From HELP DESCRIPTION

Your description should be your own work unique to this character. Reusing previous descriptions, even if your own, is against the rules. Descriptions found to be the same (or obviously similar) to previous characters' descriptions will not be tolerated.

From HELP RULES

Breaking any of these rules may result in loss of equipment, deaths, deletion, and/or other consequences, at the discretion of the staff. If a term is in all capital letters, it refers to a more detailed helpfile, e.g. 'help roleplaying'. If you are in doubt as to the legality of an action, please pray and ask first.

I'm really not sure where the confusion lies, but let me elaborate.*

1. I've posted in a previous thread that I've significantly increased the number of times I've awarded immxp over the last month. Almost half have been for above-average descriptions.
2. The converse is that I've also been policing descriptions a lot more and pulling people into the desc room for bad ones and/or copied ones from the PBF.
3. Most of the people I've brought into the desc room have been cool, but the behavior in recycling old descriptions hasn't changed. Hence the staff decision to start docking a standard amount of imm xp when we see it.
4. While this is probably attributed to only a small minority of players, I have no idea who they are (nor do I give a #### who plays who), and so when I catch a copied desc, I dock the same xp whether they're cool about it or they throw a temper tantrum.

5. Personally, I don't understand how someone can't be bothered to come up with six original lines of text to describe a character they're going to develop over 50-250 hours on average, but it takes all types. Nevertheless, it is a rule.

6.I was going to comment on the level of doomsaying, wailing, gnashing of teeth and other vitriol by some of our playerbase, but it's pretty much par for the course.

How dare I enforce rules! I'm ruining the game! I'm driving away players! I'll have the whole MUD to myself, and then I'll see how fun it is!

Way to be, guys**.

*Standard disclaimer. This post was written by me and does not necessarily reflect the views, thoughts or actions of the rest of the immstaff.
**See 6.

Which is significant if you think about it. I'm not condemning you or anything, rather pointing out the level of awareness your punishment has brought to this topic.

I think one of the most common arguments I've heard is that the punishment was too severe for the offense.

Had you not given out that punishment where would we be?

Saagkri said he was ignorant of this rule. Now he's not. There are others who are probably in the same boat.

Whether or not the punishment was too severe it has ignited a huge discussion focused on this particular rule. It would be hard for a player to claim ignorance of it now. Players also know that if caught breaking this rule there will be a punishment that has some teeth to it.

It is clear that the staff wants to protect the RP integrity of the game and will enforce this rule as a means to do that. I'd be curious to see how many violations of this rule happen from here on out. Especially, since writing a description takes so little time. The risk is hardly worth the small benefit of cheating now.

So while some might think that you're some asshole description Nazi, Akresius, I'm going to wager that your punishment has served it's purpose and this one case will be a deterrent to others.

I may be wrong, but I assume this was prompted by my log on Dioxide's where Knyst got docked Immxp for reusing a desc.

Like I said in the log, I don't fault the IMM for enforcing the rules and it was a stupid mistake to re-use Gergan's desc. I posted the log because I was second-guessing deleting Kynst.

Also, as someone pointed out, I was still violating the rules by re-using what I thought was the desc from an old low-level char I deleted (even if it hadn't been Gergan).

Every case is different, but I want to clear up some speculation in this case, none of which are meant to excuse the violation nor invalidate the punishment:

1) Gergan was my char and I wrote the desc.
2) I did not intentionally break a rule, but was ignorant of it.
3) I've been playing CF since before the purge and have many hundreds of files with descriptions, roles, maps, logs, etc.
3) My intention was to roll a char, use an old desc no one would remember, and write a new desc/role once I decided to keep the char bevause I thought re-using a desc I put some effort into would be better than walking around with poor desc and I was feeling lazy.

I accepted the punishment politely and just decided that I didn't want to have to overcome the stigma of a rule violation and an IMMxp hole with an 18 hour old char with no role. I wasn't frustrated or angry, just making a reasonable decision based on the following:

1) In my opinion, a competative thief need devious versatility for a wide veriety of enemies. 2XDevious versatility even better for hero range.
2) My best recollection is that my last two caballed chars, Gergan being one, have gotten misc. IMMxp (not counting leadership, tattoo, role, etc.) 3 times in about 700 hours of play (a good raid defense, helping newbies, having a good desc) for a combined total of about 500 IMMxp. So, this is what I was weighing the -250 against.

I think the positive from all this is that people now know the consequence for recycling descriptions and that should seriously curb the behavior.

After reading the responses by the IMMs, I don't see the punishment as excessive. I had no idea people were stealing IP and I would not be happy if someone stole mine. If the IMM can't tell that it was your char, then everyone has to be punished as if it wasn't to discourage the practice. I consider the consequence I bore to be my sacrifice/contribution to this worthy effort.

My only concern is the us v. them mentality that I see throughout this thread. And it goes both ways. We're part of a unique comminuty and I think we all have the perpetuation of CF, while preserving it's essence, as our primary goal, even when we disagree on how to best achieve it. Sometimes I think we lose sight of the big picture.

So, see you in the fields. I mean now. Please log on and sit at Market Square.

Thanks,
Saagkri the Hero of Alteration, Arbiter Lord


p.s. The first time you go to the foreman for payment, he pays you double!

You're doing better than most and you're the topic. Lol. The fun stick gets broken the more you - *require*- something specific. I don't mean devious versatility. I mean all the things which make it easy to power game. Lighting up akresius for such a thing doesn't do any of you any good at all. Not players or imms. #### man with all the bile and vitriol lately about a few things which aren't a huge deal you'd think everyone would delete;delete. Most of you serious vets who still play & complain(jk) rather than only the later will still beat 99% of the pbase. Because of game knowledge & mechanics which you can influence. The simple fact is that change is good. And concerted effort towards ease of operation for newbies is required. They need help, not you. *shrug* just my two cents.

Just placed this here for no real reason. Rather than to rebut/add to saagkri's post

nt

Writing a description is not a huge ask. People are overreacting in my view. Simple easy to meet requirement so not worthy of a big backlash when avoiding it has negatives

I am not really interested in arguing back and forth in a mess of past experiences. The tone below is rapidly deteriorating in some cases. I'd rather focus on something more positive than the general tone below. So, with that in mind let's try a thought experiment:

You guys are responsible for running and maintaining a game that hinges on original content. Some of that content (a very small fraction) is player driven, and much is driven by volunteer contributors (staff).

You know that a significant portion of the players simply choose to recycle old content. Furthermore, when questioned, the majority of the players plead ignorance, or claim that it is their character. There's nothing to say it isn't their character, but there is nothing to say it is either.

You also know that a proportion of players are almost always going to cut corners, or cheat any system repeatedly, especially when there are not any consequences*. Please keep in mind that you have limited resources, and an extremely hands-on system will create a lot of administrative work.

How would you design a system to tackle this problem**?


*This is evidenced in the other deletions this week. Whereby people genuinely sought to abuse game mechanics for personal advantage.
**And yes, we can argue that this is not a problem, but I would not personally be happy for someone else to get Imm Xp because they copy/pasted a description which I had written.

So, at level 10, or whenever it makes sense, automatically check descriptions entered against all pbfs, or however it works. If it's reused then no reward. If it checks as novel then it's available to get a small imm exp reward. It's like an extension of the role reward process. This achieves everything the current enforcement does, except it does it by positively reinforcing what you want to see rather than sudden punishment for something that was completely ignored for decades.

Experience has been given in the past for good descriptions, and still is.

But a whole bunch of people have gotten bumps from 100-250immxp for this very thing, I usually check folks in the 5-25 range and have been handing out xp for weeks, with the player getting a echo as for the why. I have also been looking at up to hero and folks who have good-excellent desc have also been getting these.

>You guys are responsible for running and maintaining a game
>that hinges on original content. Some of that content (a very
>small fraction) is player driven, and much is driven by
>volunteer contributors (staff).

I (mostly) disagree with your assessment that the game "hinges" on original content. To some extent, stock areas would give new to CF players a little bit of past knowledge from which to build. To a large extent I don't believe that any area content (no matter how cool) matters as much as code content. There are a lot of MOO? style muds out there where all people do is build rooms and RP and stuff like that. That isn't what CF is about, or at least certainly not why I play.

So, given that we have fundamentally differing views on the importance of "content", it is hard to comment on how I'd "fix" it that would be helpful.

>You know that a significant portion of the players simply
>choose to recycle old content. Furthermore, when questioned,
>the majority of the players plead ignorance, or claim that it
>is their character. There's nothing to say it isn't their
>character, but there is nothing to say it is either.
>
>You also know that a proportion of players are almost always
>going to cut corners, or cheat any system repeatedly,
>especially when there are not any consequences*. Please keep
>in mind that you have limited resources, and an extremely
>hands-on system will create a lot of administrative work.
>
>How would you design a system to tackle this problem**?

I would create a standard description generator that happens during character creation. You can choose eye color, hair color, etc. or get assigned random attributes for each. This becomes your description. If you want to make a custom one on top of that, go for it, but it adds to instead of replacing the "standard" one.

It also allows me to roll a character, get a randomly assigned "description" and go about actually playing the game. There is the added benefit that maybe I get some randomly assigned attribute that sparks a bit of creativity and becomes a part of my character I'd never have thought of, or that I decide to roll with later, once the character has truly taken on a life of their own.

If you have any familiarity with DnD 5e, think about the randomly rolled (not the only way to do it), flaws, bonds, traits, etc.

>**And yes, we can argue that this is not a problem, but I
>would not personally be happy for someone else to get Imm Xp
>because they copy/pasted a description which I had written.

I would never give Imm Xp for a written description. Role's (as much as I personally dislike that they seem to be required) should at least give some idea as to why your character behaves the way they do, and as such can be used as a ruler to measure a character from an Imm standpoint and can be a helpful tool for a player to coalesce their thoughts on their character. A written description just isn't going to come into play enough (ever) to be worth 1 Imm XP or 2 seconds of reading/enforcement/whatever.

Most times a player walks through one of the extremely well crafted rooms that CF area writers have written over the years they will simply gloss over the description or have brief mode on and don't see it at all. Players are "seeing" room descriptions once a second. Player descriptions probably aren't seen once every ten minutes and are reading them just as often as room descriptions, probably 1 for every 1,000. Entire characters are rolled, ranked, and deleted without ever reading another Player's description.

It just isn't worth staff time to police.

You (the IMMs) created this problem and now you are dealing with the results of it.

It is what it is.

Don't be surprised when people get mad for not allowing them to be even in the arms race. You created an arms race. Now, deal with the fallout.

Genuinely do not understand this point.

http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=6&topic_id=47373&mesg_id=47373&page=

Basically, you (the IMMs) created a faulty reward system. The idea was great, the implementation, not so great. Players were (are?) upset.

So you began to try and fix these issues:

Edge points became transparent
Role contest rewards were greatly scaled back
More tweaking to edge points

Unfortunately, you never really attempted to fix the culture. It was more like "Well ####, they are complaining about this so let's fix this" when in actuality, they weren't necessarily complaining about that IN AND OF ITSELF.

So now, you have solid, respectable players that can't/won't play because they can't have all the shiny bells and whistles that they are accustomed to. And you can't fix that problem now because you've created a culture of entitlement (short of giving everyone a quest skill at level 1 and 100 edge points at level 10).

Basically, your solution to the reward problem was just to make it harder to get rewards. That's not the solution. The solution would have been to make "rewards" less meaningful and place more meaning on important things (which you have begun to try to do, at least to my poor intelligence) like roleplay, playing a character with integrity and passion, etc.

Basically, I feel kinda bad because you guys are trying really hard to fix the problem. Unfortunately, I don't feel too bad because this problem was something that needed to be fixed years ago.

PS If you want, I have ideas that would change CF completely (but not mechanically at all...well, maybe slight mechanical change) and IMHO solve all the problems you currently have.

The description policy on CF hasn't changed in a very long time and neither have the motives behind it.

Descriptions contribute to the immersion of our fantasy environment just like quality areas do. They're equally if not more important of PCs than they are of NPCs. As a MUD that puts a lot of emphasis (perhaps not enough) on RP, we're going to continue to require people to do them.

I will reiterate what's been said before in the past by saying that if writing a few quality lines of description of your character is too much to ask of you then CF might not be the game for you. In my opinion we've done too much over the years to indulge the kinds of player who scoff at descriptions and not enough to attract and retain the types who appreciate them.

I would also point out that we don't 'punish' people for having poor descriptions or for using templates of their own making that they tweak (make unique) for each character. If someone's description needs work then we pull them aside to a safe room where we can provide guidance and let them work. If a description is obviously plagiarized or recycled verbatim then we do sweeten the deal with a mechanically mild punishment to deter them from doing it again.

I hope that clears things up for folks.

>The description policy on CF hasn't changed in a very long
>time and neither have the motives behind it.

Neither has the fact that most players don't read them. Ever.

>Descriptions contribute to the immersion of our fantasy
>environment just like quality areas do. They're equally if
>not more important of PCs than they are of NPCs. As a MUD
>that puts a lot of emphasis (perhaps not enough) on RP, we're
>going to continue to require people to do them.

You know what contributes to a good book? The ####ing plot. You know what doesn't? Detailed descriptions of what everyone looks like. Seriously. Go read a book. Most people get 1 or 2 identifying characteristics through an entire series.

If you put half the effort into coding, testing, marketing, or pretty much anything else (as a staff, not you personally) that you did into "quality" areas, maybe we'd have a ####ty written well-populated MUD, like a decade ago, instead of a beautifully crafted piece of art that no one wants to play.

>I will reiterate what's been said before in the past by saying
>that if writing a few quality lines of description of your
>character is too much to ask of you then CF might not be the
>game for you. In my opinion we've done too much over the
>years to indulge the kinds of player who scoff at descriptions
>and not enough to attract and retain the types who appreciate
>them.

Excellent tactic. I'll be sure to continue to not play a game that doesn't want me after 20 years of my time. Thanks for the consideration.

>I would also point out that we don't 'punish' people for
>having poor descriptions or for using templates of
>their own making that they tweak (make unique) for each
>character. If someone's description needs work then we pull
>them aside to a safe room where we can provide guidance and
>let them work. If a description is obviously plagiarized or
>recycled verbatim then we do sweeten the deal with a
>mechanically mild punishment to deter them from doing it
>again.
>
>I hope that clears things up for folks.

Clear? Yea, it's the same line as always. If you don't like it, walk. Tell me seriously, do *you* enjoy playing by yourself? Because if so, maybe a MUD isn't the right game for you.

If this reads as a big #### you, then perhaps you should re-read your post and try a little role reversal.

Umiron is one of the nicer IMMs, and verbally attacking him isn't productive.

The IMMs have a point - it's a classic slippery slope. I don't mind seeing one or two copied descriptions, but if everyon is walking around with descriptions re-used for the 10th time, and some people even have identical descriptions, then that would be quite damaging to the game's atmosphere. It's not very hard to change a description, so players should change it.

However I would like the IMMs to consider this policy: upon catching a recycled description, give a warning. If that warning is not heeded, then dock IMMXP. My reasoning below:

Sometimes it is an error, i.e. a person's copied the wrong pre-formatted text file into the description. I just can't see a -250 IMMXP punishment for what may have been an honest error. I know it is not a heavy punishment, but it is still more punishment than a lot of more game-hurting behaviours get.

For example a lot of people do permas, or "soft permas", with little to no punishment. Others behave horribly towards their fellow players, and actively seek to destroy their fun. These things ruin the MUD more than a few errant descriptions.

I ask the Immortals to consider changing the policy to giving a warning first, before docking IMMXP in the case of no compliance. This way you help the game in both ways:

1. Good, original descriptions.
2. Happy players who did not suffer because they copied the wrong text file.

>Umiron is one of the nicer IMMs, and verbally attacking him
>isn't productive.

Tac is one of the nicer Players, and verbally attacking him by telling him a game he's played since 1994 isn't the right game for him because he doesn't see the benefit to writing 6 lines of text that will never affect his playing experience or be read by another player isn't productive.

There's a difference. Umiron isn't going onto a forum, picking out Tac, and scolding him. If he did, maybe he should be yelling at one of the nastier players instead. And indeed maybe he should just be more civil about it. Umiron (or Akresius) carried out a policy, which the IMMs somehow have collectively believed was right.

Being abrasive isn't going to effect change. I think the IMM policy is off-target on this, and I'm going to point it out without being personal about it.

I mean - it's just respect, mate. The CF IMMs haven't done anything to me other than voluntarily maintain a game I'm playing. I don't have a reason to get personally unhappy at them. So I respect them and the fact that they're volunteering to run a game I have sometimes found fun over the past 15 years of my life.

I ask the Immortals to consider changing the policy to giving a warning first, before docking IMMXP in the case of no compliance.

A policy of reliable warnings generally creates an atmosphere of "cheat until caught". I've certainly busted a number of people who lobbied for a warning ... until I dug a little bit and figured out that it wasn't their first time for that problem.

Similarly, we've had a number of people claim the stolen desc was "from their other character" at odds with all evidence. Yeah, sure, maybe you've since moved halfway around the world and this other current player moved into your old house.

Most of the Immortals checking descriptions don't have the tools to figure out who is playing who, especially who was playing who a couple years back. They're just seeing a stolen desc and handing out a uniform, small punishment. And it's not one or two stolen descs-- it was common, so we're taking steps to remove the incentive to do it.

For example a lot of people do permas, or "soft permas", with little to no punishment. Others behave horribly towards their fellow players, and actively seek to destroy their fun. These things ruin the MUD more than a few errant descriptions.

These things aren't exclusive. We want to boost the level of RP, and one approach to that is building up a system that gets people to invest a little effort into their RP early on. Several Immortals have gone out of their way recently to provide XP bumps to people for having especially good descriptions.

We've delivered (much harsher) punishments for the type of behavior you're describing recently, and there's probably some more hammers falling in the future.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

OK. If infringements were as egregious as you describe, then I understand the policy.

Perhaps it would be good to have an announcement of the mandatory IMMXP docking, though - enforcement is always most effective with consistent and well-known consequences of rule-breaking.

Especially the "Oh, this is why the game is falling down" or "Do you want to play by yourself?"

It's rather childish, boorish, and petty.

Especially coming from people who actually DON'T play the game. Guess what? You don't play. What the imms do or don't do have no consequence whatsoever to you.

If it's all about sentiment and the fact you invested so much time and effort into this game, well, in economic terms, sunk cost.

I hardly believe that anything the imms do or don't do will affect your life or your desire to play (except maybe big things like open hell).

One cannot speak for the entire playerbase. In every policy decision there are people who approve and people who disapprove. In fact, even in this case of description enforcement there are people who approve of what the IMMs have done. Although maybe they are not in the majority it seems from the responses here.

1) Its really easy to write a description.
2) Its NOT an overreaction if it will keep you from chronically rerolling characters and trying to cut corners.
3) Its just really a small thing to ask. If you are so upset about losing IMM exp, just accept the consequence of your actions and reroll what is probably a low level character.
4) I would also HATE to lose IMM exp and not keep a character who did. But I'd also not go whining if it was something I should have/could have knowingly avoided.

Its a waste of everyone's time and energy, including yours and the immortals, to spend so much time rehashing punishment on a mistake you made.

PS: I have know idea who anyone is as a player. I don't really pay attention to forum handles. (So I might love your character/player and not hate it) This is just my neutral opinion.

PPS: YEARS ago I talked a real-life best friend into playing carrion fields. He was playing his first ranger and said "drag me south" and set a snare moved it to an adjacent planted room.

It was his first character, he had 200+ hours in it, and lost wilderness familiarity. It really was a harsh punishment and he stopped playing for a LONG time. But we still LAUGH about it, and shake our heads, because though it seemed innocent at the time with the punishment being over harsh, the abuse was pretty obvious in hindsight on his part.

Personally, I'd prefer you be lighter-handed with desc busting and heavier handed with blatant cheating.

Caldysias and Baelen were just disgusting. They got full Maran and were tatted. Are you kidding me? They get rewarded but others get dragged into the desc room and docked exp?

nt

When you are part of a social circle, you tend to agree with them.

There are lots of them and yours is one. Your post is as much wailing and gnashing of teeth as anyone's.

Tone it down.

You don't like transferring and punishing players for silly reasons? Then don't do it. The world won't melt, I promise.

>There are lots of them and yours is one. Your post is as much
>wailing and gnashing of teeth as anyone's.

I will leave you to your monopoly.

>
>Tone it down.
>
>You don't like transferring and punishing players for silly
>reasons? Then don't do it. The world won't melt, I promise.
>

I never said transferring players to the description room was a silly reason.

>>There are lots of them and yours is one. Your post is as
>much
>>wailing and gnashing of teeth as anyone's.
>
>I will leave you to your monopoly.
>

Sorry. I'm all gnashed out. Teeth are gone. I can only gum it now.

>>
>>Tone it down.
>>
>>You don't like transferring and punishing players for silly
>>reasons? Then don't do it. The world won't melt, I promise.
>>
>
>I never said transferring players to the description room was
>a silly reason.

You said you hate transferring players. You made no qualifier. I added one to make it easier for you. Since you feel the need to do something you don't like, you can at least narrow it down and weed out the really stupid ones like what we are talking about here.

I'd be curious to know how many times you transfer players that actually results in consequences compared to 'Oops you weren't cheating but now your character is suspect and I get bonus points anyway.'

I don't mind rules enforcement and applaud whoever for busting Arolin, but the priorities are getting skewed. Just because you're being nice and awarding IMM xp on one end doesn't mean you have to be a bastard on the other. And -IMM exp in today's edge system is just a #### move for minor-no-IC consequence violations.

>I'd be curious to know how many times you transfer players
>that actually results in consequences compared to 'Oops you
>weren't cheating but now your character is suspect and I get
>bonus points anyway.'

I don't get bonus points for transferring players. I don't LIKE transferring players. It's a waste of my time and theirs. If that's seriously what people think I as an immortal am looking to do, then I can only say that they're wrong. It's not worth my time to change their minds. Haters gonna hate.

>I don't mind rules enforcement and applaud whoever for busting
>Arolin, but the priorities are getting skewed. Just because
>you're being nice and awarding IMM xp on one end doesn't mean
>you have to be a bastard on the other. And -IMM exp in today's
>edge system is just a #### move for minor-no-IC consequence
>violations.

Taking away immxp is one of many consequences of breaking the rules. If there are no consequences, then there's no point having rules. Regardless of the new formula for earning edge points and the perceived notion that -immxp ruins a character, I see a lot of the same result:

-negative title? I'm innocent! You ruined my character. I'm deleting.
-IC reprimand via tell/cb/interaction? I'm innocent! You ruined my character. I'm deleting.
-imm xp? I'm innocent! You ruined my character. I'm deleting.
-RotD for a warning? I'm innocent! You ruined my character. I'm deleting.
-RotD, then slay/purge because you think I multi-chared/perma'ed/scouted?. I'm innocent! You ruined my character. I'm deleting.
-negative PBF comment? They were innocent! You ruined someone else's character. I'm deleting.

And... like clockwork, the martyrdom threads go up and the peanut gallery sounds off.

In my experience, it doesn't matter what the reason is. It doesn't matter what the consequence is. A fair number of players are cool when I bring them into the desc room or RotD, but don't tell me I'm being a bastard for enforcing the rules because I may take away some immxp. The nature of the consequence is irrelevant. I'm going to be considered a bastard no matter WHAT I do when being an administrator.

gr

If you're brought to these rooms, I end up in one or the other every char, think of it like you're getting a heads up. No one here likes to give ppl ####. Sometimes morts go ape #### over some perceived insult, or actual. In my idunno fifteen or eighteen years I've never once been punished without cause. Nor have I been unreasonably spoken to by staff. There are a handful of you who claim this is common. I really doubt it though. The staff are here to help. Accept the assistance. Change your desc(or write a new one ####). Don't mistake friendship between characters with an ooc perma. Play for fun not for pk/h or for edges.

Yes, it is possible that they accidentally used the same description as a previous character. However, when you run into it happening multiple times in the same week it is doubtful that many people are doing this by accident. Even 1 in 10 of these things happening being by accident would be a high figure. What I'm saying is that "Oops you weren't cheating" is not given by them claiming that it was a past character description. That is taken by the assumption that the person is being truthful.

If it concerns you that you might do this accidentally, there are many ways to prevent it. Including being more organized with your own files or always writing a new one when you start a new character (this is what I opt to do).

Stealing other other peoples descriptions is stealing their intellectual property. While you might think of it as "minor", I doubt those who have their descriptions stolen feel the same way. Regardless of if they do or not, it is against the rules.

NT

Must be favoritism. Or a conspiracy.

"4. While this is probably attributed to only a small minority of players, I have no idea who they are (nor do I give a #### who plays who), and so when I catch a copied desc, I dock the same xp whether they're cool about it or they throw a temper tantrum.


5. Personally, I don't understand how someone can't be bothered to come up with six original lines of text to describe a character they're going to develop over 50-250 hours on average, but it takes all types."


These two statements lead me to question the ratio of effort to enforce vs gain to gameplay created by the existence this rule.

You as a staff have a lot on your plate as is, would removing this rule not be a boon to you as well?

As far as I know, we're not removing those rules either.

You've repeatedly shot down ideas from players due to not wanting yet another thing the Imm Staff has to police, and yet you will waste hours reading and rewarding descriptions that some people only write because they are forced to? Why? What benefit is there? If every character of mine had a height, weight, sex, hair/eye/skin color description, does that hurt the game? More importantly, is it worth Imm time to police?

Perma-grouping affects other people in a negative way. Description... meh Sure, but hardly to the same extent. Multi-charing is really just the same thing.

I'm firmly in the camp that coming up with a description that will probably be read twice in the life span of the character (once by myself and once by an immortal that makes sure I have one) isn't worth the 10 minutes it takes to write one. It especially isn't worth it at level 10 when I haven't decided if I'm actually going to play it for 50 hours, or if the 1 I just put in is the end.

But then I don't really play anymore, so I guess my opinion doesn't really matter.

Policing multi-charring and perma-grouping may take significantly more effort but there is a significant impact on gameplay.

The effect of a description on gameplay is a different beast.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but players would like to have immxp for putting effort into a description.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but players DON'T want -immxp for bad/copied descriptions.

So, I pump more xp into the game for good descriptions, but provide no consequence for terrible/stolen* descriptions. --> I reward good RP, but provide no consequence for NO RP. Give perks, but no consequences.

*And yeah, I'm saying stolen. Remember, I don't give a #### who plays who. I don't want to know who plays who. The PB has overwhelmingly posted that they don't want me knowing who plays who. Therefore, I don't know that the description you copied is from YOUR previous character. It's stolen.

In this game, a lack of perks is consequence enough. You are correct in assuming that the player base will do just fine without you swinging your naughty-stick at every detail you don't personally find appealing.

**Disclaimer: Your post went beyond stealing descs, so keep in mind mine is too.

>In this game, a lack of perks is consequence enough. You are
>correct in assuming that the player base will do just fine
>without you swinging your naughty-stick at every detail you
>don't personally find appealing.
>
>**Disclaimer: Your post went beyond stealing descs, so keep in
>mind mine is too.

Apparently, lack of every single perk (induction, empowerment, all the edges on the list, a third spec, a quest form) is a consequence.

>>In this game, a lack of perks is consequence enough. You
>are
>>correct in assuming that the player base will do just fine
>>without you swinging your naughty-stick at every detail you
>>don't personally find appealing.
>>
>>**Disclaimer: Your post went beyond stealing descs, so keep
>in
>>mind mine is too.
>
>Apparently, lack of every single perk (induction, empowerment,
>all the edges on the list, a third spec, a quest form) is a
>consequence.

Apparently, none of those things are an advantage.

>
>Apparently, none of those things are an advantage.
>

I thought you were being obtuse and now I see you just didn't get it. That's alright. My prophetic writings aren't always easy to decipher. There are deeper problems to solve first anyway.

Your problem in this matter isn't your policing of descriptions. Your problem was laying down a punishment when someone says "whoops, let me fix that real quick. Sorry about that." It's a game. The world won't melt if you decide not to swing your stick at someone for minute #### details.

I honestly don't mind your nonsense. I live in my own little world where I'm king/god/whatever. Just trying to help you avoid such utter failure in the future. Your decision to punish beyond "Hey bro, fix your description" was idiotic and so is your OP. Players being bitches about every little thing is no good excuse to be a turd burglar yourself.

You can read this post as me wailing and gnashing teeth, or take it as it is meant: insulting, but constructive criticism. It's my style and frankly I don't care whether you take it. I have plenty of fun in game with no role, a minimum desc, and keeping the hell away from immpooptals.

>I have plenty of fun in game with no role, a minimum desc, and
>keeping the hell away from immpooptals.

Excellent! I have fun RPing and interacting with people in game. I have fun watching people put effort into their characters and get rewarded for it. I have fun socializing with the other staff.

I am also an administrator that enforces staff policy. So long as you stick to your mantra of doing nothing to draw attention to yourself positively (so I don't reward you - remember I don't know who you play) or negatively (like breaking the rules), it seems we both can enjoy Carrion Fields.

Plus my experience only gets better the more people you punish away.

I'm a bit curious why you are so hard up on pushing the "Remember, I don't know who you play." I'm pretty sure that horse has been beaten into submission. So much so you hardly hear complaints about cheating of the sort since it's just accepted.

PS: Failure is not disgraceful, but rationalization is. Nice little tip for you to try.

So I made a character about a month or so ago - drow warrior. I didn't have time or the incentive, nor was I sure I wanted to keep playing, so I copied an old desc from another mud that I used to play almost a decade ago (or more). I had forgotten that I used the same desc for another character that I made when I started playing CF.

As Deaer pointed out, it's like stealing someone else's IP. Except it's my IP.

I was cool with the desc room change, and when I was docked the 250 xp or so, I was cool with that. I apologized, I was civil, and I said ok, I'll be better next time.

All in all, I moved on because I didn't like having that negative mark on my character. In fact, although initially I was cool with it, that pretty much ruined the character for me.

Was it a violation of the rule? Certainly. I acknowledge that, and you, as the imm, are obligated to enforce the rule. There's no dispute about that. In fact, as stated above, I apologized - I don't want to take your time about silly rulebreaking incidences.

Did I think the -250 xp was horrible when it happened? Nope. But in hindsight, that ruined the character.

Ultimately, it's up to you to decide how to enforce the rule. But instead of going all gungho fire and brimstone (overexaggeration, I know) about it, how about less the punishment and more the PSA "Hey guys, FYI, we're being stricter about enforcing this." Maybe through this website or something?

Yes, it is a well established long time rule that people generally know. But in light of the current stance of the game and the changes, it may be helpful from a PR and relationship with players POV to be more reasonable about it.

Preventive instead of punishment, I always say. Sometimes punishment can be used for preventive measures, but that leads to bad blood generally. Especially where the specific rule isn't the most material aspect of the game.

Just my 2 cents.

>So I made a character about a month or so ago - drow warrior.
>I didn't have time or the incentive, nor was I sure I wanted
>to keep playing, so I copied an old desc from another mud that
>I used to play almost a decade ago (or more). I had forgotten
>that I used the same desc for another character that I made
>when I started playing CF.
>
>As Deaer pointed out, it's like stealing someone else's IP.
>Except it's my IP.

I posted this above. I'll put it here as well. *And yeah, I'm saying stolen. Remember, I don't give a #### who plays who. I don't want to know who plays who. The PB has overwhelmingly posted that they don't want me knowing who plays who. Therefore, I don't know that the description you copied is from YOUR previous character. It's stolen.

>I was cool with the desc room change, and when I was docked
>the 250 xp or so, I was cool with that. I apologized, I was
>civil, and I said ok, I'll be better next time.

The last person I talked to in the desc room was cool about it as well. Maybe that was you. Thanks to whomever you are for being civil.

Sorry if you feel that ruined your character. I get how you might feel that way. Obviously that is not the intent of enforcing the rules. In the scheme of things, -250 imm exp is not so horrible. I have two questions for you, Knac.

How do you feel we should punish stealing descriptions?

How do you feel we could prevent this from happening from an imm perspective?

Obviously, the best prevention is not reusing descs that you might have used before. But if you have ideas my ears are open. Not that I can promise anything will happen from them.

Yea, I agree, -250 imm xp is not much. Practically, it won't have a huge detrimental impact on my character (this is me personally - I'm fairly confident in my abilities that I can easily rectify that somehow). But realistically, it links my character to a negative attribution that will likely affect my character someway in the future. At least, that's how I feel - it may not be true, and maybe I'm the minority, but I don't think I'm the minority.

Coming from the player side, what I'm getting is that people think that this punishment is disproportional to the violation. IE the violation is not egregious enough to warrant getting the -imm xp. And this arose from the fact that a) observation/exploration xp for edge points has changed and b) this appears to be something NEW that's happening, and it started happening without the players noticing it.

Essentially, the -imm xp was a surprise that added to an arguably hugely disfavorable change to the game.

Notwithstanding the disfavorable changes (which is up to the imms - I'm not touching that, nor do I particularly care), before putting the -XP hammer down (and I don't think that just because imms are awarding more xp necessitates creating more situations of subtracting xp - these are different issues), I'd suggest having some mechanism to track violations (maybe a databank where imms put in various violations that they see). It's being done anyways in a way for each character's PBF. If it becomes a common problem, put an announcement in stating that this is the official stance and these are the penalties. Don't leave it open for discussion. That way there's no "surprise" when it comes to detrimental effects on players.

I said this once before, and I'll say it again. You guys should get someone to be in charge of public relations concerns. There are those naysayers among the players who are just douches, ####s, and wants to point fingers at one of the imms for every single insignificant affronts that they perceive is being done to them (or not even them - they just like to argue), but generally, I think the playerbase is more mature than those people.

You have a feedback system (imm exp) and in an effort to show more proactive focus and attention you gravitate towards activities that are not related to gameplay (description, traditionally roles).

I totally understand why this occurs. As an admin it is much simpler to read static text then invest creative energy in interactions or focus in watching people run left and right.

But descriptions as you stated before amount to 5 minutes to an hour of time a player invests in their character. Roles see more time investment but the ratio of great role to great roleplayer is low (part of the reasoning behind the recent change).

For many players the focus of the game is around conflict relationships (at a low level PK but also the relationships we develop with our enemies). We see more chatter about player behavior when it comes to PK relavant things (gear hording, perma grouping, triggers, cheap shots, getting PK affecting skills).

Perhaps instead of just throwing out pats on the back to show you pat instead focus those pats towards shaping behavior that impacts player to player interaction.

I know in the last 4 years I have been involved in roughly 4,000 PK events that ended with a corpse (mine or someone elses) on the ground. And out of those 4,000 player to player interactions I have had immortal notice (xpadd, comment, minor echo) on about 30, which I suspect is high as far as player experiences go (And over 50% of those are in just 2 high profile characters). Conversely writing roles has a "notice" affect of more around 1/2. Going to a shrine is something like 1/20 (if I include not getting a response).

I don't mean to be critical but what is your goal to using the imm exp system?

Also fictional characters don't own things when it comes to intellectual property, players do. But I do find your stance interesting.