate at which the server time advances), which is more than enough time to get used to the fact that death comes to every character.

Dedicated players are those volunteers who are willing to guide the show for free. They exist (believe it or not; I have personally known around 20 of these in the last year), and their purpose is to offer indifferent characters for the purpose of game flow, not for furthering their own ends or gains or making heroes of their characters. Call them "supporting actors" if you will, because that''s roughly what their roles would be.

Not everyone can be important, that is true. But there are leaders in online games, and there are followers. The leaders get famous through their actions, and followers get famous by standing at the leaders'' sides. Whether that is political, militaristic, or otherwise, remains to be seen when the game actually comes to fruition (and more ideas are added).

Bishop Pass:

That''s another advantage of PvP in this context (i.e. the Player-killing part of PvP), that there are consequences for it. Current online games have a sort of "tag, you''re it" feeling in PvP, that nothing is gained save a small dose of pride while your opponent resurrects at the nearest shrine.

The only issue I can foresee is punishing an ingame character, in a roleplay fashion, for something that is clearly out of context. (Example: Killah Youzass attacks Rilus Maximus unprovoked, and kills him just for the hell of it... so the town guard apprehends Killah, and puts him on trial. The guy clearly isn''t going to roleplay the situation, and will probably just log off, having gotten his jollies at Rilus'' expense. I would rather see the guy banned for misconduct; that might be harsh, but it ruins the game for those for whom the game is intended.)


I really feel I''m delving into something new (what with the majority of comments being negative), but I''m almost expecting that, considering not much of the aforementioned has been attempted before. Keep the comments coming in though, I''m interested to see what ideas people have.


MatrixCubed
http://MatrixCubed.org

quote: Original post by MatrixCubed
The intended lifetime for a character is about 8 months (this figure is based on an average lifespan of 70 ingame years, coupled with the "seconds per minute" rate at which the server time advances), which is more than enough time to get used to the fact that death comes to every character.

I would rather see the guy banned for misconduct; that might be harsh, but it ruins the game for those for whom the game is intended.)

that lifetime will never, ever hold up. I doubt that even one in 1000 would die a natural death.

And by banning people for PKing you´ll pretty soon have driven out your audience. Roleplaying is (apart from the constant fighting) about possibilites, and by a law such as that you´d force everyone into a "happyworld" type of rules. People just won´t like it. And in an online game you depend on your players financially. And if you ban all player killers you will have probably eliminated about half of your customers.
I realize that I´m not being very constructive here, but so far the only solution to the inherent MMORPG problems is to make death and resurrection so easy that no one has to get angry.

It seems you''re stuck in the mindset that the only point of online RPGs is PKing and PvP... I don''t know what your personal MMORPG experience is, but as I said from the beginning of this thread, my intent is to evolve the RPG, not clone what has already been done.

Nothing personal, mind you, it''s just that I am trying to introduce something different into the genre; if I really did give half a rat''s *ss about PKers and the revenue they generate, then I wouldn''t have started this thread from the beginning. I''ve seen what problems they can bring up in the type of game I''m developing, and it''s destructive at best. That is not my goal.

(Incidentally, my own experience is having maintained and been on the administration team of a roleplay-only UO shard for about 6 months before I decided to quit and work on my game fulltime... of which mindless PKing did get players banned. We promoted roleplaying, and the server community really was impressive as people got involved in other things than combat with each other.)

Also note that while it seems the point of this thread is to discuss PKing and PvP, that also is not my intent, just the first things I wanted to address. More on other aspects of the game coming soon.



MatrixCubed
http://MatrixCubed.org

quote: Original post by MatrixCubed
The intended lifetime for a character is about 8 months (this figure is based on an average lifespan of 70 ingame years, coupled with the "seconds per minute" rate at which the server time advances), which is more than enough time to get used to the fact that death comes to every character.

I would rather see the guy banned for misconduct; that might be harsh, but it ruins the game for those for whom the game is intended.)

My average character lifetime in a MUD?MMO is about 18 months-2 years. If that was limited to the time between birth and their first slaying, it would probably be about a week.

One fact which you do seem to have overlooked, MatrixCubed, is that, whilst we can (and must) change the RPG, pull it out of the stagnant quagmire it seems to have settled in, and get it flowing again; we cannot change the mindset of the players themselves. Far too many just want to slay, slay, slay.

I can remember, some months back, trying to explain the meaning of roleplay to one character on a roleplay-encouraged MUD, when the ejit was trying to slay every benevolent city citizen in sight. The guy just didn't understand. Unfortunately, people like that do comprise a significant proportion.

quote: Original post by MatrixCubed
The only issue I can foresee is punishing an ingame character, in a roleplay fashion, for something that is clearly out of context. (Example: Killah Youzass attacks Rilus Maximus unprovoked, and kills him just for the hell of it... so the town guard apprehends Killah, and puts him on trial. The guy clearly isn't going to roleplay the situation, and will probably just log off, having gotten his jollies at Rilus' expense.

This is actually a good argument for having player characters continue to exist in the world after log-off. Are you aware of the "rent" system employed by a fair few MUDs? If a player does not disconnect only when the character is in certain log-off points (usually inns) they stay in the world to be killed and looted.

Whilst I think that this in itself is a bit harsh, I see nothing wrong with having player characters remain in the world for a minute or two after logoff (With the obvious exception of logoff due to timeout). This would solve the problem of players logging off to avoid RPing a defeat, or other impossible situation. If they murder someone, then immediately log off, their character would still be in the world, easy to perform retribution upon.

quote: Original post by MatrixCubed
I understand the possibility for PvP abuse, but if assholery runs rampant, I would rather see legitimate player complaints get jerks kicked off the server rather than change the entire system to accomodate the mistakes of a few.

Actually, one system I say a while back gave me some inspiration. There, a character who has committed unprovoked murder is publicly executed (their head is chopped off). This counts as perma-death, and, as an added effect, their head remains as a world object. People who were murdered by others (Their clan or social grouping in your world's case) would often carry around the disembodied heads of those who had wronged them and been punished for it.

Now, if we adapt this system (I'm assuming here that your world is designed to only allow a player X simultaneous characters in the database - to create a character X+1, one of the old ones must be deleted.

If this is the case, then I suggest the following system might work:

Public execution for crime, character is deleted. Since the character was removed for the player using them for a serious crime (slaying without reasonable provacation) the number of characters they currently have goes down by one, but the number they are allowed DOES NOT go up by one.

For example, say X is 5 (max possible simultaneous characters by a player).

Player Y currently has 3 characters, allowed 2 more. Player Y uses one of their characters to gut another player's character, because they are in a foul mood, say. Player Y is caught, and the character is executed.

Player Y now has 2 characters, but is still only allowed 2 more.

I would suggest removing the restriction after a reasonable amount of time - a month would be adequate - so as not to punish a player too harshly.

In this way, obsessive player killers would suddenly find, they are allowed no characters for a month - about the same length of time as a subscription payment lasts

-edited due to author stupidity (always good to close a quote in the right place

Edited by - DM on April 14, 2001 5:35:34 PM

Here are a few MMORPGs which I think has some of the right ideas: ShadowBane and this one too Dawn

They are combining RPG elements with elements that may be usually in a strategy game such as groups plotting against each other.

I think that is the overlooked true power of large groups of players is allowing them to create their own plots just by the natural conflicting goals.


A CRPG in development...

Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.


Edited by - Nazrix on April 14, 2001 8:15:02 PM

Nazrix, I have to agree there. There is much discussion on this forum about dynamic plots. In aMMO, you have a great many independantly-minded players wandering about. A great place for dynamic plots.

Bullitin boards have existed in virtual worlds for a long time. What about using them as places for players to post quests to be completed by other players? (Assassination, thievery, arson, raid a settlement, topple a player-government, etc) Should the player who started it all not stump up the promised payment, well, the offended player can go to the bulletin boards...