Hello all,
I am back and want to reply to some posts here and share my expierence and my view on gm vs player leadership, sandbox approach and I also like to help with the understanding our current skill system. Please keep in mind, I am talking about Galmair and it is only my opinion and not an official staff-announcement.
GM Leadership
I have been playing the Don for 1 1/2 years now. Except of Silverwing, no other GM has spent a longer time period on a faction leader. Definitely with some downs, where I pissed players but hopefully also with some hights.
Anyway, in the beginning, Face and I were running Galmair. One of the first things we did was introducing those positions, which we still have more or less. Some were our ideas, some were created by players. The idea behind those positions was to create rp-possibilities and also to share responsibility and power with players. They should act autonomously as much as possible. Create and draft an army as they wanted, rent flats as they wanted, hold masses or events, etc. We would have supported them where ever we could. However, it never really worked. I can understand that some where scared that they would been overruled by the Don and hesitated, and some would like to have options without being only limited to such a position. That was then also the reason why we introduced the chancellor system in Galmair. Moving power and decisions to the chancellors away from the Don. After two periods, I still don't feel we are there where I would like to be. The first was okay, the second less but now we make progress again.
My idea of the Don was always similar to what Nitram mentioned above. The Don is a tool. Nothing else. It should help to keep the communication between GMs and players IG as much as possible. Those with responsibilities and power (first position holders, now chancellors) meet the Don and share their plans and issues. If those plans do not contradict our rules or the setting and do not cause a huge harm to the game, the Don does not stop those plans and let them do. For instance, if I had made Galmair's tunnel with ignoring any of you, it would look very different now.
The advantage that I see here are mainly two. First, it helps those players in charge. Regardless of the system, you cannot avoid communication with the stuff. If you do it via this IG-tool aka Don or oocly with a GM, does not change the fact, that any GM can always stop your plan, if it does not fit to our rules and setting. I think everyone can agree here. If you wanted to build something pre-vbu, you needed permission and someone who helped you there. I do not know how often I heard during my player career the ooc-sentence ig "((We have to wait for the building-master; The GMs did not allow that; etc.)). In other words, without a "GM-ruler", you will always have to turn ooc if you don't want to take the blame for your char. Now, you can blame the Don for denying your ideas and stay IG. Other example, if players request a Sirani shrine in Galmair, there are several options in both cases (gm and player ruler) with the same end result. In case of GM rulership, I say via the Don no. In case of a player rulership, I just say no. Or in both cases, I could allow you this project and support you but turn up as Nargun at some point and make it impossible to realise. Something, the Don would have warned you before. While I know some players would have enjoyed the Nargun event, I also know many players who would immediatelly start a flame war.
Second, if something goes wrong with those chancellors (becoming inactive, creating a mess, piss everyone, whatever), it is also easy for us GMs to step in without creating such a hated idea as the prince was for instance. Troll's Bane's rulership did mainly not change because there was a great well played rp plot but because the leadering chars became inactive for whatever reasons (busy RL, bored, pissed by other players, etc.). I do not doubt that this resulting chaos ment excitment for some but it also ment frustration by many others. In particular when leaders just disappeared and this can and will always happen. Even among GMs as Cadomyr proves.
So, in my understanding, the Don functions as help and as safty - a guardian of his town. I do not deny that his current state goes far beyond and I make mistakes. I am also in a learning progress. Sometimes, it looks to me that nothing goes without him despite I would really prefer to play him just as those two functions mentioned above. I also have to share my current perception, that it feels like we go into the direction of this guardian. No idea if it is just because of the current all time low player activity and silly season or the good job done by current Chancellors and other players who took more responsibility. I hope the latter.
As said, whether there is a gm or a player the highest ruler, any plans will need to fit to our rules or the setting we currently have. Furthermore, many things players have requested cannot be easily changed by me because I also have to consider rules and setting. I cannot add or remove tools in Galmair, change gods, build outside town, add countless depots, etc. Those actions have to be within the town's setting and also be balanced between towns. The existence of the Don helps to deny such requests but is not the reason. In other words, in my opinion, it is not about who is officially the leader. The UK has the queen and all that she is mainly allowed to do once a year is to read some lines someone else wrote for her. It is much more about how flexibel we are with our settings.
Sandbox approach
Don't get this wrong, I still think that our three different towns with different values and ideas can be a fun despite our small player base we currently have. But maybe we are able to make them more flexible without allowing everyone everything. For instance, yes you can build a shirne for Adron in Galmair but he might not accept that this new shrine is devoted to him. You might be able to convince him that he leaves his current shrine and takes yours but it will take you a some effort and only for temporary time until someone else does this for another town. It might also be possible to add all tools to each town but restrict access to ressources. Towns would have to claim them for themselves and defend them against other towns. It should not be difficult to set this like it will become more difficult for the holding facion with every day while it becomes easier for other towns to claim it for themselves. It might be possible to also make it more difficult with every source of ressources you own. For instance, if you focus on mines, you will have troubles to aquire forests, farms and other ressources you can use for your economy. The limitation of ressources would not only create differences between towns but allow more flexibility since it will be the players who decide for what ressoureces they go and it would also cause more conflicts between towns.
Even if we do not want to change leaders, ethics and law, we should probably reconsider if we want to allow sub-laws at least (although i see already the don's fears about that such additions
). It might go hand in hand with those who request changes might also have to do it themselves or ask for help to realise them (scripts, maps, website, etc.). It might be reasonable therefore, to rephrase information about our factions more timeless, so that those things can be changed ig easier. There might be a queen but the monarchy might turn into a parlamentary monarchy. Galmair might change from chancellor to something else. And even the current voiting system is not written into stone, despite I think it is much more fun than ordinary elections. I am open for many things. In particular if they create fun for everyone.
Conflicts between towns/Death of leaders
Regarding conflicts and death of leaders I also want to add some lines. Some argue here that it would not be possible to convince the Don for instance to go into a conflict with anther town. This is just wrong. Actually, just one year ago, Semtex and I tried to stir a conflict and the result was a lot of complains from the player's side. So, we stopped this again. It is not that we don't like conflicts but that most players prefer anything else in comparision to player versus player conflicts. Boring or not boring, but most want to be friends with everyone. I am trying now to create a threat with an external force. Not as obvious as Silverwing but I do. Something more for shady characters but it needs some time to develop. In particular since some of those chars who were more involved just quit recently. So, I have to change everything again but stay tuned.
I have a problem to understand that some complain about leaders and their "immortality". Well, what for your chars does count, the same must count for those leaders. No other player can force your char to die if you do not want them to die. Why should that not count for those leaders? If the stuff does not want the death of those chars, it has to be accepted as well as it has to be accepted that your chars do not die without your permission. If this causes frustration, something is wrong in my opinion. Yes, most of them have higher attributes than your chars but they can be ghosted. As far as I remember, the Don was sent to the cross once (monster) and Krunk twice (player).
Your char's concern, however, should be more other chars who strive for power. As mentioned above, if you are Chancellor, you can shape Galmair and Illarion as much as it is within the rules and setting.
MC points
The old systems seems to be still very present in your minds.
As already said, there is no skill cap anymore. The only things that matter now are that you are online and that you do anything. Walk, write, craft, fight...whatever... in the end, you will have the same skill gain. For instance, if you fight for ten hours or just walk for ten hours and have a small fight in the end of your day, you will have the same skill gain. Only advantage of the former example is that this player will have more loot than the other player. Theoretically, it would be possible to play ten years without skilling any skill but then max the skill of your char with a single click. MC points just store the information how you play the game. If I would be you, I would just forget about them and play the game, because the only thing that helps skilling is playing the game. Please, do not forget, you have to perform required action for skilling then. If you and the monster you are fighting do not have fitting skill levels, you will not learn from fighting it.
, I have tried to read the code and my eyes crossed and my mind went to mush! Thanks for additional info!
