I'm interested in designing something like a graphical RP-oriented MU*, as opposed to a graphical MUD like UO, EQ, etc. So I'm trying to figure out the best way to encourage roleplaying (as in text-based in-character interaction, not just going out and killing monsters if you're a fighter). RP MU*s tend to do this by completely eliminating stats, but this leads to powergamers trying to play God, or at least a minor deity. And even the less ambitious players may end up arguing for hours over who should win a fight between their characters. But if you do have stats that can be increased, players are probably going to be too busy trying to level to bother with roleplaying, and they're going to be able to kill any serious, non-stats-oriented roleplayer. I have a few ideas of how to deal with this, and I'd like to know what people think. First, I'm planning for skill-based stats, mostly transparent to the player. The only way they're going to know if they're improving is in the actual results of using the skill. A fighter will find themselves winning more often, a healer will be able to cure more serious wounds, etc. Also, there's only so far you'll be able to advance... no fighter is invincible, and medicine isn't magic. Fighting (invariably the most popular activity in online MUDs) will actually be fairly dangerous, and not necessarily that rewarding. Although I still can't decide between futuristic and fantastic settings, whatever magic / psi / whatever will be *very* costly to the user. Hopefully all this will result in a slightly more realistic world, as well as one where roleplaying is a viable option. But the primary way I'm hoping to encourage roleplaying, is a stat that I'm temporarily calling 'reputation', for lack of a better term. It's a spinoff of something someone suggested in this forum, of course I can't remember who... Anyhow, you gain reputation through some sort of voting system. Players can vote for or against anyone they come in contact with, on the basis of the person's roleplaying. People who get a lot of positive votes will increase in reputation, and as a result, their own votes will carry more weight. People with an overall negative score (probably twinks, who either disrupt roleplay or otherwise annoy players) will not be counted in the voting at all, and may be investigated by admin and even kicked off the game if necessary. I'm hoping this system will result in real benefits for good roleplayers. People with high reputations will actually have more power than the highest-level fighters, because they can easily influence many people to do what they want. Also, the game's admin will be able to deal with consistent troublemakers, without needing to be online constantly dealing with everyone's individual complaints. The only real problem I can see, is that the positive side of the voting is really a fiat system... positive votes lead to high reputation which means your votes are worth more in increasing other people's reputation... but you don't actually *get* anything for having a good rep. But it would be possible to add some sort of reward... maybe higher-rep players can make new alts of species that are off-limits to newbies, or that start out with more skills, or something like that. Okay, now I need somebody to tell me what's *really* wrong with this idea. And any other suggestions of how to encourage roleplaying would be nice. -Moth Edited by - Moth on 9/4/00 1:25:32 AM

MadKeith: In the current design, people would be encouraged to vote for good roleplayers - regardless of their alignment. I''m hoping to steer things towards a more cooperative form of roleplaying, as in most freeform settings, where the IC bad guys are likely to be your OOC friends. After all, they''re the ones making your virtual life interesting, roleplaying is pretty boring without conflict. Even so, the blatantly evil types are probably going to end up with lower reps... but that''s realistic, nobody''s gonna want to be friends with the psychotic necromancer, right? So maybe the bad guys will have to learn to be a little more subtle. In general, I''d rather see opposing grey factions than any black-and-white setup, anyhow...

Landfish: It''s kinda a popularity contest from the beginning, but I don''t know if that means it can''t work. If people are forced to roleplay to be popular, well, they''ll still be roleplaying... I see how it could be abused by people ignoring to RP aspect to vote for people they''ve OOCly chatted with and liked, but I''m hoping to avoid that through two other borrowed ideas: One, the initial player-base will be entirely experienced roleplayers, which will hopefully influence the incoming newbies, once the game is more widely released. (not in any commercial context, obviously... I''m not -that- delusional). Two, new players have to write up at least a few paragraphs of character background, which will be checked by administrators before they ever set foot in the game. Hopefully, people who aren''t into roleplaying for roleplaying''s sake, won''t even bother.

I dunno. Maybe I should just stick to MU*s. Without graphics or any real gameplay, there''s no attraction to non-roleplayers, and no distractions for the roleplayers themselves. It just seems like there''s so much you could add to the experience, if people wouldn''t go and make it the point of the game, instead of a means to an end.

Thanks for the feedback, anyhow.

-Moth

I have been playing UO for almost a year now. I have always role played from the day I first entered Britannia, but have only recently started doing some serious RPing (I used to RP on and off now I do it all the time).
Anyways, in my time playing UO I have found that there are two types of players,

One: Those who role play
and
Two: Those who will not role play no matter how much you force them to.
I am one of the former whiel one of my good OOC friends who also plays UO is of the latter type, he will not role play at all, he hates it, he rediculas people (even me) who role play.
I know I''m rambleing but, what I am trying to say is that it would be very hard to force everyone to role play, I know it''s an RPG but some people don''t get the role playing part and only understand the Game part.
So If one decides to make a game and force everyone who plays to RP then I fear that the number of players playing the game would drop by a large amount.

Just my 2 cents.

First off, this is -not- being designed as a mainstream commercial game. I don''t expect everyone to like it, I''m not expecting -anyone- to pay for it. I just want to make the sort of roleplaying environment I wish I could play in. My goal isn''t to attract the greatest amount of people, but to provide the best possible environment for the roleplayers... either by converting the gamers, or chasing them off entirely.

Blackstream, that''s a good point... maybe the negative voting isn''t such a good idea. A separate system might work, making the negative voting more of a complaint system. Accumulate enough complaints, and the server starts logging your activity for an admin to look at later. Yeah, it''s big-brotherish, but there has to be a way for the admin to be able to deal with problems, without needing to be around 24/7. And since it''s the admin who makes the call on what to actually do about the person, threatening some harmless roleplayer with negative votes would be meaningless.

The idea of GMs is appealing, but I''m afraid that there''s too much that could go wrong. GMs can''t be around all the time, watching everyone... well, maybe they could, but it doesn''t seem like the greatest way to run things. On the other hand, if GMs can give out goodies, people are going to be swarming around and pestering them. Constantly. Beyond that... power corrupts. I''ve seen it on more than one MU*. It''s one thing to have admin deciding whether or not to ban the occasional serious troublemaker... it''s something else entirely when you have 20 GMs running around, rewarding or punishing players as they see fit, depending on how well they think they''re RPing... a very subjective thing. Even if you *do* get a bunch of incorruptible, dedicated people, all with flawless judgement... there will always be players convinced that injustice is being done, and you''re going to hear about it. Since it''s noncommercial, I can''t exactly plan to pay a moderator. Of course I could take volunteers... but it''s like any position of power: anyone who wants it, should probably be kept away from it at all costs. ;-p

It does sound good in theory, GMs certainly work fine for tabletop. I just don''t think they''re feasible in a persistent online world, with a few hundred complete strangers at each other''s throats, rather than of a small group friends who depend on the GM to begin with. And for the kind of freeform, text-based roleplaying I''m talking about... there''s no coded solution, either. Not this century, at least.

CGameProgrammer: People who like roleplaying will roleplay... unless they''re distracted by all those cool monsters to kill and coded quests to go on, or whatever else the programmer thought would make for a fun game. Which is why I''m hoping to make something a little bit different. As for the non-roleplayers... they have *plenty* of other places to go. They''re not going to be forced to roleplay, nobody''s making them stay. Hopefully they won''t be in the game in the first place, since you have to write a character background to play. (More work for the admins, I know. But unlike GM''d roleplaying, I''ve seen this implemented and I know it works pretty well.)

Honest and fair players? Well, I hope I''m not assuming that... but what''s the worst a single player can do? Vote for someone who isn''t really a good roleplayer? One vote doesn''t count for much. Vote a complaint against someone who hasn''t done anything wrong? Fine, but nothing happens without admin intervention... which isn''t going to happen unless they see someone''s been causing problems. The worst I can think of is a bunch of players getting together and voting for themselves with no regard to roleplaying... but why would they? There''s no real value to having a higher rep, except that you have more IC power. But if people know you''re not a roleplayer, they''re not going to want to interact with you, regardless.

As for judging roleplaying... I''m not talking about ''adhering to a role.'' I know there was some talk about that in one of the RPG threads, trying to programatically force players to do what the predesigned character *would* do... that''s *definitely* not what I mean. Freeform roleplaying means making your own character, and often your own plots... *good* FFRP is mostly a matter of drama, good characterization, and involving other players in a meaningful way. Good writing never hurt, either. I think it''s possible for players to judge on those sorts of factors, although I admit it could as easily degenerate into OOC-ish popularity... I just can''t think of a better system.

Whew. Too much typing. Thanks to everyone for the feedback, though.

-Moth

Actually, i don''t really see a problem with this system. The people who have the most weight in their votes will most likely be the people playing the game really well, and will vote for the good roleplayers - not just the people they like. Look how well the voting system worked in the ''game'' survivor. That was the most popular show in america. There are some mu*''s I have played that use voting, and I think it works rather well.

Maybe i'm missing something here but the principle of all games in personal desire to play them. It's not work! So if you want to have real role playing in your games you should never force but simply allow for it. The big question is has always been.. How are people going to roleplay in your game?

quote: By Moth
Hopefully all this will result in a slightly more realistic world, as well as one where roleplaying is a viable option.

Remember that most rpg's (not crpg's) are fantasy based which usually has little to do with realism! So promoting roleplaying by trying to make it realistic is just a bad exuse for wanting more realism in my books.

quote:
But the primary way I'm hoping to encourage roleplaying, is a stat that I'm temporarily calling 'reputation', for lack of a better term. It's a spinoff of something someone suggested in this forum, of course I can't remember who... Anyhow, you gain reputation through some sort of voting system.

Roleplaying comes from a personal desire to role play. If someone doesn't know the fun of role playing then they must be taught. It's that simple. Enforcing ideals on players is bad game design or not game design don't worry, we're all guilty of it too from time to time. Game Design is all about teaching <== ahhh, that looks like a good signature, i'll have to think about that one for a while

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Edited by - Paul Cunningham on September 5, 2000 3:29:23 AM