So, how about adding limited items to Item Search? I'm sure that will drive more interest to the game and result in better item circulation.

1) Like there are areas in the game that I've never been to and I don't bother to go to, but if I know there are nice items there, I'll make sure to explore to find them.

2) Newbie-friendly! Edges are dead to even the field, give everyone the same level of item knowledge to even it even more. A win-win situation (and when you see the results, also bring back edges).

3) Once people know what items are in Hell, they'll swarm Hell and die in thousands, much to the delight of Father of Devils.

4) Having as many secrets as there are, I'm sure even vets will start searching for them like crazy because now they KNOW the prize is there.

5) This absolutely positive change requires no coding, you just have to comment the exclusion condition in Umiron's code, 100% info. EDIT: 99%

One of the most frustrating parts of learning this game is item knowledge. It's the one thing that keeps me as a noob from being competitive in PK situation. There are other mitigating factors that may cause me to lose regardless, but being on an even playing field would go a long way in teaching myself what other mistakes I am making.

I was going to suggest that all limited items under level 40 or 50 should be included in the item list. This way the ultra elite stuff is still a discovery, but us new players don't have to commit 500 hrs to establishing a personal database and exploring every area with a fine toothed comb just to be somewhat relevant gear wise. I do appreciate getting outfitted by vets, it's great and I thank all of you that do so, but that's handing me a fish. I don't just want to eat, I want to be able to feed myself.

The fact that only the area is given is still incentive to explore the area, it's something I've done with the current item DB many times, to my benefit.

This very simple change will do wonders to raise the baseline on new players without hurting anything. I have never understood the 'chamber of secrets' system when it only benefits veteran players. It puts incentive toward OOC channels of gaining the information. Besides that, there are various outdated/incomplete/semi current lists available already, they just are outdated/incomplete/semi current. Why the secrecy when the players that it excludes are the exact players that we want to stick around? If this had been a thing much earlier I might have stuck it out one of those times all that long ago and would be a vet instead of a really enthusiastic newb. That all said, I would exclude preps from the list. Let THAT stuff be the super secret sauce. At least with regards to preps the stuff you can find in the cities is comparable to the stuff that your opponent will be carrying (other than Ragers, of course).

Anyhow, I will likely revisit this topic when I write up a larger scope post with some of my observations and potential suggestions, but the TL;DR is that there doesn't seem to be a solid reason why all of this information is so well guarded. I realize that everyone knowing where all the decent limited stuff is makes it less available, but isn't that supposed to incentivize us towards taking it from some of the people that are carrying it? Or, that guardian sword is illusionary? Well now I get to know what the next best thing is, so I'm not left with checking the three or four spots that I know of that have presentable gear, now I get to go explore an area to find out what my next best option is.

>One of the most frustrating parts of learning this game is
>item knowledge. It's the one thing that keeps me as a noob
>from being competitive in PK situation.

Allow me to humbly disagree? Lack of item knowledge may be hindering you, but its fairly unlikely to be "the one thing" that's keeping you from being competitive.

Knowledge of the nuances of skills, both your own and your enemy's. Area knowledge. All the other stuff that goes into PK competitiveness, like not panicking, not spamming, having the right strategy for a given opponent, being able to adjust that strategy on the fly to adjust for unforeseen occurrences, etc.

But I'll totally grant that item knowledge (both gear and consumables) is important.

>I was going to suggest that all limited items under level 40
>or 50 should be included in the item list.

If they're going to do a filter like that, I would base it on "rarity" instead of item level. Item levels are kind of wonky. Some items that are very powerful and rare aren't as high level as you'd expect them to be, and some items that are high level aren't really that rare or powerful.

>I do appreciate getting outfitted
>by vets, it's great and I thank all of you that do so, but
>that's handing me a fish. I don't just want to eat, I want to
>be able to feed myself.

If someone is willing to gear you up, that person is probably also willing to show you where that gear comes from. Just have to ask.

>>One of the most frustrating parts of learning this game is
>>item knowledge. It's the one thing that keeps me as a noob
>>from being competitive in PK situation.
>
>Allow me to humbly disagree? Lack of item knowledge may be
>hindering you, but its fairly unlikely to be "the one thing"
>that's keeping you from being competitive.
>
>Knowledge of the nuances of skills, both your own and your
>enemy's. Area knowledge. All the other stuff that goes into
>PK competitiveness, like not panicking, not spamming, having
>the right strategy for a given opponent, being able to adjust
>that strategy on the fly to adjust for unforeseen occurrences,
>etc.
>
>But I'll totally grant that item knowledge (both gear and
>consumables) is important.

I don't semantically disagree with your point above but for me at least (maybe the other guy too) you can replace "being competitive in PK" with "having fun in PK" in the second sentence you quoted. Having fun in PK is at the very top of the list of why I MUD. Second is elf elf giant love triangles but I hear empire has that covered.

Yeah, CF PK is weird. For me it's always been very feast or famine. May be a factor of the class you play. The world is often divided into "people I can roll" and "people who can roll me". The exercise is to actively exterminate the first set while not being exterminated by the second set. It's that tension that's fun, more so than the actual encounters.

That's one thing that's always bothered me a little. Too many fights are one-sided. Or, if not one-sided, they're super short, where the disadvantaged party should probably start thinking about an escape plan maybe 4 rounds into the fight. Not sure what to do about that.

>Allow me to humbly disagree? Lack of item knowledge may be
>hindering you, but its fairly unlikely to be "the one thing"
>that's keeping you from being competitive.
>
>Knowledge of the nuances of skills, both your own and your
>enemy's. Area knowledge. All the other stuff that goes into
>PK competitiveness, like not panicking, not spamming, having
>the right strategy for a given opponent, being able to adjust
>that strategy on the fly to adjust for unforeseen occurrences,
>etc.
>
>But I'll totally grant that item knowledge (both gear and
>consumables) is important.

Of course, you are quite welcome to disagree, however in this instance I think where our opinion differs is in how we are each defining competitive. I simply mean that having the opportunity for a success is competitive. I did mention that I would likely still lose due to other mitigating factors, such as those you mentioned. If character X comes at me, does our gear difference mean that even if I have the better rolls, I still lose to their damage? If the answer is yes then I don't feel that I am competitive in that situation. I didn't have a chance to win even if I nailed the other. variables.


>If they're going to do a filter like that, I would base it on
>"rarity" instead of item level. Item levels are kind of
>wonky. Some items that are very powerful and rare aren't as
>high level as you'd expect them to be, and some items that are
>high level aren't really that rare or powerful.

If that's the case then I absolutely agree.


>If someone is willing to gear you up, that person is probably
>also willing to show you where that gear comes from. Just
>have to ask.

I have picked a lot of information this way, but I hate using tropes for what is essentially OOC information, in a meta scope. Also I don't like bothering people because of my own inexperience. I feel that I'm inconveniencing someone who could probably be spending their possibly limited time on more important matters. The other thing I don't like about only asking IC is that I don't know if the person teaching me has complete item knowledge/optimization. What if said person doesn't know what would be best for my build etc., or if they know what I'm looking for. There have been times when someone gives me a piece, but something I found on the item list actually suits me better. In that case is it their unfamiliarity that is at issue or did they have something specific in mind for my build? I can't figure that out without employing RP tropes. And yea, what if the person I'm asking gives me misinformation based on their own misunderstanding? It's not an efficient system, though as I said I am thankful to everyone willing to share information, even if we do have to disguise that with RP Trope X. Also, and this is more of a personal distinction, but I learn the game better when I have to go out and look for things. When someone gives me the info, I have to memorize it, which I find to be less effective for the retention of that information. The things I've learned from the database is instant recall because to find that thing I had to go to the place and search the entire place until I found it. I just don't feel that asking others is the best or most reliable method of learning.

Re: not wanting to ask people. If you stick to goodie-asking-goodie or cabal-asking-same-cabal then I wouldn't feel bad about it at all. If you're worried about people having to RP-ize stats, just ask them to let you handle it, then lore or identify it. If you don't have the identify spell/supp and/or the scrolls skill then you'd need to take the time to get lore up to a respectable level.

W.r.t. people having incomplete knowledge, just assume that whatever answer they give you for "what's the best gear at slow X for my build" may actually be wrong. But it's their best effort. If you ask several different people (who seem to be vets) then you can expect to assemble a reasonable "short list" of gear to aim for.

Seriously, why do you keep going on with this?

We've all heard that "just ask IC", which is effectively "spend 900 hours asking IC instead of spending 1500 hours looking for yourself" against "spend one hour browsing item search".

Very effective.

To be fair, I think Isildur is giving some suggestions that work within the current structure as alternatives. I agree with your opinion on 'Ask me IC' because it's basically, intended or not, a flip of the bird to whatever question is being posed. The only way I could actually do that is to ask, OOCly, 'Who are you IC?' which of course would go unanswered (or should). Even if I did know that player IC, that doesn't presuppose that I have an IC reason to ask that character that specific question.

Now, to the suggestion of playing goodly characters. It's not a bad idea under the current structure, but now I'm making a decision about my character based on OOC reasoning. I like playing goodies, so this isn't a bad route for me in particular, but not everyone wants to play that kind of character, so for that person they are now looking at playing something they don't want to for OOC reasons. It seems ironic to me, because the system is now encouraging IC choices due to OOC pressures. Failing an appopriate character to ask said information of in game, my best bet outside of the item search is to look through the old item lists on the Dioxide's wiki, another OOC source and unfortunately just as reliable as asking some random player that may or may not have beneficial advice. I have learned some item locations even from some of the maps on Dio's, for example the 'Dawnbringer' staff in Fhaulgash. I don't see how adding such information to the db would be all that different. In fact, in the case of Fhaulgash I would have taken much longer to find the staff if I only was given the area. I would have needed to actually explore the area to find what I was looking for. It incentivizes exploration and simultaneously makes brand new players more competitive.

>It incentivizes
>exploration and simultaneously makes brand new players more
>competitive.

This is well put, and K-guy's note as well. It's about helping new players get into the action without needing 1,000 hours AND intersection with helpful chars. I don't see what the downside is - MUD is more likely to retain new people, and as has been pointed out, new players will still be fodder for a while while they learn unique mechanics.

Elsewhere in this thread Umiron seemed totally disinterested in doing anything in this front. Can someone link me to where the "con" argument has been laid out? I'm terrible with this forum search function.

>Now, to the suggestion of playing goodly characters. It's not
>a bad idea under the current structure, but now I'm making a
>decision about my character based on OOC reasoning.

To be fair, we already do this. It's recommended at character creation that new players not play empowerment classes. Or, at least, it used to be. Why is alignment different than class?

Maybe good and neutral characters are just more accessible to newer players.

I for one don't play goodies because they're boring as hell. All my attempts ended in being bored and auto.

Why, not enough targets? I can see that. Then again, if you're evil Empire, half the evils out there are in your cabal or in Tribunal. Though you still have free reign to go after the neutral guys.

And depending on role, you can't really talk to ppl about telling you stuff, because you've just killed them

Not that you actually care or that alignments are enforced.

Grokko was a rare exception. Sorry for killing you

Your triggers did.

It's cool to be proud of someone else's accomplishments though. Live vicariously through your programming skillz who are we to judge?

It was gear given to me by heroes

>Seriously, why do you keep going on with this?

To the extent it's possible to get this info relatively painlessly in game the need for a searchable database is less.

Now, you can certainly argue it's not easy or painless. At least with respect to high-end gear, the "best set of equipment" feature on PBFs is hugely helpful. Doesn't tell you what stuff does, but gives you a short list of stuff you should covet.

I think basically all "newbies" to MUDs anymore are refugees from failed muds. For me the greatest deterrent to MUDing these days is not having a place I know to play in, and getting the "hey everyone starts out as a newbie, it'll only be 2-5 years until you know where these preps and gear I'm owning you with are from." CF is far from alone in this - almost all PK MUDs share that culture. But it's 2017, and even on the much younger side of the MUDing population I have a wife and work to keep me from learning MUDs without handouts like I did in my teens.

Granted I'm a killer/socializer type, not an explorer, but I think you'd potentially do really well to have a comprehensive database of all gear and preps by area available for review by players who wanted to have such info spoon fed. Doesn't seem to me like it would make anything too easy on a new player - they'd just be able to target their exploration better and have a bit easier time looking for chinks in the armor of better geared opponents.

I agree with you in that such an unrestricted database would be a good thing. I have my own personal way of finding gear (grepping years and years of logs) but for people new to the game this would get them a leg up pretty quickly.

Having said that, there is literally zero percent chance of this being implemented with the current staff. You'd need to wait for my application to HEROIMM to be accepted. I'd be all for the information highway to help out people with 20+ less years than me.

Remembering back to when I was new to this game, how to gear was always something that frustrated me. Back then there was *no* item list whatsoever, and I think I was playing a class that didn't have the identify skill/spell. And stats were more obscured. So, all you could really do is look at other people of your same class/alignment and try to make a mental note of what they were wearing, then go try to figure out where all that stuff came from.

Things that exist today that I imagine would shorten the learning curve:

1. Legendary awareness. At least when you look at someone you can see which pieces are "rare".

2. Alduk in the Inn. Everybody now has identify (for a price).

3. Items lists, both here and the out-dated one at Dio's. It's still good for a few things.

4. The "best set of gear" portion of the PBF posts. If you're playing a common race/class/align combo, you can probably just search for other people who've played that same combo and see what that their "best set" consisted of.

I can tell you that, role-play permitting, I'm perfectly happy to direct people to preps in-game, unless I find one that's so powerful I expect it will be removed from the game once it becomes widely known. Then I might sit on it.

Better comment on the matter. Do you think the proposed change would be for better or worse of the game?

I'm wary of sounding like an ingrate to folks who are responding kindly but here I go anyways.

1-3 while tautologically more than nothing are pretty sparse to someone actually trying to jump in and get up to speed. Alduk is redundant with friendly casters or souped up lore classes, and the item lists omit anything competitive past super low levels. Legendary awareness might net me a notion of what's good but I've already been online enough to know that guy's phylactery beats my green sleeves. I don't know where to start looking for the phylactery though.

4 it's clear to me why you'd want to keep the good stuff to yourself and I certainly don't hold it against you, but it is exactly the culuture I described in my first. Is it actually a good thing to have OP preps in the game for that only 1 person stumbles across them and gets to abuse them for all future characters?

I will say these sound like answers I've given before. Funny to be on the other side

>I don't know where to
>start looking for the phylactery though.

Yeah, and that was my problem too. I just got really shameless about asking people, and played a couple characters in a row that had very few role-play conflicts with other people. It also helped that, back in the day, more people had the "locate object" spell/commune. That being removed made it slightly more difficult to figure this stuff out.

All that said, figuring out what all this cool, mysterious gear did, and how to get it, was one thing that kept me playing at a time when I was getting regularly curb-stomped by literally everyone in the game. (Now I get curb-stomped only semi-regularly. Hah.)

If you don't want to play a "friendly with everyone" character because you enjoy PK, then you could play a good-aligned character. Most other good-aligned characters are happy to share gear locations with you, and you still get to fight evils.

I forgot another thing that was added that helps: Illusionary gear. Used to be the highly limited stuff was never on the mob, but there was also no placeholder there to let you know it even came from that mob in the first place. Now you at least get the knowledge of what a mob can potentially hold, even if it's not there.

>4 it's clear to me why you'd want to keep the good stuff to
>yourself and I certainly don't hold it against you, but it is
>exactly the culuture I described in my first. Is it actually a
>good thing to have OP preps in the game for that only 1 person
>stumbles across them and gets to abuse them for all future
>characters?

No, it's not a good thing. But it's also very rare. And if something is "powerful enough" then it eventually gets discovered, shared, and nerfed if it really is that broken.

The only other preps I might not share are ones that are 1. limited and 2. I'm actively using/hording with my current character.

>The only other preps I might not share are ones that
>are 1. limited and 2. I'm actively using/hording with my
>current character.


And that's bad. Because haste/aura/stoneskin/shield/barrier preps are essential to a PK-heavy player. Like Gromm before prep knowledge and Gromm after prep knowledge are two different things, and you may be sure I've learned those OOC way. Did I lose fun trying to figure out aura talisman in Organia? I'd never ever figure it out if not for OOC information channels, so no fun lost. I've had A LOT of fun using it though.

Did I learn Veran quest IC? Hell no. But I've had a lot of fun loading my tranced assassin with aura/stoneskin and jumping on 3 tribunals as criminal in the middle of the city. And I'm sure they've had fun as well. Had I not had that knowledge, those rumbles would've never happened. That's why I've made a lot of effort to show that quest to as many people as I could IC.

Both preps are limited, and I actively hoard them when I can.

Quote: Did I learn Veran quest IC? Hell no. But I've had a lot of fun loading my tranced assassin with aura/stoneskin and jumping on 3 tribunals as criminal in the middle of the city. And I'm sure they've had fun as well. Had I not had that knowledge, those rumbles would've never happened. That's why I've made a lot of effort to show that quest to as many people as I could IC.

**********
How many would that be? Like 6 of your Broskies?

Your fault.

Grokko was almost a cool character.

Chase triggers put you in the ranks of POS's like Marcus and Shappa.

At least you owned up to it and corrected the behavior. So some respect there.

but mine

You're a Russian after all and for what ever reason Russians cheat in video games and elections.

Even if it were just limited items from non area explore. I'd even be happy with a level cap.

Sometimes it's just nice to know an item with certain stats exists with maybe a clue as to where of to begin searching.

>5) This absolutely positive change requires no coding, you
>just have to comment the exclusion condition in Umiron's code,
>100% info.

That's actually not true. The item database is updated by booting the MUD with a special switch and then running a separate command line tool.

The fact that it doesn't get updated silently and automatically was very much by design.

But thanks for the reminder! I should probably teach someone how to work that thing so that items from new areas get included.

Kicking edges in the groin was also by design

Seriously though, what do you think about the idea?

>Kicking edges in the groin was also by design
>
>Seriously though, what do you think about the idea?

Go figure, I don't like it.

I wouldn't be a fan of the item search criteria getting any looser after the level cutoff was raised already a year or so ago. I've explained why elsewhere.

Basic preps wouldn't bother me but there's no convenient way of implementing that in a way that wouldn't be all or nothing, and I'm firmly against all.


But like I said, I'm totally for keeping it up-to-date, which currently requires a little know-how that I almost certainly did not document. In my defense, nothing in CF is documented.

You could do a two-tier approach where "basic" gear is shown with the area, but "nicer" gear is shown without area included. Maybe have "really nice" gear not shown at all.

Not necessarily advocating this, but it's one approach that could bridge the gap between "show everything" and "only show really common stuff".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ggke9pDUho

I've held onto this video for a while (it's longer and from a different source than the others) and I think it applies here, but perhaps I'm misreading your reasoning for not having an all item search.

My point exactly. Brilliant video.

.

That is an interesting video. On the one hand, it is interesting that enjoyment value might be higher for those who have a plot spoiled; on the other, there is something to be said for authorial intent. The other day I finally watched Gone Girl, having zero idea what the movie was about. My enjoyment of that movie was based on not knowing what was going to happen; I don't think having it spoiled would have made that a better experience. Maybe the general populace is just to lazy or impatient to enjoy quality story telling. :p

That said, movies involve a passive audience. As an extreme example, would it be fun to solve a puzzle with spoilers? Like, if you saw the answers to a crossword puzzle before you started it, would that actually be an entertaining experience?

This may just be a culture shift. Those of us who started with tabletop gaming didn't have walkthroughs to consult before entering a dungeon, so much of the magic of gaming involved exploration without helps.

I think it's definitely a culture shift for MUDing - I remember the days where exploration and discovery was what made it magical - but that magic's more or less gone after playing 2 MUDs for >10,000 hours each (yikes) and WoW from vanilla through whatever that Arthas expansion was.

In terms of magical moments the first time in the whirlpool would've definitely been exciting 15 years ago. Now exploration is a required task to get back to being competent in the familiar text action rpg gameplay that I still like better than anything else available in 2017. These days the magic is in improbable PKs and dynamic, conflict driven RP.

Pecking out the previous paragraph I was reminded of this story... Before my first "home mud" died the staff tried to shake things up by radically changing gearing, stats, and areas. It just sank like the titanic as they basically obsoleted all their veteran players over the course of a year of hard work (though that wasn't the only issue, extended downtime didn't help either). That situation was probably even more frustrating than attempting to move to a poorly documented mud, because at least new players have a change of scenery to check out.

I think it's definitely a culture shift for MUDing - I remember the days where exploration and discovery was what made it magical - but that magic's more or less gone after playing 2 MUDs for >10,000 hours each (yikes) and WoW from vanilla through whatever that Arthas expansion was.

Certainly for a veteran player a spoiler for an environment that they have been immersed in for a long time is no longer a spoiler, though. But for someone new to the game, I would think unspoiled exploration must still be possible.

Possible yes, desirable to require it though? If we can agree that substantially all MUDers these days are 28+ with 10+ years of MUD experience (10 years out of American high school) then I'd think anyone who still really wants to start from zero knowledge will be mature enough to avoid clearly marked spoilers.

I think that exploring IS fun, and I wouldn't advocate for a change that destroys that. However, I also think that currently there is a large time sink involved in learning where some of the more basic limited equipment is. Having hundreds of hours as a requirement to put myself into a position of parity where gear is concerned is a bit off putting, and I don't have the time restrictions of some players. I think that Isildur made a good point with rarity being a distinguishing perameter, if an expansion were to be made. With the current search I haven't been turned away from exploration. Rather, it has given direction to my exploration. Instead of randomly wandering into an area and walking into aggro mobs 20 levels above me just to learn there isn't anything that I can acquire for some time I instead knew that there was a piece that I can use in the Troglodyte Cave, and I ended up finding three other pieces that will be useful if I roll up a low level arial in the future.

Having recently been the victim of the hoarding prevention code my inclination would be to say that with regards to gear anything that is touched by the anti hoarding code be kept from any item lists. As I mentioned elsewhere in the thread I don't think preps aught to be included in the list. And, of course, no exact locations, just area names. It might just be my opinion, but I don't think this spoils exploration, but rather it gives exploration some direction, as well as shaves time from the amount needed to be competent at gearing oneself.

With regards to the video, I think that spoilers only alter our perception of the spoiled information, not necessarily our enjoyment. It's hard to say whether that an unspoiled perception of the event/story would be more enjoyable than an unspoiled one. I personally am not a fan of spoilers when I'm interested in a story (anyone that spoils a Star Wars or Tarentino movie with earn my ire), yet I see that there are instances where a spoiler could alter my perception of the story in a positive way.

That said, I don't think that the video applies perfectly to this situation. If the item db ruins exploration, then even the little that is there is acting as a spoiler. Personally I think it just mitigates some of the less worthwhile exploration that I could be doing (re: exploring areas that don't help my current situation/character and drain my constitution/experience) and puts me on to areas that I'll benefit from exploring.

It was Item Search that made me look at every mob in Hamsah Mu'tazz in search of that item. Eventually I was amazed I never stumbled upon that item before.

Observing the whole of Hamsah was sure fun, and I would surely not do that if not for Item Search

I don't need a detailed walkthrough, but if I don't know a thing exists, I probably won't search for it, and thus, exploration is relatively useless.

For an example, I was told when I was playing Brondalorm that there were some new forms of aura for warriors (OOC). I ended up exploring quite a bit because of that, though two separate players gave me IC clues, and eventually I figured out both forms of aura.

Another example is something like Shadow Plane (though, to be honest, this is lessened because while I think you are incredibly creative, I think your game balance hat has completely shifted towards a certain type of player). Now that I know it exists and that players have gone, I'm interested in it. Before I knew it existed, I could have cared less.

Long/short of it is, you can't be completely "gestapo-like" with certain information about CF. You have to allow certain things to either "leak" or full on posts logs/discuss.

>I think it's definitely a culture shift for MUDing - I
>remember the days where exploration and discovery was what
>made it magical - but that magic's more or less gone after
>playing 2 MUDs for >10,000 hours each (yikes) and WoW from
>vanilla through whatever that Arthas expansion was.
>
>Certainly for a veteran player a spoiler for an environment
>that they have been immersed in for a long time is no longer a
>spoiler, though. But for someone new to the game, I would
>think unspoiled exploration must still be possible.

I have some other thoughts, especially about the "culture" shift, but want to make sure they are properly researched, but on this particular point... spoiler tags exist on the internet for a reason. Nothing forces you to spoil something for yourself just because the information is available. I mean the dude just spoiled The Usual Suspects for himself to talk about it in the video... It isn't because the "spoiler" information wasn't out there to be found, he just had made some point of not having sought it out before...

>That is an interesting video. On the one hand, it is
>interesting that enjoyment value might be higher for those who
>have a plot spoiled; on the other, there is something to be
>said for authorial intent.

First, I want to tackle the premise of authorial intent. Specifically that it matters, kind of at all. Let's look at some real life examples.

Neon Genesis Evangelion is considered by many people to be a great work of anime. And has had a profound impact on peoples lives. The author's intent was not to create something like this, in fact he derides people for finding meaning where he intended to create none. It's a fascinating phenomenon that is worth brushing up on, if you aren't already familiar.

Another example is (and I'm failing at my google fu to find it) a couple of people created a book of poetry that was... word salad. The specific intent was to show how silly poetry was as a genre, and yet the book got some favorable reviews, even after it was known it was created specifically to subvert the process. The art they created was experienced in a way beyond their intent.

There are plenty of examples of unintentional art, which if we care about authorial intent, can't be art kind of at all. I'm not saying that authorial intent is merit less, but it is hardly sacrosanct.


>The other day I finally watched
>Gone Girl, having zero idea what the movie was about.
>My enjoyment of that movie was based on not knowing what was
>going to happen; I don't think having it spoiled would have
>made that a better experience. Maybe the general populace is
>just to lazy or impatient to enjoy quality story telling. :p

The video specifically talks about unspoiled media still having value. Your experience is anecdotal, but I've had the same. I watched the movie Crank in the theaters with my wife. That movie is not, by any stretch, a great film, but a combination of factors (including us having basically no idea what we were in for) resulted in a great experience. We actually own the movie because it allows us to recall and to some extent relive that experience. If we had been more informed, we probably don't have that same experience. However, people watch bad movies they know are bad going in and have great experiences. It isn't always about what is on the screen.

The general populace being lazy or impatient is a dangerous line of thinking, and is really unfair to people who enjoy things differently from yourself by implying their experience is somehow less that yours.


>That said, movies involve a passive audience. As an extreme
>example, would it be fun to solve a puzzle with spoilers?
>Like, if you saw the answers to a crossword puzzle before you
>started it, would that actually be an entertaining experience?

Yes. It is both possible and something people do regularly. You can enjoy and appreciate the subtleties of a puzzle without actually solving it yourself. A jigsaw puzzle is a perfect example of this, in that you (almost?) always know exactly what the end result will be. The picture is spoiled from the start... In fact it is usually right there on the box, but the mental exercise of putting it together is the enjoyment, not the "solution".

I, as an anecdote, have very little enjoyment for crosswords, but I do sometimes like to look at the answers and enjoy the understanding of how they crafted the clue. I experienced that, somewhat, with your 6th age crossword, despite having zero success in doing it myself.


>This may just be a culture shift. Those of us who started with
>tabletop gaming didn't have walkthroughs to consult before
>entering a dungeon, so much of the magic of gaming involved
>exploration without helps.

This, couple with the earlier comment about general populace being lazy, is, I think, harmful and a form of gatekeeping that is unfair and frankly offensive. It's also probably a "No True Scotsman" fallacy. No true gamer would play with a walkthrough. The only valid way to experience the real magic of gaming is to explore without any help. That's crap. To say it was done that way back in the day is also only as true as those things weren't generally as available. You can't get a walkthrough for Zork off the internet in 1990 because the internet basically don't exist. Does that mean anyone enjoying Zork today while using a walkthrough is having an invalid experience? Can they not enjoy the game in a different way that those of us who completely bumbled through and spent hours and hours mashing random keys hoping for a different result?

Old games, generally, increased difficulty to artificially increase the time investment and give people either more bang for their buck, or to get people to continue to pump in quarters, but that isn't a good design, at least if the goal isn't purely to suck as much time/money from players as possible for minimal game design investment. If instead, you want people to enjoy playing, be engaged with the game, and get other people excited and engaged, you can no longer force this kind of play on people. There are other games in town.

Finally, the kind of person that really gets into crawling through a game to find every easter egg and hidden bit of content can still enjoy that play, even if walthroughs are available, or the content has been spoiled elsewhere. They can simple choose not to spoil it for themselves, in much the same way the dude who made the video made it to 2017 without spoiling The Usual Suspects for themselves.

First, I want to tackle the premise of authorial intent. Specifically that it matters, kind of at all. Let's look at some real life examples.

Your examples are not the norm of communicative acts, however. I spend a lot of time in cognitive linguistics and authorial intent is immensely important in constructing both narrative and non-narrative and communicating it to others. Disregarding authorial intent is your choice, but then you will not understand what was actually being conveyed.

The general populace being lazy or impatient is a dangerous line of thinking

It's my opinion and I don't feel endangered by it.

The picture is spoiled from the start

Not an analogous example; the spoiler would be having someone show you which pieces go together.

This, couple with the earlier comment about general populace being lazy, is, I think, harmful and a form of gatekeeping that is unfair and frankly offensive.

#triggered

No true gamer would play with a walkthrough.

Not the point of my comment.

All you've accomplished is Father of Devils reviving the rotten corpse of svirf conjurer to serve as his undead forum shield

I guess the importance of "authorial intent" depends on the purpose of CF. Is it about preserving an original creative work of art, or is it about creating gameplay that engages and entertains?

I would be very hesitant to dismiss the studies in the video due to passivity versus activity. We, as humans, are very social creatures. Learning from others is hardwired in us, just like it is in animals. This was drilled home to me in watching some newly hatched ducklings trying to find water for the first time. The mother duck led them to the water bowl, then drank. Some ducklings saw and imitated. Others didn't. The mother repeated it over and over, until she was eventually just putting her beak near the top of the water, pretending to drink. Eventually all the ducklings caught on. I have seen this same behavior in my nephew, and now my 9-month old son.

That is kind of the whole point of a story--to share an experience that has already happened so that we can learn from it. We are thoroughly a storytelling people. Want to make CF more fun? Make it easier for us to tell our story, and easier to enjoy the stories of others.

If you are after self-discovery or self-actualization, might I suggest encouraging this through solid Immteraction and RP rather than through unspoiled area exploration. I have had a handful of absolutely fascinating philosophical moments in CF, and exactly zero of them were from exploration.

Is it about preserving an original creative work of art, or is it about creating gameplay that engages and entertains?

False dichotomy; these may be one and the same in many cases. Tabletop Dungeons and Dragons involves engaging and entertaining gameplay where scenario information sits behind a screen. It may be that there are better means of entertaining players (and there are), but I'm not convinced that knocking over the screen is a good solution.

Want to make CF more fun? Make it easier for us to tell our story, and easier to enjoy the stories of others.

Players do that every day IC. We encourage that.

If you are after self-discovery or self-actualization, might I suggest encouraging this through solid Immteraction and RP rather than through unspoiled area exploration.

You might, and we have had an immortal cohort in-training for a while to get them ready to do that again.

>Is it about preserving an original creative work of art,
>or is it about creating gameplay that engages and
>entertains?
>
>False dichotomy; these may be one and the same in many cases.
>Tabletop Dungeons and Dragons involves engaging and
>entertaining gameplay where scenario information sits behind a
>screen. It may be that there are better means of
>entertaining players (and there are), but I'm not convinced
>that knocking over the screen is a good solution.

You're the one who said, "On the one hand, it is interesting that enjoyment value might be higher for those who have a plot spoiled; on the other, there is something to be said for authorial intent."

Are you not suggesting authorial intent is more important than pure enjoyment value? I apologize if I misunderstood. Even so, it would appear that they are not the same in many cases, as shown by the two studies about short stories.

But what if this is true? What if a majority of people enjoy experiences after being spoiled more than they do if the experiences are not spoiled? What if taking steps to do just that (exploration hints, tips, suggestions, carrots, spoilers) is quantitatively more enjoyable for more people than the current status quo?

I appreciate the reply. Hope all is well.

Hutto

We're mixing genres here, so the comparisons are tentative at best. We'd really need a study on spoiling games of this type, but we don't have that. That said, I'm suggesting that authorial intent does not have to be compromised for the sake of enjoyment value. Let's assume that the study demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the spoiled and unspoiled groups (I didn't download the article to see if that is true or not); the difference is still small enough that both author and many readers could be accommodated with unspoiled stories. AND, the guided experience would help preserve the communication act. In a game like CF, where there is replayability, you could of course then experience BOTH the unspoiled and spoiled versions of the experience, which sounds like a win to me.

And, for the record, I'm not trying to be difficult (it is sometimes difficult to know over the internet). Someone will have to have a pretty compelling argument to have us consider ideas that may very well break a game that has, over the last 20 years, had a fairly discernible trajectory on this matter.

To stick with the theme of Dungeons & Dragons, would you say that you cannot enjoy the game as a player since reading the Monster Manual and DMG? That makes an assumption that you have done so, but I think it's safe to assume you've done some DM'ing. Personally I don't find that my enjoyment of the game ruined from a players perspective, despite having much of the MM and DMG content memorized.

Some people think that metagaming and power gaming (min/maxing) are wrong in the D&D setting. If I only knew what my character could know I would tend to agree. The truth is that I don't actually know everything my character would, unless I make my character a total rube. I'll use an example which hopefully is a good comparison to this situation.

In the new 5e module "Curse of Strahd" there is a background that was introduced to 5e through the module. My friend was DMing and was hoping one of us would take that background. Knowing what that is like from his perspective I elected to take it, even though some other backgrounds might give me better combat perks. As I was paging to the part of the module that I would need to copy that info from I saw a sword that is available to the players depending on which cards the Vistani Fortune Teller draws for the party (one of the features that give this module extra replayability). I couldn't help my curiosity, I read what the sword was and what it does. Perfect for the character that I'd made, it got me excited. This module is designed to be tough to finish. Anyone familiar with the Ravenloft setting (and perhaps Barovia) knows that the 'Devil' Strahd is no pushover. All it said as to the location was somewhere in the Svalich woods. The Svalich woods are a pretty big place, so I decide to keep my eyes peeled any time we are in them. As luck would have it, the fortune teller draws the sword as one of our fated items that can help us fight Strahd. All of this is meta knowledge that I'm technically not supposed to know IC. This knowledge did not ruin my enjoyment when it came to finding the sword. I wasn't prepared for the difficulty of the encounter that put it in our hands, I didn't know any of the tricks I might use to make said encounter easier, nor does the information make our end goal any different than before we knew of the sword. All the information did was to tell me that this is a sword I want, and as well that I should be looking for it in the general vicinity of Svalich woods. Finding the exact location of the sword was still necessary, as was figuring out how to acquire it (I'll keep that part spoiler free, just in case anyone is looking at playing the module). Indeed the only thing that I knew is that I could find it in relative location X, which wasn't a big spoiler because it meant that I was very attentive every time we went to the woods (which was several times for different reasons), which actually slowed us down because the first bunch of trips were totally unrelated to the sword. That's alright, though, because we found some other things that we might not have.

Now, for the most part I can agree that spoilers in general are not something I enjoy, like social media plot spoilers, but all at the same time not every type of spoiler truly ruins the experience. When I ask people IC where to find something in game the vast majority of responses are basically a walkthrough of how to get there and where to look. "N e s s s w e, open desk, get all desk. Go up and sell it" which is way more of a spoiler than the item db telling me that somewhere in troglodyte caves there is a decent starter piece for a minotaurs horns. I had to explore the caves to find the horn tips, whereas the made up example directions (which were meant to mirror an actual location that was given to me in game) were instant gratification directions that didn't enhance my knowledge of the area beyond those exact locations. I personally would prefer to have just a bit of direction and go looking for myself. Why the direction? Why not just go out and explore those areas anyway? Well, because I have done that in some places only to find out four hours and five mob deaths later that there isn't anything that I can use, or the stuff that looks good I'm not able to get and I have no idea what level the stuff is to come back for later. Bonus, any levelling progress that I had made has been ===OBLITERATED===. I'm a fairly calm person but that can be quite frustrating. That wouldn't be eliminated, of course, with more items in the db. However, at least if I do that chasing db info, I know that I am doing so for a reason.

Anyhow, I'm rambling on ten different tangents again, and part of the reason for that is that I don't know what the reasons are for not putting any limited + gear on the db. I can think of only two off the top of my head. 1. Availability: This one is somewhat understandable, though I have some thoughts in that area. 2. "That's what we've always done.": The argument of tradition, which FEELS like (as an outsider) "You have to put the same amount of effort in as the vets have." Which seems an awful lot like "This is how we've always done it." Which is rarely a meritous argument in and of itself.
I would be curious to know what the actual arguments are, since those are more relevant than what I can think of off the top of my head. Then perhaps I would have a better idea of what your expectations are of new players.

TL;DR: Does knowledge of the MM and DMG ruin your experience of that game as a player? Why no limited a on item list (You referenced this as potentially game breaking, how so)? How much time are you expecting a new player should have to put in to playing to be competent as a CF player?

I very much agree with the sentiment. I spend many thousands of hours on my last MUD, and another many thousand on my first MUD.

My first MUD took a very different approach to CF. The locations of all of the eq-loading mobs were public knowledge but specifics about those mobs and areas weren't. It led to a really healthy veteran-newbie culture where it still made a lot of sense to follow around a vet to learn about the game, AND it led to a really healthy culture of individual exploration, AND it led to a really healthy culture of funneling players into the same areas for PK.

Sharing general information like "an enormous axe loads on the renegade commander north of the keep" is way different than sharing specific information like "you need to prac 53% search, go 3w 9n 3w 8n u 8n w s, search south, open treeroots, s, search e, op hiddenknot, and the commander is east with six guards so bring a group." With the first version, there's still a ton of excitement in heading north of the keep for the first time and scouring every room until you find the treeroots. Some people would do this even with no reward. But, it isn't much fun for a lot of players if they don't know that an enormous axe is waiting for them if they can find it...

My second MUD took more the CF approach, and I did most of my learning where things were on ICQ and AIM, and most of my learning area specifics in game. That game had a SUPER rich in game history and a relatively big world with lots of places to explore, and exploring the hidden home of the angels that you could only access by standing in the right place with the right key at 3pm then solving a number of puzzles based on room descs was fun... and not at all spoiled by someone telling me "here's my list of item IDs from the past 10 years, that limited suit of adamantite armor and energy sword are up at the top of Cain Techt."

My experience as a vet on other muds and as a newer player on CF is that vets respond better to new players sending them a tell with a specific request than a general one. It's way nicer to get the tell that says "hello sir, I've heard of a sword held by Bob in the Castle, think we can roll over there and check it out" as opposed to a tell that says "hello sir, I'm totally helpless and have no idea what good gear even smells like unless I'm following around heros during pk and spamming get all corpse, please take pity on me and help me find gear."

(Haven't had a chance in recent months... year? to log into cf, but trying again of late (of course it's currently hung))

But this well written explanation makes me think... what if there were means of inquiring mobs about items. The extent of this would directly correlate to how much effort a coder would wish to invest... such that not every NPC should know much about ANY item whatsoever. But maybe the likelihood of a dwarven area/ruins/cities would be known to dwarf NPC's as a basic example. The question would be what kind of qualifiers exist or could exist to make it practical... at least this way if you saw an item in use, spoken about, or written about, you could have some options in game to find the area.

A side contemplation could be a change in the way item searches work to be more vague for items not currently included. Maybe a level, but even outside of that, only the area it could be located in.

Apologies in advance if this has been too regurgitated or already suggested prior.

And would actually add some value to beseech.

Would you mind terribly saying why you are against the idea for those of us who weren't here for the 'elsewhere' explanation? I have a hard time seeing who it hurts. I'm not advocating for all information being available, just gear and just up to around lvl 40 or 50. It would let those of us with under 1000 hrs of play time be able to throw up a good fight when those vets come for us.

..to avoid playerbase outcry at what you knew was a bad decision...that is documented. =P

>..to avoid playerbase outcry at what you knew was a bad
>decision...that is documented. =P

Documented like in log files?

2639.log:09/10/2016 14:47:25 : Umiron deleted in Room 1200 .

I was gone for 8 months. Now I help out with bugs, putting in areas, progs, etc. I avoid the forums for the same reason more than half the staff does: they aren't worth the headache.

And that's my forum quota for the month. Cheerio!

Also when you say 'half the staff' but you're really talking about 3 of 6 people it isn't as impressive sounding.

But we still love you and everyone else that rule our imagination world. I do anyway!

>Now I help out with bugs, putting in
>areas, progs, etc.

I guess etc means screwing up people's characters?

Yes, some people are not constructive posters. I think that's the same person who kept insisting I was cheating with Seltie until Scarabaeus had to intervene to prove otherwise. But, it's not very good for morale when we're told that more than 1/2 of the IMMs avoid the Official Forums because it's not worth the headache.

Fielding player feedback and forum moderation are a pretty major part of the job (if not THE job) when you create an official game forum.

If being on staff is such a chore, then don't be on staff, but it doesn't help, in fact it's probably harmful, to say things like that. At the same time, that is a sad state of affairs.

I do appreciate your code work as it is definitely needed.

Nuking edges was not needed.

>Yes, some people are not constructive posters. I think that's
>the same person who kept insisting I was cheating with Seltie
>until Scarabaeus had to intervene to prove otherwise. But,
>it's not very good for morale when we're told that more than
>1/2 of the IMMs avoid the Official Forums because it's not
>worth the headache.

Well, you guys wanted transparency, right? In all honesty, I
don't blame those who prefer not to be involved. There's
definitely a lot of negativity that floats about at times, as well
as plenty of days that it's talking/arguing with a wall. You'll
notice that it's a process of time, also. Typically it's the
higher level Imms that begin to heavily tone back the amount of
time they commit to the forums. It's a cost/reward equation in
many ways. For whatever reason, I actually enjoy the task, but
even I want to reach through the screen and strangle people some
days.

>Fielding player feedback and forum moderation are a pretty
>major part of the job (if not THE job) when you create an
>official game forum.

Hey, none of *US* created this forum, we got stuck with it!
Joking (mostly), but in seriousness - I feel that both are done,
but we're not always on 24/7. There's plenty of times I go to
bed, happen to check on the forums after I get up the next day,
and some random WTF has happened. Or alternatively, it's the 78th
post about how CF's been ruined and it's going to die next week.
There's only so often something can reasonably be rehashed
sometimes.

>If being on staff is such a chore, then don't be on staff, but
>it doesn't help, in fact it's probably harmful, to say things
>like that. At the same time, that is a sad state of affairs.

Even if jalim doesn't believe it, that's more or less exactly what
happened. Umiron can correct me if I'm mis-speaking for him, but
when he left my understanding is that it wasn't fun for him
anymore, so he stopped doing it. Recently, he decided he felt
like helping out again, and so he came back. Umiron works where
he enjoys himself, and doesn't do things that are a chore for him
(like the forums).

>I do appreciate your code work as it is definitely needed.

Agreed.

I just instigate when people believe stupid things. Or when people react in a funny way to situations on the internet.

Why don't we add prep-search as well? But if they're THAT secret, don't show item name and type, only area.

Like I search "haste", and get a list of areas that have haste prep (any) available, to find them there - is on me.

How many people will be surprised to know "stone skin" and "haste" are in Seantryn Modan?