This might sound like something a crusty veteran might say, but I'm definitely not that. Though I've lurked on the various forums for years, I play rarely and casually. I'm speaking as an experienced newbie.

Granted, this might say more about me than the game, I don't know. But here's the thing. What's the point of exploring the mud for cool things if people just keep giving me cooler things? Moreover, when I myself find those particular cooler things, I don't get the full satisfaction of my exploration, because I've not only seen those things before, I've HAD them because someone gave them to me out of the blue, for no reason except that I'm an elf and they're an elf, or whatever.

This doesn't just go for qualitative stuff, but also for quantities. When I earn/spend my first few thousand copper, that still means something to me...at least, until some charitable character plops X gold on me with no warning. Suddenly all my own economic efforts are meaningless.

Right now, the only way I can think to get around this is to constantly play anti-social or honor-addled characters. I admit these are viable options, but they aren't appealing ones, not to me. It's not that I dislike being given things; both fun roleplay and fun exploration can depend on the give command. I just don't want to be given things that outshine what I've earned or discovered myself. And really, even if I choose to drop the gift or give it back, the fact remains that now I know I'm putting my exploration efforts into something that isn't really mysterious and exciting at all. Purely a psychological thing, but no less real for that.

So, what follows the constructive bit of this post, not that I expect you'll go for it. I hope someone has a better idea.

A) Enforce the equipment level when it comes to give, just like you enforce it when people try to buy something from a merchant.

B) Place a cap on the total amount of gold a person can receive through charity that increases as the person earns gold themselves. That way everything you get through charity is something you've at least earned the opportunity to receive.

C) Allow restrictions A and B to be circumvented through a special command like contract that sends a pray-like message about the exchange to the imms keeping an eye on roleplay. The giver might use this command if their roleplay justifies the gift as a payment for services rendered, a bribe, an expense account for an errand, etc. The receiver should also be able to justify their own roleplay following receiving the gift. ICly, the receiver would be swearing on their respective gods to honor the contract or roleplay a good justification for breaking it.

Then, crack down on frivolous contracts until the messages are rare enough not to be annoying.

Furthermore, I think Seantryn Modan must be destroyed.

In your OP you make it sound like you don't like people giving you things and therefore nobody should be able to receive gifts from higher levels. To me, it sounds more like you are not receiving as generous gifts as your enemies are and therefore want a way to prevent your enemies from being outfit with full suits of midnight dragon gear and necklaces of prayer beads. If you truly did not want things given to you, you could use nogive as Java pointed out. I don't see any point that merits the 'give' command being taken from the rest of the mud, also as Valg pointed out, the items can just be dropped. If the Imms decided they wanted to make this change, the better solution would be to make all items BOP so you can't give or drop them, reinstute the junk command from basic ROM code. But again, I don't see that ever happening.

I expect Valg's point moots the usefulness of further discussion; but in case you think otherwise, you might find it beneficial to read the OP without uncharitable biases.

>In your OP you make it sound like you don't like people giving you things

1. I explicitly stated otherwise.

>and therefore nobody should be able to receive gifts from higher levels.

2. I explicitly stated otherwise.

>If you truly did not want things given to you, you could use nogive as Java pointed out.

3. While your consequent does follow your antecedent, your antecedent is false, as per 1.

Furthermore, I think Seantryn Modan must be destroyed.

The secret of life is enjoying the passage of time.

1) I don't think this is a necessary change as presented. I'd consider something for evil characters, but I can't think of methods that account for reciprocity and/or deliberate or accidental circumvention. I don't want to have to police a system that has an inherently high rate of triggering on spurious reasons.

2) Everything you mention can be circumvented by putting the item and/or currency on the ground.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

Is it just me, or is there something insidiously unconstructive about trying to be constructive?

For instance, suppose my OP sounded more like this:

"Hey, is it just me, or does it feel weirdly disconcerting when you can earn more loot and gold by merely walking past a generous hero of your class or race than you can by engaging in the game?"

Do you think then people would be more likely to offer up a variety of solutions?

Furthermore, I think Seantryn Modan must be destroyed.

I don't get what you're asking.

You personally don't like being given stuff, so you want to remove that possibility for the ENTIRE mud?

There's a nogive command. Just use that.

The fact that you have some weird psychological belief that you need to earn things in this game to enjoy them, doesn't mean the entire playerbase feels the same way. Personally, I enjoy seeing powerful items I've never heard of, then tracking down where they came from. I'm goal-oriented that way, and a defined goal (find X gearpiece) is more interesting for me than something open ended (poke around and see if there's anything worth finding here).

Also, Imms are busy folks. Having any command that requires their involvement for simple transactions is a mistake. It would become an absolute pain in the ass to the Imms (think about it, they have to take the time to research the role of BOTH players, oversee the transaction, then verify that they keep up both ends of the bargain?), a hassle for the playerbase, and provide no real advantage for the vast majority of the mud.

>There's a nogive command. Just use that.

I addressed this in my OP.

>The fact that you have some weird psychological belief that you need >to earn things in this game to enjoy them, doesn't mean the entire >playerbase feels the same way. Personally, I enjoy seeing powerful >items I've never heard of, then tracking down where they came from. >I'm goal-oriented that way, and a defined goal (find X gearpiece) is >more interesting for me than something open ended (poke around and see >if there's anything worth finding here).

That is also what I enjoy, but you shouldn't need to be given something in order to do that. show ring Java

>Also, Imms are busy folks.

I addressed this in my OP.

Furthermore, I think Seantryn Modan must be destroyed.

That's like me saying "I counter all of your points with reasonable arguments, and change your mind." I can say it, but it doesn't make it so.

Your reason for not using the nogive command was that you didn't want to use it. That's not good enough. If you don't want something, don't accept it. But don't try to force everyone to conform to your own personal views.

And saying "crack down on frivolous contracts" does not address the fact that Imms are busy. It just gives them SOMETHING ELSE TO DO. That's the opposite of addressing how busy they are.

>Your reason for not using the nogive command was that you didn't want >to use it.

In your first reply you say, "You personally don't like being given stuff..." But I made clear that I do like being given stuff -- more importantly, I acknowledged that it is common preference. I supplied a distinction, and my proposal takes that distinction into account. So as I said, I addressed this in my OP.

> But don't try to force everyone to conform to your own personal views.

I'm trying to persuade everyone to share my personal views, or, if they already share them, to discuss how best to account for them.

> And saying "crack down on frivolous contracts" does not address the
> fact that Imms are busy. It just gives them SOMETHING ELSE TO DO.
> That's the opposite of addressing how busy they are.

Consider contract to be a species of pray or role. It should not require more snooping, but it should just help organize the snooping the imms already do. That said, if you are dead set against this idea, I did express hope that someone might come up with something better. My own problem with it is that it is somewhat inelegant.

I think the real issues at stake here are as follows:

1) Should a character should be required to have an outstanding IC justification for giving a younger character a powerful item? My position is that Gandalf should not give Frodo the One Ring merely because he doesn't need it at the moment.

2) Does receiving an item without having earned it (through exploration or roleplay) make the game less fun? My position here is that it does. My opinion is that earning said item makes the game more fun; that the game is in fact this very dynamic. The reward cycles are "Kill things, and take their stuff;" "Persuade things, and take their stuff;" and "Find things, and take their stuff." By implication, receiving an item without having earned it has an opportunity cost. Receiving an item without having earned it therefore makes the game less fun.

Both of these positions speak to my personal preferences; but if they also speak to the personal preferences of others, then I'm not trying to change the game based on my personal preferences alone. Otherwise, I'm content to have at least voiced my opinion.

Furthermore, I think Seantryn Modan must be destroyed.

"I'm trying to persuade everyone to share my personal views, or, if they already share them, to discuss how best to account for them."

That is an epic response. I'll have to try to use that in real life.