... the recent Kozakuran thing does fit a lot of what you're saying. But it didn't last.
I'd argue that that experiment failed not because of anything about good vs evil, but simply because almost all of the players have vanished, including the faction leader.
_________________ Winner of Amia's "Most Ethical Time Traveler" award 2026 Character Portraits!
That's my point, though. It ran out of steam. And things run out of steam typically when a setback occurs, and enough people leave that it passes below a threshold of sustainable RP. Once it gets like that, eventually the few people left over are going to get bored and leave for lack of other people to interact with.
The key, from what I can see, is just to try and be as open as possible. And that inevitably involves choosing a side in the setting. What complicates the matter is that evil is -terrible- at getting along with itself...
Evil lost, but I don't think "doomed to fail" means "not worth trying".
Completely disagree. Even going into it knowing you're playing the bad guy and that your setbacks are what makes the game fun doesn't mean that at the end of the day (whether that be a week, a month or years... you ~do~ get bored of being the punching bag for the shiny guys. Thus why most players of evil have switched to the shiny guys and found that having a halo is fun, since you get to win and you don't have to work half as hard.
I'm with Iron. Let's haveColonel Kurtz, Arkan's Tigers and a real sense of tension to go along with the crop-burning raiders and the tyrannical middlemanagement.
_________________
Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?
Last edited by 555444333 on Thu, Aug 23 2012, 23:46 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Well, what I'm talking about would be forcing this stuff down our throats from above by developement changes, DM plots and interaction with factions. You know, a master narrative. I think it's clear Amia cannot change as long as its infrastructure remains what it is. If you have dozens of places you can bind, independent areas with no actual economic and political affiliation, you can always just ignore the great story. But since we're looking for a unified direction here, that simply won't do. (If a master story is the direction the DMs want to lead us.) You can't drop out and ignore what's going on around you, the module need to be focused functionally around the great story. If you want to buy supplies, you have to effectively support one party of the story. If you want to level up fast, you're more than likely to have to do quests for one side or the other. There could be scripted ways to control land, to perform raids on caravans, to gather supplies and gold for one side or the other, anything the server's imagination and developement skills lend themselves to. This isn't some experiment that would run out of steam, as there would be a whole team of DMs dedicated to keeping it running, and the infrastructure of the server would be designed to encourage and force everyone to take some stance on it.
It means harsh measures. Forceful relocation. Creating anew. You can't just do something half-assed and hope things will get better. If we're dramatically unhappy with the way things are, then a few tweaks to death penalties or XP rate aren't going to do shit. They sure won't make me log on more. If we want a unified path, we need to steer our course toward it and not just wave in the general direction.
I hate to use another EfU:A comparison, because I don't think we should model Amia after that sever, but here it goes: it worked because there was exactly one civilized settlement on the Ziggurat, a run-down docks district next to it, one floating mage enclave, and nothing but ruins and wilderness all around. (Apart from the odd wilderness camp or old faction castle that served a handful of special PCs, anyhow.) Even if you didn't care for the anarchist thugs of the docks or the ruthless private army ruling the Ziggurat, you still had to live in either place and adapt to the rules. We can't go to such lengths on our large server, but some drastic design changes will be needed to force players choose one of a very few hubs that don't change by the flavor of the month.
Over the seven years I've played Amia, I haven't had a single long-term character with any vested interested in good vs. evil. Not one. My drow have been evil because they were drow, but they schemed against other drow and had no desire to make life miserable for the goodies. My elves were pretty decent because tehy were elves, but wouldn't have hesitated to do cruel things in the name of their people. The humans and other races all had their own motives and values, but none of them would have taken part in some epic battle against evil (or good). It's simply a marginal, exclusive paradigm that doesn't really create anything new or interesting. It doesn't force any ethical choices on you, or make you question whether you're on the right side. It's pretty black and white, because either you're depraved evil and don't give a damn, or you're a normal bloke and want nothing to do with evil - whether or not you really care about good, either.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Last edited by IronAngel on Thu, Aug 23 2012, 23:51 PM, edited 1 time in total.
I don't have time to respond in-depth but I will say that based on this:
IronAngel wrote:
It's simply a marginal, exclusive paradigm that doesn't really create anything new or interesting. It doesn't force any ethical choices on you, or make you question whether you're on the right side. It's pretty black and white, because either you're depraved evil and don't give a damn, or you're a normal bloke and want nothing to do with evil - whether or not you really care about good, either.
I don't think we're on the same page, or possibly even in the same book.
Edit: first part of your post sounded kinda good though.
_________________ @Thanatopsis#6293
Last edited by serbiris on Fri, Aug 24 2012, 0:02 AM, edited 1 time in total.
Thus why most players of evil have switched to the shiny guys and found that having a halo is fun, since you get to win and you don't have to work half as hard.
I disagree that Good has it any easier than Evil, ultimately. Day to day, perhaps, but it's just as difficult for good to see any real victory.
See: Monolith. In about every way that matters, the Ulrik-era Good-aligned Monolith got its ass completely thrashed, over and over again. It survived a continuous onslaught of shadowmasters and vampires, sure, and ultimately prevailed, but at exceptional cost, then finally succumbed spectacularly to the schemes of a group that, if not Evil, is absolutely malign. The Monolith lost everything except a handful of people, and while there is a glimmer of a chance they might eventually prevail over that foe, it'll be a half-hearted, sullied victory at most.
Good did not win, there. In fact, it continues to lose.
I am biased, in that I don't play good. At all. Ever. Must be some sort of mental instability. That or I like doing all my evil vicariously. Whatever. For the what.. 2-3 years I played Malice, it seemed that the drow could do 0.diddly to affect anything in any fashion and even our attempts to raid (as so often requested) ended up with 5-10 drow playing tag with half of the server (back in the day...). When you're already at a 2 level disadvantage in a toe to toe with even numbers of epics, it starts rapidly feeling like you may as well not bother since affecting the surface with some neferious plot just never seemed to take off. And then there was the whole plague/lolth demands you move house saga. I'll leave that axe to grind another day.
Drow experiences aside, I have played CN and TN and even the odd LN character and tagged along with the halo crew and personally, I've felt that notable example above aside (never really involved with the Monolith) ~ Good is entrenched and thus has to do a lot less groundwork in general in order to do something effectively.
_________________
Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?
I think that it's generally the approach. In general Good seems to try to do stuff that would be well-received, or words around what is already present. In general Evil seems like it's trying to work against an established order. If Good tried to gain a foothold in the Underdark, I imagine they would be stymied pretty hard at every turn because the environment itself favors Evil. On the Surface, it tends to favor Neutrality or Good, so Evil finds it harder to work in the environment using Evil means. That kind of thing.
You're probably right. Though why Good would bother is an interesting question. It seems like that people always want us to come crawling out of our holes... Aside from some twisted panties when Ultri got raided without a DM present, nobody even tries to kick some drow-butt.
What are you? Scared?!
Anyway, I'm still for something a bit multitonal, interesting and radical a la IronAngel. Let's kick the dichotomies out the door and shake the grit out of the broom onto the floor. And turn out that light, it's not dark enough.
_________________
Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?
Last edited by 555444333 on Fri, Aug 24 2012, 0:02 AM, edited 1 time in total.
Thus why most players of evil have switched to the shiny guys and found that having a halo is fun, since you get to win and you don't have to work half as hard.
I disagree that Good has it any easier than Evil, ultimately. Day to day, perhaps, but it's just as difficult for good to see any real victory.
See: Monolith. In about every way that matters, the Ulrik-era Good-aligned Monolith got its ass completely thrashed, over and over again. It survived a continuous onslaught of shadowmasters and vampires, sure, and ultimately prevailed, but at exceptional cost, then finally succumbed spectacularly to the schemes of a group that, if not Evil, is absolutely malign. The Monolith lost everything except a handful of people, and while there is a glimmer of a chance they might eventually prevail over that foe, it'll be a half-hearted, sullied victory at most.
Good did not win, there. In fact, it continues to lose.
Note that Good was not facing any Evil PC's, and when Good vs Evil PC's come into play, Evil players always end up getting screwed over one way or another. Even if we have a technical victory, we get screwed. I should know. I've been on the receiving end more than most. Also, good PC's don't have bounties of several millions on their heads most of the time, and can go to safe places AND RP in them too, whereas evil players cannot. They often have to risk their lives for RP, if they are banned from pretty much everywhere. Also, Good doesn't have to worry about other good players attacking them for the most part. Evil vs Evil is very common too. Banites vs Cyricists (well, cyricists vs everyone), and the drow houses too.
Evil players don't tend to get some Good NPC paladin who is on a warpath to kill something either. Probably because it would end up lots of Good players joining him making it impossible for evil to win further.
I find there are far too many restrictions as to where PC's can go and what they can wear/do in certain places too, and modifying area's to the point of not bothering. First example, fire giants. I don't think I know of anyone going there since the recent changes. Secondly, Wiltun. I see no point in going there anymore, with all the silly laws, even if they do have IC reasonings for them.
_________________ Khaldun Menetnashte Khalfani Victor Wilkinson
On the contrary, one of the many adversaries facing Good-Monolith was the Crimson Arcanists, and the Evil PCs who were trying to weaken the Monolith throughout the various other conflicts.
Ah yeah. You almost had me there Letum - this was what I meant. When GvE comes into PC actions vs PC actions, like you said, us in the black robes are usually working against the established order but every victory (that rare thing) is a) Pyrrhic and b) Overturned within weeks by some whitecloak action. Now I'm off to bed. Don't get this locked whilst I'm gone guys.
And as to the Crimson Arcanists... yeah, what happened to those guys?
_________________
Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?
I may have been reading too much Foucault lately, but I got out of bed to share this thought before I forget it: an interesting conflict would be between sovereign rule based on a feudal system (demanding only fealty in the form of taxes and military service) on the one hand, and a modern bureucracy representing faceless governing focused on normalization and the biopolitics of the populace (managing things like popular opinion, health, family values, sexuality, the direction of labor, etc.) on the other. Not that we have to recreate an experiment in Foucauldian historical studies, but the theme is pretty compelling. And we'd have one of the 20th century's greater minds to inspire us.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
I find there are far too many restrictions as to where PC's can go and what they can wear/do in certain places too, and modifying area's to the point of not bothering. First example, fire giants. I don't think I know of anyone going there since the recent changes. Secondly, Wiltun. I see no point in going there anymore, with all the silly laws, even if they do have IC reasonings for them.
As a player of a Wiltun Warden, I have to agree that Wiltun has gone from RP hub to barely used anymore. Half the time, Wiltun was where people on B were found. I'm not complaining, just stating that it made an obvious decline. Still fun to be there, though haha. Also, with the fire giants I have to note that I have only been twice since the changes, and both times left immediately (once alone with my 26 wizard to test how it was changed and then again with a 20+ cleric in a party).
_________________ Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play: Salema Nefahri::A penny for your thots Zrae'a'stra'fryn::That which nightmares are made of Khasir::From the East a storm is coming
Oh I remember, I think my second time was shortly before it changed again for the better. Unfortunately people shied away from it by then
I should try to get more to go, though, IC-like
_________________ Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play: Salema Nefahri::A penny for your thots Zrae'a'stra'fryn::That which nightmares are made of Khasir::From the East a storm is coming
Yeah, been there with a group of around level 18-23. It went just fine, when people worked together. When three only, it took slightly longer, but by no means impossible. The place seems fine.
Joined: 09 Jan 2009 Location: East of Elsewhere, West of Sometime
jimbono1 wrote:
LetumLux wrote:
555444333 wrote:
Thus why most players of evil have switched to the shiny guys and found that having a halo is fun, since you get to win and you don't have to work half as hard.
I disagree that Good has it any easier than Evil, ultimately. Day to day, perhaps, but it's just as difficult for good to see any real victory.
See: Monolith. In about every way that matters, the Ulrik-era Good-aligned Monolith got its ass completely thrashed, over and over again. It survived a continuous onslaught of shadowmasters and vampires, sure, and ultimately prevailed, but at exceptional cost, then finally succumbed spectacularly to the schemes of a group that, if not Evil, is absolutely malign. The Monolith lost everything except a handful of people, and while there is a glimmer of a chance they might eventually prevail over that foe, it'll be a half-hearted, sullied victory at most.
Good did not win, there. In fact, it continues to lose.
Note that Good was not facing any Evil PC's, and when Good vs Evil PC's come into play, Evil players always end up getting screwed over one way or another.
Truefacts. A small series of events were responsible for the Monolith being lost, and it would not have been possible were it not for evil PCs who carried out certain tasks.
But, as Glim said, the horse is not only dead, its bloody unrecognizable.
I do believe that the harsh death penalties (not perma.) will eliminate builders / loot hunters / nonrpers. When you have a character for many years and you loose something, you do not mind it much (personal experience from previous server - on death, whole inventory dropped). You just suck it up and continue - because you like your character, you work with it, plotting with it, you took your time to create it, put an ideas to it... you are rping with it.
I played on Mystara with you Guardy and droping items on death was awesome. PVP was far more intense knowing you could lose an item. Risk V Reward. Heart in the mouth stuff that Amia just lacks. What's the worst that can happen in PvP or a failed adventure? Broken Ego....
_________________ Little Libba Roruk Steelshadow Morten Morrowcroft
But, as Glim said, the horse is not only dead, its bloody unrecognizable.
I'm usually rather hesitant to post my opinions on such matters, as they have been stated in my previous comments on this topic. However, having played hands from both decks I'll give my two cents on the matter.
Glim and Nivo are correct, this issue has been repeated endlessly, largely with the same complaints argued again, and again. Good gets burned out dealing with the same kind of transgression over and over, and the badies get burned out because the world never quite gets burning to their satisfaction. Fine, both are legitimate frustrations. I personally think that while one side gets the upper hand from time to time, things tend to balance back out. And while I know I'll catch flak for this I cannot help but think that this is what the respective parties signed on for. You don't want to engage in endlessly stomping out minor criminals? Don't play good. You don't want to have to deal with people banding together to stop a nefarious scheme that will likely hurt them? Don't play evil.
Debating this yet again is an exercise in futility, because it won't be solved here. The chief reason for that is because, in my opinion, it is not the system that is at fault for these complaints. Some adjustment is necessary from time to time of course, but largely our frustrations in this instance are our own responsibility as players.
Secondly, Wiltun. I see no point in going there anymore, with all the silly laws, even if they do have IC reasonings for them.
Yeah, I agree. Walking through Wilton wastes a rest period and requires you to re-micromanage your spellbook for most casters. It's not worth dealing with from a mechanical point of view. My character doens't care, and agrees with the law. The player thinks it's a royal pain in the backside.
The only time I go to Wilton anymore is when RP forces the situation.
jimbono1 wrote: Secondly, Wiltun. I see no point in going there anymore, with all the silly laws, even if they do have IC reasonings for them.
Yeah, I agree. Walking through Wilton wastes a rest period and requires you to re-micromanage your spellbook for most casters. It's not worth dealing with from a mechanical point of view. My character doens't care, and agrees with the law. The player thinks it's a royal pain in the backside.
The only time I go to Wilton anymore is when RP forces the situatio
n.
something i can gather from a lot of the previous posts.
Overpolicing and setting of procedures and rules is something that has just become encumbersome to deal with.
One example: All followers of a certain deity are banned from cordor or certain cities as a blanket rule. This was debated upon and the stance was taken that the blanket rule has to apply because inability to monitor 24/7.
What happens when such a rule is in place? . Player has an idea of creating an intelligent evil character, who secretly worshipped bane, to penetrate the nobility of cordor and influence things from within. The character has selected bane upon character creation menu, but even though there is absolutely no IC way of determining his secret devotion for a god, he is banned from a city. thus character concept nullified and creative rp possibility castrated.
We understand why management comes up with policy and procedures but it just gets overly cumbersome to deal with that most players just go meh.
Suggestion? Do away with everything start a fresh and let players complain and whine about things..playerbase has to mature up and just deal with IC things as they come about without worrying about rules or guidelines too much.
_________________ Currently starring: Vinasis D'Magi- Calishite Merchant Pantheros Sylvanight- Lycanlord of Malar Artorious Godstrike- Paladin of Torm
Lets focus on the problem and the way to solve it.
I don't think the problem is ~that~ specific, meaning I doubt it is the strict law of Wiltun or the cart system. I would point my finger on the harsh death penalties though, or perhaps the obvious fact that Nwn's not a kid anymore. I mean people now prefer newer, hotter games that do things ours won't do.
Sometimes I feel like the server is changing in a way that only fits the common Amian who knows his way around. Hunting grounds getting tougher, death penalties being escalated.. I mean these things promote challenge but maybe they're driving away new RP'ers who're just looking for an entertaining RP-hunt rather than a near-death experience? Surely something to think about.
I think people have always moved on and left Amia. There are those who're addicted to it like me, but the majority of the players have always moved on, it's just that we always had new players coming in and fill their void.
I think the problem is that we don't have those new players anymore. Something about the server doesn't attract RP or D&D freaks anymore. I think what contributes to that mainly is the server's immenseness. I think the server is too big. Even I sometimes log in, don't find anyone to RP with, and log off.
In short, I think we need to get in these new player's eyes. We need to create a friendly image for the server, think what would tempt them to come back after one stroll on it.
What is Amia? An RP server, or a hack and slash? RP server.
Can it have hack and slash? Yes
Should we focus on hack and slash? Not at the expense of RP
Right, so our focus is RP? Yes.
Excellent, so, how do I find RP in Amia? ...
Both myself and a couple of other new/returning players have commented on the loss they're feeling with Cordor, having to travel through zones, no porting out to find the RP zones, confusion at where to go at the beginning (I myself didn't even notice the signpost that got commented on because I didn't know to look), and finally, there is no automatic RP hub. The old Amia you woke up in what was effectively a market place, there were people everywhere, now, it's a dock, and the first thing you have to do is leave South Cordor before you can do anything. Essentially, when you rock up, there is no RP, and no way to find it, especially on such a large server with people spread out, and with absolutely no reason to be in any part of Cordor. Quite a lot of RP was generated by being shoulder to shoulder with people the moment you spawn in, even if you intended to spawn out to get to another hub somewhere, quite often you would encounter someone briefly and decide to roleplay. The way that Cordor is designed now, it angles for people to leave the city in order to port/find RP, and as soon as you leave the city, you're already geared to go hunting (These days I walk to Tarkuul rather than port given how long it takes to leave Cordor).
So step one, Cordor as it stands does not encourage roleplay. Fix Cordor.
Returning the spawn point to Waukeen temple would work brilliantly, solving a lot of problems with minimal effort. Allowing porting within the temple of waukeen (even if not the rest of Cordor) would work fantastically as well, allowing the guard to keep their peace, restrict crime, but not inhibit the players (and would encourage adventurers IC to visit the temple, thus promoting business).
We've all had a chance to have our voices heard, it's now time that we start proposing ways to remedy it.
As for PvP, evil, instadeath. PvP and evil are PLAYER responsibilities, while I agree strongly with those points, they also require strong bastions of good as counterpoints, so a little bit of roleplaying goes a long way. As for instadeath... well, it could work. I'm not going to say I like it, but then I can and will IC kill a character if the RP deems it happen. Not everyone does, and not everyone wants to. But, even if you only had a 1-5% chance of death, it would encourage party hunting rather than solo hunting, it would also give that little bit of adrenaline rush and various other factors. Problem? How do you party hunt if no one online is in your level range. You could risk going solo, but especially for a dominantly RP character sometimes you might hunt solo effectively so you can claim it happened OOC, or just so you don't get bogged down by RP (example, I never got a character past L23 in two years because of RP, I never would have gotten it to 20 if I had to rely only on party hunt because the character didn't like others). I would say, consider it after Cordor has been fixed, but in my honest thought, if you want permadeath that bad, just roleplay it. And it's not like party hunts don't happen regardless.
I think the problem is that we don't have those new players anymore. Something about the server doesn't attract RP or D&D freaks anymore. I think what contributes to that mainly is the server's immenseness. I think the server is too big. Even I sometimes log in, don't find anyone to RP with, and log off.
I said something to that degree on page 1 about B-mia is so split up. but it seems so few people think its a problem because noones commenting on it....so here is a super short of it....
Caraigh,Wiltun Khem Underdark Brogendenstein main land Ruathym Abyss (delete) Shadowplane (delete) Forrstaker (delete) Frozenfar (delete)
so from 9 down to 5, we could get it down lower
_________________ ================-<Cory ShadowFlame>-================ Risenlord-Shifter(OMG a Non-Dragon Shifter that can hold his own in PvE)
Apologies Cory, I admit I only red some of the ideas presented in this topic. But yeah, I think you got it right.
Also, I 100% agree with Theander's first post!
I think it is extremely essential that the main city, meaning Cordor, be always populated and have a sense of friendly atmosphere. As insignificant it may sound, returning the spawn point back to a more crowded location would improve greatly the first impression new players have on Amia. Instead of a cold, distant place where NPC's stand motionless, they would find a vibrant city with PC's in it, and thus what they came for - RP.
Cutting it down won't help. Freedom is one of the wonderful things about Amia. Limiting it would be a tragedy.
Edit: If you remove certain places, it won't make Cordor more appealing. Force people to RP certain places and you lose even more players. Personally I know that Cordor is likely the best place to find immediate RP, so I would go there anyhow, even if the neat far away places exist.
Come to think of it... yeah, I think I agree that the Cordor Spawn should be shifted back to somewhere more central. It makes sense the first time you log in to appear at the docks. But after that if your spawn is set to Cordor/default, wouldn't it make more sense to appear in say, the Nomad (which could stand to get a bit more traffic these days!) or something?
I know you can pick another Cordor node and set that as your spawn, but that takes up wand slots. I've got my wand up to Greater on my main and I would still have misgivings about devoting a second slot to Cordor. But that's just me.
I may have been reading too much Foucault lately, but I got out of bed to share this thought before I forget it: an interesting conflict would be between sovereign rule based on a feudal system (demanding only fealty in the form of taxes and military service) on the one hand, and a modern bureucracy representing faceless governing focused on normalization and the biopolitics of the populace (managing things like popular opinion, health, family values, sexuality, the direction of labor, etc.) on the other. Not that we have to recreate an experiment in Foucauldian historical studies, but the theme is pretty compelling. And we'd have one of the 20th century's greater minds to inspire us.
Oh my god this. I was actually just about to suggest this: if you want a solid conflict that cuts right across the good/evil divide, make it a peasant revolt. You'll get the Lawfuls on one side, Chaos on the other, Neutrals pulled in between ... it would be gorgeous.
If anyone is interested in trying to start this, PM me. I would LURVE to play a peasant rebel, complete with crippling poverty and malnutrition. The catch: it would definitely need a DM's thumbs up and support to referee any attempts to recruit support, steal cattle, do whatever. If there's a DM who might be interested in shepherding a wannabe Black Forest Rebellion - and oh please let there be - I'm totally game.
_________________ You dare mock the Tibbly one, catcherer of drowses?
Cutting it down won't help. Freedom is one of the wonderful things about Amia. Limiting it would be a tragedy.
Edit: If you remove certain places, it won't make Cordor more appealing. Force people to RP certain places and you lose even more players. Personally I know that Cordor is likely the best place to find immediate RP, so I would go there anyhow, even if the neat far away places exist.
yes cutting it down will help alot...because I'm talking about Boss-mia not Active-mia , as I said in my post on page one.
corypx wrote:
well hindsight is 20/20 as we all know, but I'll take afew pokes at this.
what I belive is the main downfall with players on B-mia is the layout of the server, when you look at A-mia you get that connected feeling because its a single island, things effect the world and so effect your neighbors meaning more RP
lets take a quick look at the servers layout
A-mia Amia island.
B-mia Caraigh,Wiltun Khem Frozenfar Underdark Shadowplane Forrstaker Brogendenstein and now main land Ruathym EDIT I forgot Abyss
lets say the dale was in ruins for some reason, it has in walking distance a number of diffrent groups/settlements...ect made up of players who could take part realistically as they live near eachother.
B-mia is so split up you really have no neighbors, nothing effects anyone else, events and RP does not breach the gap of distance and we get stagnated then the active player bases die out with lack of RP.
another problem I see with B-mia is that then you need a small army of active DMs to attempt to try and keep the disconnected player base of islands to remain active because its so stagnated...that in turn might burn out the DM if they even wish to take the time with a island thats active player base is... 1-3 players.
what could we attempt to do... I'm not sure we could attempt Alternate beginnings for locations on B-mia to get players interested about the location, learn its history and lore in hopes it grows.
I think thats all I will put this post for now, but anyone else who wants to chat is free to PM me on the forums or in game, I'll be on my bridge.
_________________ ================-<Cory ShadowFlame>-================ Risenlord-Shifter(OMG a Non-Dragon Shifter that can hold his own in PvE)
If you want Cordor to change and be more friendly to you, you have some work to do. You spawn in the South because you are "out of the way" there, as mostly non-citizened adventurers. When you hang out in the Eastern district, you loiter right in the middle of their governmental center, threatening their clerks with your heavy weapons, powerful magics and mere presence. Your portal rods don't work because adventurers are the only ones who have them and the city doesn't trust them, since they commit so many crimes and then just port away. You can thank the Arcanum, by and large, for screwing you over there. Maybe take it up with them?
I would say that what you might want to consider is doing something positive for the city to improve the reputation of adventuring PCs beyond what's scripted for you (selling your loot in the city, doing the quests provided to you by NPCs in the city, playing courier, etc.), but of course, you're all level 30 adventurers and they're a bunch of commoners whose opinions shouldn't matter or affect your lifestyle, right?
Right?
Alternatively, there's always the option of just forcing them to make your portal rods work again. Kill a few random citizens to make your point. Hold them hostage. March on the Commonwealth Center en masse and tell them you don't like being discouraged into hanging around the docks all the time instead of right there where you feel you belong: right in the heart of their business.
Either way, you may get some of those changes you want.
@Cory: I read it. Still, cutting down on locations changes nothing that you deemed the problem on B. Your lack of neighbours still exist, and there would be less places to seek out specific RP (like Shadowscape for SDs for example).
Perhaps my observation is lacking, but I noticed that RP thrives with active leaders. When Renais, Aylomen and Arion for example stopped, each of those previously active and interesting places became more or less desolate. I believe people sometimes need guidance in-game to thrive. Correct me if wrong. Inspiring people to take the reigns ICly, like handing the torch to the next person, could secure less break-ups of groups and thereby secure RP activity. Many do strive to have something to be part of in-game they can rely on. Stability of groups seems rather important, the way I see it.
Alternatively, there's always the option of just forcing them to make your portal rods work again. Kill a few random citizens to make your point. Hold them hostage. March on the Commonwealth Center en masse and tell them you don't like being discouraged into hanging around the docks all the time instead of right there where you feel you belong: right in the heart of their business.
Either way, you may get some of those changes you want.
Do iiiiiit!
_________________ Aernoud Van Brabant: Heir of the House. Proprietor of the Beer Wagon. "Go to the Mayfields, have a pint, and wait for this to blow over." Aurelius: Sunmaster of Amaunator. Contemplative. Aspirant to Transcendance. "Sol Invictus"
Yeah, I really don't see how Cordor is the problem. It's the most interesting and dynamic place on the server. What I think we should do (if my previous posts didn't make it clear) is expand on that story and create another, similar but opposing force to compete. The Commonwealth plot is one of the best things to happen to Amia, but Cordor is a small city with very little territory at the moment, and so the story doesn't really force itself on everyone. If you can walk away from the master narrative without inconveniencing yourself, it won't work so well.
There's so much potential for Joon now that he's a citizen and a teacher in Cordor. I would love to see more people pick up on the whole story, choose sides and expand the conflict. Monarchists arise, Commonwealth protect your interests!
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Joined: 15 Dec 2009 Location: The Sky Above The Rain.
Do not touch Abyss. Unless you want me feeding Graz'zt's idol with your testicles.
Seriously, though, the world is not THAT big. The reduction will solve nothing. Ulir nailed it :
Ulir wrote:
Cutting it down won't help. Freedom is one of the wonderful things about Amia. Limiting it would be a tragedy.
Edit: If you remove certain places, it won't make Cordor more appealing. Force people to RP certain places and you lose even more players. Personally I know that Cordor is likely the best place to find immediate RP, so I would go there anyhow, even if the neat far away places exist.
And this :
Ulir wrote:
@Cory: I read it. Still, cutting down on locations changes nothing that you deemed the problem on B. Your lack of neighbours still exist, and there would be less places to seek out specific RP (like Shadowscape for SDs for example).
Perhaps my observation is lacking, but I noticed that RP thrives with active leaders. When Renais, Aylomen and Arion for example stopped, each of those previously active and interesting places became more or less desolate. I believe people sometimes need guidance in-game to thrive. Correct me if wrong. Inspiring people to take the reigns ICly, like handing the torch to the next person, could secure less break-ups of groups and thereby secure RP activity. Many do strive to have something to be part of in-game they can rely on. Stability of groups seems rather important, the way I see it.
Nuff said.
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
If the divided areas on B were the main cause for the server's emptiness, Amia A shouldn't have taken a hit.
I think IC reasoning behind re-locating the spawn point and allowing portals to be opened in Cordor is important, but that is not the motive for the proposed changes. Encouraging players to create server-altering events is an excellent idea, but right now I think there are some technical issues which repels players from frequently visiting the server.
It's not that we want Cordor to change to be more friendly to -us-, it is more as we just think it should be more friendly to all. Cordor is the face of the server for those new players. My theory is that lately, new guys used to log in, spawn in South Cordor, bump into some of the mindless NPC's who're standing around, some may have been patient enough to reach some other areas, didn't find anyone - and log off to try another server.
It has also been the case for me and others as Theander said. That kind'a led me to believe Cordor -is- a part of the problem.
I must point out that as opposed to what I have written before, I don't believe NwN's age plays a big role here, since you can still see other RP servers populated with 60, 70+ and even more players.
You still seem to be missing the point. The reliance on charismatic PCs to keep certain areas alive is exactly why there needs to be a restructuring around two or three focal points. The kind of DM-supported social structures and hierarchies that don't die when a few players lose interest. The kind that keep getting new members. You can't rely on people; you must create self-sustained structures. You're comparing player-run factions and stories to something completely different, something Amia has never seen before. The only empirical evidence you could have is from other servers.
Areas don't necessarily need to be cut, as such. But a few central hubs need to be made more important, more attractive, more diverse. Larger, perhaps, but cramped together better. A new layer of slums in Cordor's sewers after a population boom? A refugee camp outside Kohlingen, and a new mage tower established in the arcanist shop? Areas to support all kinds of RP for all kinds of PCs. You don't need Shadowscape to RP with Shadowdancers, the academy could very well move into one of the major centers as the portal destabilizes. You don't need a seperate mercenary camp in the Forest of Despair if both cities hire mercenaries for their armies and set up camps on their outskirts. And most of all, settlements must be connected by some IC relevance. That is to say, independent villages like Uhm, Wharftown, even Bendir would be subjected to a larger power or at least forced to balance between two. Some settlements could stand to be destroyed, but not all of them.
It would be a lot of work but kind of neat to fast-forward Amia, say, ten years to implement the new situation.
This isn't the only option, mind you. This is just an example. But it's an example of the scale of change that's needed. People are really talking past eachother in this topic, suggesting small tweaks that really have no hope of revitalizing Amia as a new and exciting experience. Portal rods, spawn points, death penalties, starting levels, really now? We've been here for yeas, we've done it all - a change in the setting and story would be welcome. Story is the only thing that will make people log on and play, and there's no doubt that a unified huge story has the highest chance of success. It can be a lot of work, there might not be the manpower to realize it, we might not have ideas good enough - there are many potential problems, but you can't deny that it's the most likely way to inspire a lot of people.
Herding people into two or three hubs by spawn points is important too, though. That's the only small tweak I can see having a positive impact. But again, those hubs need to be central to the story for them to remain interesting.
If you think we don't have enough population for two hubs, you could always just split Cordor in two by civil war, and make the sides play against eachother by incorporating player factions, DM factions, PC roles in the government, alliances with other settlements etc. It's not quite as intuitive and easy as two large city-states competing, but it keeps everything even closer together.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
I can't really contribute anything beyond this at this point: IronAngel is brilliant <.< He has much more eloquently and concisely given a series of ideas that have some real potential and will shake things up and I'm struggling to find words to explain just how fully I'd be up for the outlined changes to happen.
_________________
Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?
- Make cordor the city of the free, city of tolerance like how it used to be.(get rid of the blanket rules that make no ic sense)
- Allow portal wands to work again - Have cordor east, central, west etc as no pvp - cordor south allow it to be pvp. (get rid of the npc guards and let it be run by criminals again to allow for crime rp) - Let Waukeen temple be the temple where raised people can get free healing etc, and the spawn point after death similiar to how easy it was in the past. - Increase number of quests that stem out of Cordor. (Why does it only have to be noobie quests, why not pile intermediate, high, and epic level quests all to be around that similiar area to drive traffic)
Now all this requires in game IC action to implement. But aint no one gonna risk ic permadeth to their toons, to fix an OOC problem which is the drop in the playerbase.
_________________ Currently starring: Vinasis D'Magi- Calishite Merchant Pantheros Sylvanight- Lycanlord of Malar Artorious Godstrike- Paladin of Torm
Many of the details seem like fine-tuning a half-broken car. If the portal rods work in cordor or not make no significant difference imo, as it is such a minor thing. The economy, the pvp system, the jobsystem, the low or high fantasy style of the summons, cart-system, the balancing of spawns in regard to one another, (...) are all aspects that are not so important when there is no roleplay to improve them with. Like Iron wrote, " a few tweaks to death penalties or XP rate aren't going to do shit."
The server has become like a patchwork of servers by being so spread out. The different locations are almost completely independend from one another and what occurs in them has almost no bearing on the rest. Ultrinnan and Udos before had interaction with the surface. Khem had interaction with the rest when it was still a part of the amian isle. Both have improved lorewise and design wise enormously from that very long ago time, but they are almost completely irrelevant to the rest of the isles. A spread out playerbase without any real reason to stand in contact with one another ic causes the problem that even if thirty people are on, it still can mean you will not see anyone. I think it is essential that the world slowly becomes smaller again to gather the playerbase, be it through devestating plots that eliminate the small border hubs or other means.
You to play almost everything in a tailored hub. If you are an elistreean you have the shrine, a lothite has Edonil, other underdark races have L'obsul and Underport, the shadowdancers have Shadowscape, the halflings have Bendir Dale, the Dwarves have Barak Runedar, the elves have Winya Ravena, the necromancers have Tarkuul, the healers have Benwick Hollow, the paladins Kohlingen, and so on. You can even play proper mulhorandi in Khem. However, it got way too broad, way to independend, and there is no master narrative as Iron mentioned.
I think the Cordor Plot may be the tool to do it. In history, there were always events that brought on dramatic change in a region or world. We need a fall of the roman empire, or perhaps the rise of it. Not only would such a narrative help narrow down the hubs, but it would provide an interactive story that the players through their characters can take a part in. When things fall, it makes place for new things to build as well. The Church of Kelemvor might return to Kohlingen, the Muhlorandi would experience a vast exodus if Anubis brings utter destruction to their homeland, the shadowdancers might build up a new shadowdancing academy in Cordor if the beasts of the darkness rip apart Shadowscape. The abyss portal collapses with the rise of a new demon prince. (All pending on the rp, but the characters have a chance to construct new things and work for them.)
I agree that story is a big, primary part of what keeps people on the server, and a lot of people wanting to be a part of that story defines a great RP server. I don't vote against enhancing the plot, I'm aware of it's necessity for the server's success (which right now is measured by it's popularity).
Iron, You talk about a lot of players that would join the server when a huge story is made, I just think that while true, you don't get to reach those players. Practically, those who log in for the first time don't see the story you're talking about, their only idea of a story is by watching people in Cordor standing and RP'ing it. And even if they'd enter the website to read about the excitement of Amian history, after logging in they'd get a much more boring glimpse in the shape of vacant Cordor's streets and lack of RP partners.
As for Iron's second paragraph, I agree entirely, and is kind of what I'm talking about when I suggest to change Cordor.
And to add one more thing about the minor tweaks suggested: almost everyone agrees the problem is too few players to RP with. It's not like everyone had good RP going on and tried to enjoy it, but were so inconvenienced by a portal rod restriction or a lack of gold that they just had to log off. Conversely, it's not like small changes are going to make the inactive players go "Wow, that's so cool I have to get back into Amia right away!" I can only speak for myself, but I would be wowed by unified mission statement and a cool new master story I just had to be part of. That would make me play more, not bribing me with levels or convenient travel.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Iron, You talk about a lot of players that would join the server when a huge story is made, I just think that while true, you don't get to reach those players. Practically, those who log in for the first time don't see the story you're talking about, their only idea of a story is by watching people in Cordor standing and RP'ing it. And even if they'd enter the website to read about the excitement of Amian history, after logging in they'd get a much more boring glimpse in the shape of vacant Cordor's streets and lack of RP partners.
Not necesarily, if the starting quests are modelled to pull you straight into the action, if there are actual scripted means of participating when DMs or important PCs aren't around. If the streets were covered in "We Want You!" and "Beware The Traitors!" propaganda posters. And the whole point is, the streets of Cordor wouldn't be vacant if it suddenly became the place everyone wants to be.
Ultrinnan used to be a hub, because every drow wanted to hang around. You could get in on the latest rumors and action, improve your standing by being seen, and fish for opportunities for advancement. If there was similar opportunity to advance in the government of the new imperialistic Cordor and its affiliated factions, people would want to be around more. (There's the possibility now, but it's not very important to most PCs.)
You could even nerf the Abyss shop and bring the original to Cordor and whatever other place you make its opponent, and only grant access to those who've proved their worth to the Commonwealth/The Other Guys. Make your hubs mechanically the center of crafting and trade, make them the place where you're most likely to find adventuring parties in some rowdy, fairly neutral tavern (implement an island-wide messenger system to call for parties, instead of the party ball?), add quests there (repeatable, even?) and make those quests a more important aspect of levelling than the pure grind. There's a lot that can be done if you make the conscious decision to center the server around a single metropolis, or two.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
FAQ
Search
Login
