The World of Layonara
The Layonara Community => General Discussion => Topic started by: Rembaxe on July 11, 2005, 06:38:00 PM
-
I was gifted by an excellent suprise GM event about two weeks ago ran by Vyris. It was intense, had great roleplaying and created some new character relationships in Layronna. We had about 10 people involved and it was great fun. A week after that Vyris scheduled a sequel event on the calender and he quickly had 30 people signed up. This time things were a bit different. It was chaotic, huge lag and people were often times talking over eachother so nothing could be understood. After the server crashed for the third time I decided to opt out.
These two events were my first two on the server and having played the first one I was extremely excited for the second. Unfortunately after playing the second one I'm extremely leery of any event put on the calender. Either the event is designed for the same small group of extremely high levels or the event has 30 people signed up for it. Now as someone who has designed and DMed his own NWN campaign I know how extremely hard it can be to DM for a group of even 5 people so I know that you DMs are doing extremely well for how massive this server is. There really needs to be more segregated events being made, for both the enjoyment of the players and the sanity of the DMs. I know an easy way to accomplish this is to simply make all the events for those same high level characters but I'm thinking more along the lines of creating a php system to limit how many events a player can sign up for in a period of two weeks. This is just one idea I have for this problem.
I'd like to hear what the community thinks of the problem and maybe we can brainstorm some ideas.
-
Hmm,just got rolled out of Abbyss of the Soul. Four rolls of d20 and never above 10 *rolls eyes*. Anyway, I think the biggest problem that there often is a low levelcap, but almost never a cap for high levels.
-
Alot of quests have (or had a while ago) a limit on the number of people allowed to join ... I think the GMs just need to be a little bit more strict in regards to those limits.
I also think that restricting the number of quests a character can go on per month would help alot too. No reason that Bob the Cleric has to go on every quest out there.
Just my thoughts ... I don't go on many quests anyway.
-
The thing about player caps being made super hard is that everyone will then be signing up for every event for the month just to make sure they get in.
-
Filatus - 7/11/2005 9:43 PM
Anyway, I think the biggest problem that there often is a low levelcap, but almost never a cap for high levels.
Reconsider that statement by going through every event this month. You'll find your conclusion is very wrong. As a high level player I certainly know there are limited amount of quests for me to play on.
-
Well, that is why I also said restrict how many quests a person can go on per month. (I thought that would make more sense than every 2 weeks, as the calander is setup into months.)
We need limits on both I think.
-
What if GMs kept track of who participated in each quest they ran and didn't allow the same character on consecutive quests? Admittedly, people could still move from GM to GM but at least then:
1) they'd probably be seeing different people, different GM styles, etc.
2) given that many GMs have certain, preferred times they run quests, this might still effectively prevent some people from signing up for every quest because of time differences, etc.
Just a suggestion. It's tough to try to balance those who are very enthusisastic about playing on Layonara and can and want to particpate in all the quests (I'm quite jealous!) and those who can don't have the time and have to be selective in what they participate. Don't want to damper one side's spirits, but you have to give others a shot too...
Imperious
-
I think rolls should definatly be implemented for ONLY the people that signed up on the calendar. Most of the people that get on quests are friends of those already in it. They just get tells saying "hey, there is a quest starting, you want in" then they are in the group like that.
If everyone that signed up on the callendar rolled and the GM took the 10 or 15 highest players then that would solve alot. Rolling is equal chance for everyone. When i played Everquest, items dropped and we rolled for them. Most of the time I was one of the people that could use it more or could put it to better use but on one particular item it took me 20 raids to finally get it.
Also i think consideration for other players could go a long way. If youve been on 3 quests this week and someone that dosent play tha often because of his real life schedule signs up and wants to get in on a quest give him your spot. Just remember what goes around comes around and you will be alot more respected if your willing to help versus higher level. Because honestly, the people that jump in on quests last minute are not for here for the story, they are here to exp leech.
-Klugger
-
Living in EST territory, I'm having a hard time finding quests to join that don't start at like 6am for me. Those I can join do tend to have huge parties.
The only fair solution I can see is having more DMs running quests, and make sure they're evenly distrubuted across the time zones so everyone has a chance to play.
-
orth - 7/12/2005 3:54 AM
Filatus - 7/11/2005 9:43 PM
Anyway, I think the biggest problem that there often is a low levelcap, but almost never a cap for high levels.
Reconsider that statement by going through every event this month. You'll find your conclusion is very wrong. As a high level player I certainly know there are limited amount of quests for me to play on.
Statement reconsidered. It's maybe because I'm so slow at levelling that everyone looks impossble to me. Heh, can't see the actual level so yes, I could be wrong.
-
My point of view on this has a couple different levels.
I would love to be able to have 30 people in my quests, I just can't manage that many.
I want to provide a level of immersion thats actually REALLY hard with even 10 people.
I want to allow people to RP thier stats and roll thier skills, the more people involved the less often I get around to everyone.
Another thing is, in a series you have key events and you need key players to trigger these events, if you don't get the same key players back for the entire series it is just a confusing mess because nobody will know what they are doing, let alone why. It was hard for me to pick people to put in my lucky hat for the maker quest to get branded, but I had to make a few judgement calls on who I thought would be most likely to be available every thursday for a month...
I think it would help if people would respect the party limit posted and not add themselves to a quest that has a cap of 15 and 15 people already signed up. If you really want to go on the quest then PM the GM and see if you can't work something out.
Vyris
-
I agree that it would be a good idea to limit the number of quests one can go on in a particular month. Now in the case of a series, the PC should be able to be involved in the whole series, of course. But maybe then, one series every other month? Then again, this might be difficult to track so we may have to go by the honor system.
Oh, on a side note, I missed out on the 'Maker' series and the 'Cage' series, and while I am disappointed, I believe it is best that party size be limited to a manageable number. Just my opinion.
-
"...The only fair solution I can see is having more DMs running quests, and make sure they're evenly distrubuted across the time zones so everyone has a chance to play..."
*jaw drops* More GM's? The 20 quest GM's spread around the world are not enough for you?
Anyways, I do know what you mean by that statement and I understand your feeling. I am not sure what else we can do here folks. We have a ton of GM's and they all run many quests but they do it while working around RL (including work and family). There really is only so much that can be expected and I think the team is going way above and beyond their call of duty--after all it is all volunteer work and they deserve to play and have fun as well.
When we place hard limits on quests (and yes we are trying to do it again due to this thread as well as the lag it causes on servers and the gm's not having fun when the parties are too large) we tend to get a lot of hot replies of "favortism" or "why can't I go but he/she can" etc. Remember, the GM's do not like running real large parties either, it just is not near as fun nor is it as immersive. But the problem comes in to the fact that there is only so many GM's (and we have a lot of them) and so much time in the day--and then we get feedback from players of "why?" etc.
We do our best and I don't think anybody can ask for more than that, at least in my opinion.
-
layonara has alot of gm quests already...the only change id like to see is series quests. if a group starts the beginning of a series they should get first piority, as not a whole town would go looking for a single treasure. If there was slots available , then all means join in, but if the limit is met, well next time. the main plot quests are a different story altogether, as it affects everyone...and i guess the "suprise" quests (my favorite) would basically be for the party the GM would like to smite with evil fury *waves a fist at Dezza*....
-
I think the GM's run great quests and the price they pay for this is getting more and more players onto their quests.
Let me be one of the first to say that I will go on as many quests as possible because that is one way to meet other people and get exposed to different situations. Even though I try and make PST or EST quests I will mainly join GMT quests as it suits my timing better.
Having said that, I would not feel offended at all if I was to get to a quest and gets turned away due to charater fit for the quest or dice rolls or whatever method you want to use. As long as it is fair and transparent. In actual fact I would strongly support such an act, because I think it makes the playing experience so much better. Being turned away at one quest means a better experience probably on the next quest I get accepted into. I know it is not nice, but GM's should probably get a bit firmer on the number of people on quests.
Another idea perhaps is to give more detail on a quest and let people RP themselves onto it by way of PM or forum thread. That way people could get approved to go on the quest and maybe then add a couple more, by another way.
Thanks to all for doing a great job. Keep it up. And even though we nag for more quest we fully understand that you have real lifes as well.
Regards Aragwen
-
Well I don't know the situation well anymore, but back when I was GMing, a solution was having 2 GMs helping each other. It doesn't help lag, but it does help keep the players involved. There were a couple of times when I saw a group getting too large that I volunteered to drop out and helped the GM instead of playing. I also know it helped having another GM around to help you out so you don't have to bounce back and forth all the time. *shrugs* Its always gonna be a problem with a great place that keeps expanding like Layonara. You'll never have enough GMs to keep up with the player base.
-
I would like to make one simple comment here. Most of the suggestions and comments above regarding what to do with overful quests concerns GM approach and actions. We are currently discussing options and approaches amongst ourselves right now and something will be done in each case. However, I strongly believe that the players also have a responsibility regarding keeping quest numbers manageable, perhaps even moreso. 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. If a quest is overful by 20 people, think about how much that is for one person to deal with. GMs don't want to play the "bad guy" at the beginning of their events by restricting access and we shouldn't force them to.
Thanks for reading my comments.
Respect,
Rhizome
-
Well alot of people just sign up and dont show up. I remember reading a post a while back that it was good practice to put your name on the calendar and go anyway because some people on the list wont be there. Unfortunatly since the new massive flow of new players, thats not acceptable anymore.
What if we did away with signing up all together. However i could see on series quests we can put names down of the people that have been to the previous quests. For instance.... the prelude quest Klugger, Luna, Bido and Quantum were there. So then those people are gaurenteed a spot. But the second quest Klugger dosent show so then he loses his quarenteed spot in the new quest. Everyone else as well as klugger could roll for a spot.
On single quests i still think everyone rolling on a spot would be the best plan.
-
A solution was having 2 GMs helping each other. It doesn't help lag, but it does help keep the players involved.
I tend to run quests solo, so everything you see and here is from my mind not another GM. Also I find that it becomes too chaotic with more then one GM behind the mirror of things, players end up very confused or dead.
if you don't get the same key players back for the entire series it is just a confusing mess because nobody will know what they are doing, let alone why.
Exactly, this is why on the Heart of the Elements I give TOP priority and say to the outsiders sorry. Because I don't want the key players to explain the situation to 16 to 20 diffrent people that happen chance to walk by. But at the same time, it keeps the story fresh in the minds of the key players so they are driven. Its a double-edge sword.
"...The only fair solution I can see is having more DMs running quests, and make sure they're evenly distrubuted across the time zones so everyone has a chance to play..."
*jaw drops* More GM's? The 20 quest GM's spread around the world are not enough for you?
We are only human.
We would LOVE to run 27 quests a month, but... if we did then we wouldn't be human ;)
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.
Yep, I would prefer that if you can't make it to my event. Please please remove yourself that way I can get an idea of how many over I'm going to be.
On a rather side note, We do have new GM's they are learning the toolset to make it so that we can have more quests for everyone to enjoy. Give them time, once they get everything set squared away. I'm sure that there will be more quest sets/imprompt quests from them.
Sakura
-
"Give them time." Hehe, yes time. Unfortunatly for me I'm having writers block so my quests are a little shakey (and in the works). August should be a good month for quests. Expect some early after noon GMT quests, and some early/mid evening quests EDT.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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)
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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. ;)
-
"...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.
-
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.
-
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.)
-
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.
-
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.)
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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. . . .
-
Wahg, you beat me to posting about it :sweat:
But yeah, my post is a little more long-winded, more example-filled version of what he just said, with a few things added.
And incidentally, what I'm suggestng isnt really a replacement for the system in place. Its just a suggestion for something that could be added, as well as something I'd love to do myself. I mean, for 'big' quests, you obviously can just whip one out in a day or two . . . it takes some time to set up. I'm talking about the occassional spontaneous quest, maybe a few a day, depending on who's around (and what they like to do). And theyd be aimed at more lower-leveled characters, since theres already PLENTY to do for the higher-levels, as is evidenced by who all signs up for the calendar quests. I mean, a ninth level char isnt too useful against people going up into the dark rift, now is he?
-
Xerina - 7/12/2005 11:33 PM
At some point you start to feel like me. Why bother checking thier all going to be full or too 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 can relate. Looking at the calendar, especially when you're new, feels pretty demoralizing. Zerpa and I essentially lucked into a great quest the other day, and then last night's events. But if it weren't for these, we'd have probably have given up on Layonara, not because of the quest problem, but because Layonara hadn't yet hooked us enough to overcome our fear of being no-nothing dunderheads in a crowd of seasoned RPers. There's A LOT to know and learn. The quests made the difference for us.
-
Requiring people to RP in order to get into a quest would make the quests take longer than they do. As it is quests can take 4 hours or more, and trying to set-up a quest hook to get enough players in would be difficult for the GMs, and strenuous on the players' time constraints. However, the spontanious quests you guys mentioned do happen. GMs have been known to just pop in and do things. I almost had my bed stolen by a gnome for instance.
Randomly choosing the quest-goers when they get there sounds like a good idea, but as it has been stated before, and time you do something "Random" people will feel that it was the cause of favoritism. Unless of course you show the dice-rolls you will be making, but that falls into the section above about taking up time.
I believe that players showing self-restraint in their quest selection, and not signing up for every quest they have the possibility of making, would help things alot. I think that a forced limit of a certain number of quests per month would help the players in restraining themselves.
As for Teefal and Zerpa feeling like low-level dunderheads .... well ... that's how everyone feels at first. Don't worry, eventually you will become higher level and will have done more in the world and will be respected by people you don't even know that well. I think that you guys are pretty darn good for new players, and will only get better as you go along.
-
With due respect, Zhofe, I think I have to disagree....I'm not suggesting that the RP happen the night of the quest...nor would it have to extremely difficult for players or GMs.
Frankly, I don't see how much work it would be for GMs. Once they got the "lead" characters moving, their work is done until the time of the quest...they would have absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the "quest preparation" as it would be the responsiblity of the lead players.
And players wouldn't have that much work either....posting info in the Inn or event calendar could do the trick.....and everything should be taken care of before the quest begins.
Anyway, just a different view...and I agree with you about the random qeusts, Zhofe...those are always great.
Imperious
-
And how are the "lead characters" chosen then? And what drives them to actually gather others? How can we be sure that they will be responsible? Will they even be able to make it to the actuall quest?
It seems to me that there are alot of problems with setting up quests in this manner, and it would certainly make a huge dent in how many quests were available if this were done all the time. I think the idea is a good one, and an interesting one, but I do not think it is practical for the number of quests and players on the server.
Perhaps if one or two GMs particularly liked the idea though, they could run their quests that way ... well, really, I think that it does boil down to that any solution not on the player side is going to be the decisiion of the GM running the quest. I think it is that much more important then that we limit ourselves.
-
ZeroVega - 7/13/2005 10:15 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.)
I've noticed a lot of quests start in places like Lorindar that require ship passage to reach. At the earlier levels, papers for ship passage aren't cheap, especially when you have to buy 4 for a round trip. It costs Gretchen 800gp for a round trip between Hlint and Lorindar, and that's a huge chunk of change for her. So suppose she shows up for one of your quests starting in Lorindar and doesn't make the cut. She's out of a lot of gold with nothing at all to show for it. Doesn't seem fair to me.
-
Hmmmm....in the spirit of discussion, I will answer your questions, Zhofe...let me be clear, I'm not trying to be prickly, or anything, your questions are good.
1)And how are the "lead characters" chosen then?
By the GM. At the beginning, it might make sense for GMs to choose two or three people they know are really sold RPers and know Layo well....Then as quests continiue, others would be chosen
2) What drives them to actually gather others?
For starters, the need to stay alive, since most quests can't be completed by 2 or 3 people. In addition, they wouldn't want to disappoint the Gms or other players involved. I think self-interest plays a role here. If I was chosen, I would want to be sure I got it right so other players and GMs would know i had my act together.
3) How can we be sure they wiill be responsible? 4) Will they even be able to make it to the actual quest?
Well, see number 2 for most of my response. As I stated earlier, when the GM and lead players discuss this at the beginning, obviously the GM impresses on them how important this and they all make sure they can in fact take lead roles.
Perhaps this approach simply isn't practical...but I am thinking about what Leanthar said about us, the players, taking roles in making this world happen. To me, this seems a great way to do it and one that keeps us in RP mode the most.
Again, just my thoughts. I await your rebuttal with much anticipation! ;)
Imperious
-
In response to number 1. If the GMs choose known "good RPers" then we have a bit of the same problem with the same people being on every quest. We also already have a little bit of this, as I don't believe I have been on many quests where Ozy wasn't sitting in the background. However, I suppose it could work if the GMs spread out their selections, but then again, this is a stress on them.
In response to number 2. Okay, I give you that, I don't want to die either, and I know I cannot stop the great evil mummy hoard by myself.
In response to numbers 3 and 4. The first part I will give you, but what about the second part. What if this role-play is 3 days before the quest, and that player simply cannot be online in 3 days. They may be less apt then to alert other players and thus get a good party started.
Now, let us assume that these things go without a hitch, and the player makes a post in the Wild Surge Inn section of the forums.
What changes between this and the calendar sign up besides possibly a more in-depth post? people will still try to be the first to sign up for such things, and you've simply moved the problem. If however the player only goes to people he/she knows, then the selection is unfair, as there is a large group of players that simply never had a chance to get in at all.
I think it could work well for some quests, but I still think that the calendar is the most practical way for players to know what is going on. I understand it isn't the best device from a role-playing standpoint, but as I have mentioned before, occasionally we must make compromises in our role-playing for the practicality of real-life. If you have a problem with that statement please say so and I will ignore all of your BRBs and AFKs, heh ...
I am not really against the idea of RPing into quests, and I think the situation does sound very fun and alot more realistic, but I don't think it really solves the problem at hand.
-
Imperious, while this may be a good idea and a great way to facilitate RP, the "lead characters" cannot possibly know every player in the database and would have to seek out those he/she is familiar with to join them in the quest. What you would be left with is loosely the same groups questing together over and over again.
-
Excellent ripostes, Zhofe and jjkolb: well done
I, of course, shall respond! (clearly not much to do at work today!) ;)
I will only say this: A few days ago, I posted a note in the Wild Surge Inn for some players of approximately levels 5 - 9 to join me on occasion, just to serve as an informal "adventuring party" and to RP...I got a few messages from players I have interacted with on occasion, and a few from players I had never met before ingame. This is from a post that had nothing to do with a quest or anything qutie so execiting, just a chance to get together hopefully fairly regularly and RP. So I think you can achieve a balance and not just always have the same people, especially if the "lead characters" are changed for every quest. I don't imagine for a moment you need to know every player in the database...
What if one might add a few details in a post, for example: "seeking wizard of low (middle, high, etc) training for
so-and-so quest...specialty in..." So maybe you get four wizards "applying", and the lead characters have to decide who might be best...a test of their leadership and cooperative abilities, who knows?
Plus, there are ways that DMs could bring different groups together....perhapas make the lead characters a Drow and a character who hates Drows...ask them to bring five colleagues...boom...adventure...lots of tension...see what happens...
I think I had another point but can't remember everything you all said...oh, well!
I happily admit that we must at times submit to the limitations real life (although I try to avoid it). but many seem to be in agreement that the current system is...lacking. Why not put the onus on us and try something new?
-
I simply do not think that the current system is so lacking that it cannot be fixed.
Also, I believe that eliminating the calendar in favor of role-playing and player driven posts would harm some of the more casual players who would simply want to see if a quest was available that they could make.
-
a comprimise between these two positions is:
1) keep the calendar
2) only only "quest approvers" (lead characters, GMs, etc) to sign people up.
Quests on the calendar would be phrased in terms of a rumor, something to generate conversation in-game. The task for someone who wished to join the quest would be to ask around town until they found someone who knew something ... and after some talk, that someone could put them on the calendar. Takes the work off the GM. Makes for more RP in game.
I think we want to keep the calendar for two other reasons:
1) it quickly shows just how many quests are in layonara, which is good from a marketing standpoint
2) it helps people prevent simultanteous quests, so we don't have 100 people on west server at the same time.
-
Again, the problem is, casual gamers who can't spend hours running around trying to find one person so that they can go on a quest.
-
I don't think you have to eliminate the calendar -- I just think you could have most calendar events coordinated by players...like I mentioned, players could post events on the calendar as a way to increase awareness, get people, etc.
In addition, I think this approach could help in bring casual gamers. Let's say the GM on purpose chooses a "casual player" to be a lead player in a quest...in that way, he/she gets more into the game and may end up meeting other people, etc.
-
Zhofe - 7/13/2005 3:16 PM
Again, the problem is, casual gamers who can't spend hours running around trying to find one person so that they can go on a quest.
I think a lot of "casual" players are running around anyway, trying to level up, trying to figure out things. Another way to look at is: casual gamers can't spend time writing up a bio just so they can join layonara.
Making people write bios improves the roleplay of the community by weeding out the hack-and-slashers. Making people *find* a quest by actually talking to people improves the roleplay by weeding out the "i'm here, entertain me" crowd. If talking to people in-game were a requirement to going on a quest (which makes great sense from a roleplay standpoint), then I think the quality of the roleplay on those quests can't help but improve, since there'd be more motivated people, just as there are because of the bios.
I've been running around town saying, "Hey did you hear what happened last night?" People eat it up. It's what's *persistent* about this PW ... that there's more than a "suit up, show up" schedule.
(btw, i know i'm new ... just saying it like i see it now .. my opinions are very likely worth the bits they're displayed with.)
-
hmmm, I tried not to post here but somethings need to be mentioned.
My work schedule changes every 3- 4 weeks. So untill the last week of july I don't really know my august schedule. I can either sign up for a few and try to make them. Or not sign up at all.
I basically have 2 days a week I can play on quests. I love Layonara and before my new position I played alot. Now I try to squeex in a hour a night here and there. Untill the 2 days off. I really don't want to miss quests cause I couldn't get on and find a player before hand.
The calander is great. I would hate to see that go. Please don't remove it.
We need to sit back and think a moment. We have recently had a major influx of players lately. Great job on that team. It will even out, just be patient. Either the Layo team will get more dm's or some players will leave, or both. But you can't just start changing things when we have a week or two with full quests. Vyris ran a quest. Those quest goers came to the forum and started saying how great it was. So more people signed up for the quest. I know a gm doesn't want to have to make a descision of telling others they can't join. And I also know vyris wants everyone to have a blast. I offered to sit this one out so he could concentrate on a smaller party. He said no. He wanted me to have fun too. (Thanks Vy)
So if a party looks too big, grab a few players and go run your own quest. If you had your heart on attending the dm quest then there is nothing wrong with that either. But when the GM rolls for positions in the quest(which I like the idea) then be nice to the GM and get the others that will not be attending and have some fun.
Etin
the reason I like the idea of rolling for spots if there are to many is because it can be done by the gm. The Layo team in a whole doesn't have to change structure. Orth doesn't have to write that magic code to do something and can concentrate on things that make cole stronger ;) They don't have to remove the great calander they have here.
-
Just read this in the april world meeting log:
"We have a system called PC Quests. Bascially NPC's around the world will give out a quest and the quest is to find X PC (yes PC) and discuss Y subject.. when that has been completed you can go back to that npc and get a reward just like a normal quest. it is a normal quest but it involves established pc's that have info to spread"
Heard there are a few of these. Wouldn't it be neat if this mechanism could be used to promote news of quests? (Maybe it already is... not sure)
-
I've been thinking about the various comments that people have posted here about having the players organize more quests on their own. It's a great idea, and really the only practical one. It seems to me that there are only a few significant differences between a PC run and a GM run quest.
One is the GM's ability to control the world and tailor it to the quest. This will never be possible for players. However, it would be possible for a GM to drop certain items or creatures at a specific location at a specific time. This is somewhat like a hugely simplified CDQ. The player puts in a request for a new camp of his nemesis, the much hated trolls, to spring up in the mountains. She or he then leads a group of people to the area to put down this new threat. This wouldn't be much of a burden for the GM's, and as long as no one else came along and cleaned out the trolls, the questing party would be able to have a slightly customized experience. It would break up the "so what will it be tonight, the caves, the crypt, mowing the broken forest?"
The other difference between GM and player led quests is the XP reward. Player led events only have the experience points that can be earned by killing things. This limits the type of adventure and the level and nature of the party. Imagine that your goal was to rescue a hostage from the troll camp. All the approaches involving invisible mages and stealthy rogues will work, and will net exactly 0 XP. The approach of going in with a wave of fighters, axes swinging, will earn 1,000 XP. I think this contributes to the mayhem and bloodlust seen in the recent "Red Light Mayhem" event. Players are conditioned to kill everything on sight as a way to maximize XP. When these players get put into a GM event, the conditioning overtakes the thinking. This is particularly true for new players coming from single-player NWN or other more battle oriented servers. In the PnP days, people were role players. But with NWN, a lot of people are video game players. Tough transition. If the same GM that dropped the troll camp and the hostage could be called on the GM channel after the mission and check that, yes, the hostage was indeed alive and safe, and reward the result and the problem solving and teamwork that went into it, then people would start to think outside the "kill kill kill" box.
Sorry for the analysis. I'm an engineer and can't stop analyzing, even a game. I love Layonara and have improved my roleplaying skills quite a bit during the past few weeks. Thanks to everyone, especially the GM's who have done custom things for me.