Author Topic: Too many people in GM events. (Read 609 times)

jjkolb · « **Reply #20 on:** July 12, 2005, 01:53:00 pm »

Quote

Rhizome - 7/12/2005 3:04 PM It is surely much easier for me to look at the calendar and see that an event has too many people already and thus refrain from signining-up than it is to sign-up anyway and force the GM of the event to deal with the situation by himself at the beginning of the event.
Respect,
Rhizome

The only problem with this method is that not every player can be online every day and read the calendar. I'm sure that some people watch it closely every day and sign up as soon as a quest is posted. This puts many of the other players at a disadvantage. As I said before, if possible, players could be limited as to the amount of quests they can go on in a month, whether it is self monitored or monitored by a GM. Surely, the GMs are not at fault as there are plenty of quests offered each month.

Chief Waha · « **Reply #21 on:** July 12, 2005, 02:17:00 pm »

Exactly. I don't get a chance to watch the calendar and see when new things pop up. By the time I look at them, there are 15 people already signed up. I do agree players should have the responsibility of saying, 'Hey, I've been on a couple quests this week, I should let someone else get the chance.'

Another idea... get rid of the quest calendar entirely... Have the GM pick out a group of players that are already out together and hook them in, or hook a couple players in town. It'll encourage players to form groups instead of soloing on the chance a GM will pick your group, and allow players that like to hang out and be social in town a chance to catch up on XP to those people that are always out monster hunting.

Rayenoir · « **Reply #22 on:** July 12, 2005, 02:20:00 pm »

As one of the people who got nailed by it and didn't get to go on The Cage: Opening (just mentioning that so it doesn't sound like I'm blowing smoke), I'm fully supportive of the dice-roll method. No favoritism at all involved there. Though if a person doesn't make the roll and misses multiple quests in a row.. well, that requires some consideration.

Also, I'm a big fan of spontaneous quests. Some of the most fun I've had on a quest is when it just sprang up out of nowhere, as then people have to improvise with who's there at the time. Being shortchanged for people can make the roleplay much richer. (There wasn't a cleric in the bunch last night on IDii's quest, heheh)

KageKeeper · « **Reply #23 on:** July 12, 2005, 02:25:00 pm »

Personally I feel this way:

It is a players responsibility to check the calendar. That is what it is there for. Other player's should not be penalized because some other player is not able to check on a fairly consistent basis. Many quests are up weeks in advance.

The calendar should not be gotten rid of as I think it is a great way of communicating quests and also shows some accountability that quests are being run. Picking a group of players to go on a quest will inevitably lead to claims of favortism.

A GM has many responsibilities. One of which should not be babysitting and micromanaging every aspect of a players time. That is the players responsibility. If a quest is full, do not sign up. If you do and you are asked to leave, well, you should know better.

There are plenty of quests run each month I think. All across the timezones. I try not to sign up for every single one, but I also do not think we, as players, need to be limited to how many we can go on. In most cases, it is first come first served. Unless you have a key role.

We are all supposed to be mature individuals here. We also do not want a lot of restrictions put on us for these types of things. So let's use our intelligence and common sense and police ourselves.

Seems prety simple to me.

ZeroVega · « **Reply #24 on:** July 12, 2005, 02:34:00 pm »

Perhaps GMs could simply not give the option to sign up for quests on the Calender. People would then know when and where the quest will take place and if there are more people there than the GM feels like handling he/she can pick and choose the PCs based on what the quest is about. Personally I won't give priority on my quests to people who signed up first, only to those who had been on previous parts.

Rehevkor · « **Reply #25 on:** July 12, 2005, 02:44:00 pm »

The problem with that is, once a series is under way, it is very difficult to get into later sessions if you weren't in the first. Given that most quests posted are part of a series, it can be hard finding quests to join if you missed out on the start of the series'. It would help to start all of the series' for a given month on the first week, and balance out the days and times so that everyone has a chance to join at least one series. It would also help to seed a few more single session quests through the month for those who can't get into a series. I see a few up, but all but one I think are well outside of the time I can play.

By the way, I've sensed some defensiveness from the DMs about this, which I suppose is understandable, but I want you to understand that I'm not complaining. Layonara is a good server, and works pretty well even without the DM run quests. I just thought I'd post a few suggestions to help arrange quests so everyone has a shot at them.

teefal · « **Reply #26 on:** July 12, 2005, 04:33:00 pm »

Reading through this, I'm feeling:

1. We need some concise measure of how often a player's been on a quest, and this should affect their chance of selection. Why not a modifier for the roll. Each time you get snubbed, you get +1 to your selection rolls. (Or something.)

2. I like the thoughts people have said regarding RP'ing quest selection. Where is this calendar in Layonara? What if quest participants had to earn their spot by RP'ing their way in ...

Let's say the calendar was more like the gossip forum. Quest postings would be teasers ... rumors about something worth RP'ing in the game. By talking with characters in-game, you find a clue to a clue, and presto, your name goes on the calendar event.

Yeah, this sounds like more work for the already taxed GMs. Perhaps GMs could have "office hours" .. times when they're in the world somewhere, and players never know who's the "recruiter". This would promote more off-hours RP. Never know when your comments might land you a quest. This is actually more how it'd really be.

Maybe the way to do it is to have "quest approvers" ... players who "know" something ... chat about it with people, and grab the ones that RP it right (and have the time for it).

If this thing keeps getting more popular, there's gonna be more and more people showing up at quest time saying "pick me, pick me, pick me". Maybe it's better if we all chat in-between times to increase our chances.

My 2gp.

Thedan955 · « **Reply #27 on:** July 12, 2005, 06:38:00 pm »

I think the GMs do enough work around for us and dont need to be given office hours

Also that method about RP is hard to defend against people picking their friends and buddies.

Xerina · « **Reply #28 on:** July 12, 2005, 08:33:00 pm »

Quote

KageKeeper - 7/12/2005 4:25 PM

Personally I feel this way:

It is a players responsibility to check the calendar. That is what it is there for. Other player's should not be penalized because some other player is not able to check on a fairly consistent basis. Many quests are up weeks in advance.

The calendar should not be gotten rid of as I think it is a great way of communicating quests and also shows some accountability that quests are being run. Picking a group of players to go on a quest will inevitably lead to claims of favortism.

A GM has many responsibilities. One of which should not be babysitting and micromanaging every aspect of a players time. That is the players responsibility. If a quest is full, do not sign up. If you do and you are asked to leave, well, you should know better.

There are plenty of quests run each month I think. All across the timezones. I try not to sign up for every single one, but I also do not think we, as players, need to be limited to how many we can go on. In most cases, it is first come first served. Unless you have a key role.

We are all supposed to be mature individuals here. We also do not want a lot of restrictions put on us for these types of things. So let's use our intelligence and common sense and police ourselves.

Seems prety simple to me.

One of the problems with this is that I check the calander every day usualy 2 times before work and once at work. that is 3 times a day and I have never checked the calander that didn't have the maximum number of people signed up and it is the same group of people. I suspect they have multiple computers and view the forums while in game and out. While it is great for them it makes it hard for me to sign up for a quest. If I can't make the first 15 checkeing it at least once a day, and usualy 2 or three times, its impossible for others that don't have the advantage of checking the forums from work as well as home. Im checking them at least once every 8 or 9 hours. Their really isn't a option that is going to work for everyone or make everyone happy. I like the idea of the calander and with a little player consideration for others it should work. Esp with spontanious quests thrown in. Oh and I'll rephrase the never, I have seen two quests for group at least twice my level with out the 15 max when I checked them the first time. So to say its theor fault for not checking it everyday is not really useful. While it is their responcibility, but at some point you start to feel like me. Why bother checking thier all going to be full or to high level anyway. That is honestly the point I am getting to with the calander it is starting to feel more like a waste of time then anything else.

I don't like to complain about a problem unless i can think of a better solution at least to myself rather people agree or not is another issue. Here I don't really know a good solution while their are many way to deal with it not of them are really better then what we have now. Changes will not make anymore people happy then their are now it just shifts to a diffrent group of unhappy people. More GM's might help generate more quests but it would also cause allot more problems and we have allot of GM's working overtime already and doing a excelent job. We need to make sure to support the GM's we have not get more. Keep a tight group with a clear goal and focus not allot of people running quests willy nilly.

My old server had a little less the half the players and only 4 GM's only 2 ran quests regularly. One did the plot quests and one did non plot quests.Plot quests were once a week, and other GM ran 2 or 3 quests a day. Neither of them ever really got to play and it led to their GM plot chars becomming the play char and it caused problems because they didn't have any free time to play. Compared to that Layo has a million GM's and quests, and our Dm's get to play too.

The only suggestion I can make is for more players to step up and find ways to involve those around you. Both of my chars require other chars to farther their goals and plots, so Anytime you RP with my chars you are effecting the world alittle. IF thats what you want from a quest is have fun, and farther the development of the world alittle look for it in the players around you and Role Play. If your just looking for XP from a quest you might be looking at quests for the wrong reason. I have had a few people RP with my chars and change the path I had planed for them or their outlook and view on life. Their for they changed the world alittle in that they changed a real char and her reaction not a NPC that may or may not effect anything else. The few spontanious quests I have been on were great fun, due to the role playing of the Chars anf immersion of the DM. But they didn't really effect anything story wise or world wise other then giving my Bard something to talk about and tell the story of latter. So player interaction is often better for creating a lasting effect, out side plot quests. It just kind of depends on what you want out of a quest.

Plus their are always player driven quests. And their are a few options for those, but that would be better situated for a post of its own, and then only if anyone really cares.

Leanthar · « **Reply #29 on:** July 12, 2005, 09:58:00 pm »

"...The only suggestion I can make is for more players to step up and find ways to involve those around you..."
That is the heart *seriously* of what the team and I have been driving at/towards for three years now.

Mark my words, if it does not happen this campaign will be a failure. Ask any player here (that RP's and is involved--or tries to be) how important it is to communicate with other players and you will see that it is critical for success.

stormspirit · « **Reply #30 on:** July 12, 2005, 11:00:00 pm »

Generally a series is run for involvement, it can play with development so much more than single sessions. I think generally speaking the solutions is one already presented, sign up for the quest and then at start the gm gets people to roll to see who gets slots. That means its fair no matter when you get to view the calendar.

And yes having more than one gm works a treat, Pan helps me with all mine, he does setup and encounters and the plot and story is mine. WE play to our strengths and can cater for more people. Yet Pan and I have been rping together for a long time here now, and gm together for half of that. It isnt a situation that is easy to reach, where you both understand what you are doing, and know the other Gm well enough to predict responses. While it is potentially ideal its tough to manage it.

Lastly on player communication, it is vital. With our drow quests (temporarily on hiatus due to timezones for the players) things were happening all over all of the time. If you didnt talk to one another you miss half the story and thus half the clues. If you want to get into a series best way is to ask a player who is on it, do the legwork and find the info. Show that you are interested by taking the time instead of just appearing at the quest and expecting to know what is going on when the series has ran for a month prior to your involvement. Most things are not hard at all to manage but the Gm cant do all the work for the players, nor would I assume you would have to much fun if we did.

Zhofe · « **Reply #31 on:** July 13, 2005, 01:00:00 am »

Well, no, a player should not be penalized because he/she was able to check the calander more than someone else, but there is really no reason that Bob the Cleric need to go on 8 quests a month either.

Some people hardly ever go on quests, either because they can't make it or because they are simply not as interested in breaking from their standard RP. On the other hand, there are players that seem to sign up for EVERY calendar event they can.

I do not mean this as a dig, or insult, or accusation, but if you look at the calander this month, you will notice that Shadowblade225 (sorry dude, your name stuck out) is signed up for almost every event on the calendar. Not one or two or three or even five in a row, but nearly every event has his name in the signed up list.

Now, Shadowblade225 is a good player. I have known one of his characters, and from what I know, he RPs very well. He is not a bad guy, he just wants to be involved.

The problem is, he signs up for the event, and others think like him and do the same, saving their spot by signing up, and then the newer players become intimidated, and do not sign up. To be perfectly honest, I don't think this should be allowed. It is unfair for any player to demand a spot in every event run on the calendar. I believe that limiting the number of quests a player can go on per time period is crucial, particularly with the increase of players recently.

I think some of us could really evaluate what quests we really want to go on, and save the rest for other players. I know that the majority of the people here are good guys (or gals) and that there really shouldn't be a problem. I think that most of us just don't really realize some things, and I am probably VERY guilty of that.

(Again, I didn't mean to pick on him specifically, I just wanted some proof to back up my claim.)

Chief Waha · « **Reply #32 on:** July 13, 2005, 06:23:00 am »

Quote

Zhofe - 7/13/2005 3:00 AM

Well, no, a player should not be penalized because he/she was able to check the calander more than someone else, but there is really no reason that Bob the Cleric need to go on 8 quests a month either.

Why should the rest of us that have other obligations be penalized for not being able to access to the calendar is my question?

Anyway I don't sign up for a quest unless I know I'll be able to make it anyway, which means within the next week, not 3 or 4 weeks away. I mean I just looked at NEXT month's calendar and the quests are already filling up. With the player base expanding the way it is, perhaps a limit on quests per month is the way to go.

ZeroVega · « **Reply #33 on:** July 13, 2005, 07:15:00 am »

You know what, I'm just gonna take sign up's off my quests. When I think about it, it makes sense. Anyone who wants to try and be on the quest, please come. If there's a level/player limit it will be enforced and I will pick at random the characters who will be allowed to play in it. Just show up, and either you'll get it, or you won't. Worst thing that can happen is you wasted 10 minutes running to it.
(And for those of you who don't have a lot of quest time, or take days off to go on a couple quests, feel free to let GMs know. They'll probably keep a space open for you.)

teefal · « **Reply #34 on:** July 13, 2005, 07:20:00 am »

Sounds to me like a simple solution would be to adjust the webapp slightly (if someone has access/ability to do so):

* Allow any given player to sign up for 1 quest or series in a given calendar month.

ie:

if( player.hasQuestInMonth( month ) ) write( "Resign from your other quest" );
else write( "Add yourself to this event" );

Clicking "Resign from your other quest" would search through every quest in the current month (after now) and remove that player. The page would reload and show "Add yourself to this event" (automatically). You could then sign up for this one.

One implication of this approach would be that players and/or GMs would have to be more rigorous about unsigning people that didn't make it in a quest, otherwise they'd be penalized. The signup list for a quest that is done would have to reflect who actually went on the quest. This would be an effect way to represent who got bumped and who didn't.

Two questions:

1) does someone have access and ability? (I know this is MegaBBS, which is 3rd party.. not sure of customization access)

2) is "once a month" for a series or a single fair?

steverimmer · « **Reply #35 on:** July 13, 2005, 07:33:00 am »

hmmm only 1 quest a month that'd be awful...I have to point out that for some people including myself one of the reasons they were attracted to Layonara in the first place was the amount of quests available for players. I'm sure that'd put some people off staying on the server if something as stringent as that was put into place. I know that I'd probably spend less time signed on too as it is the quests and the storylines that really make this server in my opinion.

Andrios · « **Reply #36 on:** July 13, 2005, 08:03:00 am »

This is just my 2 cents, if it is worth that. I think the GM team already does an awful lot, (not to mention that it is all volunteer) and I would hesitate to add anything to their workload.
I think setting up a way to track how many quests each player had been on would do just that. I also think that those that are requesting a limitation be put on number of quests per month to be enforced by the gms, would have second thoughts down the road when a time comes that there are more quests that want to be on than they are allotted. I think this community is a very respectful one, and if we excercise that respect nothing need be mandatory. If you notice a slot is full do not sign up. If it is a perfect fit for your character and you are very interested PM the DM and let him know. He may consider your request and make sure something is available for you. Also, do not sign up unless you are reasonbly sure you will be there. (rather than as a place holder should you be available) If we are polite and respectful of one another, the DM's will feel less stress and we will all be happier.

ZeroVega · « **Reply #37 on:** July 13, 2005, 08:52:00 am »

My opinion is this. People will check their computers all day long and sign up for quests. Yeah.... and? Signing up for a quest FIRST doesn't mean you're 100% to get on it. Limiting people to 1 quest a month will make all of the GMs to run quests at the end of the month have no one to run it for. Take the sign up's off the calender. Randomly pick the players who will go on the quest from the group that gets there (or have them choose who goes), and run the quest.
DMs get to choose the level restriction and how many can come. They have to write the quest, plan the quest, set up the quest and do a million other things, they shouldn't have to settle disputes on who gets to come and who doesn't.

Imperious · « **Reply #38 on:** July 13, 2005, 08:59:00 am »

I liked an earlier idea about roleplaying getting into quests. What about this?

To begin a quest, a GM might spot randomly (or arrange through subtle means) to have two or three players have an encounter or a very short mini-quest that clearly leads to a problem or larger quest that can only be handled by a larger group of specific level. Through an NPC (elf, black cat, demon, lich, whatever), the GM and players can get a handle on the quest, what is needed, etc. (some of this might have to be OOC).

At that point, it is up to those characters to assemble the party, take the lead, determine who goes if there are too many people, get everyone at the starting point, fill them in, etc. The players might post something in the Wild Surge, put it in the event calendar, just use roleplaying IG, whatever.

In this manner, it takes the onus away from the GM and puts it squarely on the players who take the lead to get the party assembly and get the right size. If the players can't handle it, not the GMs fault, and the quest is delayed.

Sure, some players might just choose their friends, but they might be better off thinking about party composition (wizards, rogue, priests, etc) and size. Plus, GMs could rotate who got "chosen" to be leaders to ensure that different groups of people get invovled in these quests.

I could see other ways of RP'ing this.....a mysterious note is sent to ten players to gather at a specific place...they are thrown together as a party and must work together and no one else is allowed in the party....plenty of variations you could play on this....

Perhaps the GM team has already considered this...perhaps not practical....just a suggestion.

Imperious

Dalbarhedi · « **Reply #39 on:** July 13, 2005, 09:00:00 am »

I actually have thought alot about what was suggested about the 'office hours' before. Not in quite those terms, but a sort of similar idea. I have actually seen a LOT of comments about how there dont seem to be enough quests for the US-based 9-5 workers, with most of the quest being held either VERY early, or VERY late (relative to us).

That got me thinking, and wondering about how to become a DM here on layonara. Admittedly, I have only a smidgin of experience with the dm client, and that was when NWN first came out 4 years ago. Regardless, I got thinking about it because of a particular thing that happened to my character, Vorkresh the Goblin. I still have no idea how I might become a DM, but that is another subject.

In some of the FAQs, they mention GMs just randomly dropping monsters on players, or placing the odd out-of-place monster in a nearby area, or something to that effect. I actually had this happen. One of the DMs (I have no idea who), I guess was watching Vorkresh killing a couple of the Red Light Goblin Scouts. After looting the bodies, Vorkresh wandered back down the slope, and ran smack-bang into a gelatinous cube . . . right outside Hlint. The cube chased a hollering Vorkresh (who had no clue what the thing was) all the way into Hlint, getting all the way to the tavern before it was killed by some of the other players.

Needless to say, while the occasional stray goblin, orc, or bird wandering into Hlint isnt uncommon, a gelatinous cube is NOT the sort of thing you see everyday.

What if, say, instead of being chased, Vorkresh had returned to Hlint, recruited a couple friends, and gone back out to kill it? Perhaps they could have found evidence of an evil mage who was preying on low-level adventurers nearby, and set out to find and kill him, eventually tracking him to a cave just past the wizards tower and killing him. . . and perhaps more could occur even after that, such as finding a holy emblem belonging to a distant temple among the wizards stolen loot, and the players decide to return it, etc etc. And after each key 'event', the DM could surreptitously award some exp to the players, based on roleplaying and actions in the quest.

A DM could easilly engineer something simple like that by creating one or two stock NPCs (which I know there are several already), and possessing them (and/or monsters), in order to create a very simple quest that might take an hour or so. They could then locate a player of a reasonable level for the encounter, and give them the 'hook' for the quest. The players wouldnt even necessarily know there was a DM involved either right away. But there is so much good roleplaying of characters in layonara, I bet such events would EASIILY be managable on the fly. I mean, Ive only been here what, a month maybe, and Vorkresh has helped (and been helped) in several spontaneous endeavors that were just random things that occured due to good roleplaying.

I would love to see more of that, ESPECIALLY with the lower-level characters. I figure it might take a couple of days or so to come up with each event, but then each one could also be performed more than once, with different groups of adventurers at different times of the day (or on different days, between set-up times). Of course, these wouldnt have to be world-shaking quests, just small things for the odd adventurer in thier spare time, but it would give much, much more variety to what low-level characters can expect. And of course . . . theres always the possibility that rumors would start to fly as people mentioned oddities to one another, and facts would be linked and rumors would be compared, and maybe . . . just maybe . . . someone will piece together a big picture, and decide to do something about it. . . .

Condensing Fact from the Vapor of Nuance. . . .