DM quest limits

[Chnmmr]

I'll probably be flamed for this, I dont care.  I really suggest that people are limited on the number of quests they can take part in.  Why?  Some people (example myself) because of timezone can only attend very few of the planned quests.  And when I need to fight 10 other people for places on a limited slot quest it is -very- aggrevating when I see the people get in already involved in other quest.

I would -love- to attend quests but sadly my time zone AND people's want to be in every quest possible means I always miss out.  And I don't think its fair at all.  Today I wasnt able to make the roll on a quest that I wanted to attend... which happened to be the only quest line that was suitable for my timezone... so this is another month I am questless.  

Feel free to call this whining if you really want to.  I am stating a fact for me.  Currently the fact people can join however many quests they want means I get into none.  And on a server where quests mean alot and provide much of the xp for higher levels...  and a big opportunity to meet people and do things that affect the world.  I really feel left out.

Also how about more one off quests?  Less quests that stretch 3,4 10 sessions long each asking for returners only.  Opens up a lot more quest slots for people.

[Rayenoir]

I disagree with your suggestion that people be limited on number able to join.  Because speaking as someone who formerly could attend a lot and now can attend very few due to work scheduling, I have seen both ends of the spectrum.  I would *not* want to limit someone else just because I can't go.  But I do agree, I'd prefer to see fewer of the "10-week-long and closed party" quests and more spontaneous and short-term quests.  If there were more shorter ones, then people who miss one get more chances to attend another, even if they did end up closed.  I dislike the idea of putting a penalty on others just because their amount of time and geographical position simply happens to be advantageous.  I do, however, like the idea of more opportunity.  I realize that this puts more on the shoulders of the GMs, but hey... they're there for a reason.

EDIT:  left out a "not" where there should've been one.  thanks Rev!

[Blackguy]

You are simply caught in a bad time. There is not alot of GMT timezone quest atm. 6 months ago, there was nothing -but- GMT timezone quests. It fluctuates alot, and you just need to carry on forward.

[ThrainSil]

In the end I would have to vote no on limiting quests.  With that said sometimes there seems like two worlds on Layo with the regular world and the quest world in which many things happen but only a few are in on it.

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

Blackguy's right; a while ago, I couldn't find a quest that I could make for the life of me, as everything was GMT, with one or two on AEST.

I didn't end up getting to go on last night's quest anyhow, due to some seriously aggrivating connection issues; I have to apologize for filling that slot. I'd been looking forward to going, but... Things happen. The only reason I wasn't rolling with the rest was because I PMed Nova before the first one, stating my hopes to come.

I really think the solution here is fewer long-running quests that are closed at whatever point, and more short, 1&2-shot non-closed quests. Coyote's Non-Lawful quest was good example of that - nay, a GREAT example of that. As was Ogzuhimmal's Mind-Flayer/Beholder one-shot... Though that was about a year ago.

The following equations will demonstrate, SCIENTIFICALLY, how the closed status of a quest, and the number and length of quests, affects fun.

Open Quest = Fun.

Closed Quest = Not nearly as fun.

Fewer, Longer Quests = Fun-ish

MORE MORE MORE, Shorter Quests = FUN TO THE MAX.

See? Scientific PROOF.

[Faldred]

Even though I have some of the same frustrations, I would vote "no" on limiting the quests as suggested.  While Stephen's post has a certain mathematical flair, there should be room for all types of quests or quest series, to meet the desires of all members of the community.  Short and/or sponteneous quests would give more players the chance to participate, and that's a good thing.  But they shouldnt have to be at the expense of long running quests consisting of weekly (or so) sessions, which I would imagine gives the players involved a lot more "PnP feel".

However, as a suggestion to my fellow players (and to the DMs), if a (non-plot) quest has more people trying to join than are allowed by the DM, consider letting those who don't get the chance to participate in many quests have first priority before resorting to dice rolls.

[Chnmmr]

We can't have both without more DMs.  As it stands now the majority of quests are multi-session ones which tend to be closed in some respects and have far more people intested in them than there are places.  To make things worse some people are getting on many quests while others can't even manage to get on one.

Whats the point of a server advertising lots of DM run quests when people can't even get into one?

if a (non-plot) quest has more people trying to join than are allowed by the DM, consider letting those who don't get the chance to participate in many quests have first priority before resorting to dice rolls.

On all the servers I've been on, this has never ever worked.  Unless rules are put in place players -will- do what they want; which is currently getting into as many quests as possible without care that others are trying to get into even just one.

So ask yourself this.  What is more important?  More people being happy that they got to be in a quest?  Or cater to the fewer that manage to get into all the long winded quests.

[Weeblie]

Looking at the last month I can count:

Open Sessions: 1111111111111111
Closed Sessions: 1111
CDQs (or similar): 111111

And stopped checking at the 18th of the month. As it was quite pointless to continue. I just don't understand what you mean with "the majority of quests are multi-session ones which tend to be closed in some respects".

[IDii]

Yeah, I've noticed it's been going on for a while now. Think most of the quests being run now are closed-party, long-running series quests where 3-5 people can get to join every few weeks with a lucky roll. The whole thing is a double-edged sword in quite a many ways. Perfect quests for some, and for some it can be pretty frustrating to find a quest to join and have some fun.

Anyway, here's a GM's (well a former Layonara lead quest GM anyway) view on the matter. So nothing official... just me being bored and typing out something!

Easier to run, way more interesting and enjoyable for all the participants. It's easy to see why most quests are the series type. They are usually far more enjoyable for both the player and the GM running the quest. Having the same players and NPCs and so on adds depth to the quest and the character development happening during the quest. It's easier for players to get into the plot when it's the same thing going on for weeks, but it's also significantly easier for the GM to weave the story further based on the earlier events on the series and not having to create a new base story every time you start running a quest makes the whole GM job more enjoyable in general.
In the end it's a lot like running a PnP campaign, where people get familiar with each other and there's a lot more space for interesting roleplaying during and between the quest sessions. Also quests like this can have an effect on the world... which a short one session quest would never even hope to achieve.

Now the 3-5 hour single session quests can be pretty difficult and stressing at times. Sometimes they're great fun, sometimes nothing goes right and it's just one great headache. I used to run a lot of these back in the day, for example if anyone can remember my insane gnome quests... heh. Simple quests with crazy gnomes and mindless plots.
With a single session quest you have several things making it difficult. First you have a time limit... Usually about 5 hours max since after that it gets kind of tiresome and people usually have to leave. So within the 5 hour or so limit you have to get the setting for the quest done... Get the players on the quest to understand what's even going on or why they would all of a sudden want to travel to a dangerous mountain cavern full of deadly traps to recover a poor gnome's lost lucky screwdriver.
So you see the story has to be short and simple... but at the same time dynamic and enjoyable. And it can't be too difficult to figure out... Often on long quest series you see the great adventurers (or misadventurers rather) following what they *think* is a clue for hours and hours... Which can lead to some fun RP and adventuring and so on but on a single 5 hour quest you can't afford that.

So all in all it's really no wonder why I don't see that many shorter quests. They can be a pain at times... With possibly new players, new NPCs, new setting, new plot, and less time to manage it all. Also the level of roleplaying usually doesn't get close to what you can achieve on a series of quests... since there's a lot more feeling of involvement in that case.
However for some players it's the only kind of quests they can join. And it can be quite frustrating to play on a roleplay server with a lot of quests being run but nothing you can join.

Now it would be ideal if the GMs could balance the quests they run, and I think it's being done anyway... Just it can easily get out of control when your quest series span a lot more events than you originally intented to. I'm sure almost any GM could mention a quest series they intented to be a single session or a few parts but lasted far longer.
Perfect balance there would be some quests for the community, the single session quests for those people with a bit less flexible schedules. Then of course there's the CDQ's which are a different type of quest on their own. And then there's the third kind of quests... long-lasting series with much more feeling of involvement for both the GM and the players.

This was kind of attempted before. When there were a few GM's focusing on CDQ's, some focusing on more important quests/events and some focusing on just ordinary quests. But I think it should be all the GM's splitting their questing time between the different quest types.


Then about the actual topic of this thread... Quest limits might be a good idea really, if it could be done in a reasonable and fair way. But there can be quite a few opinions about what's reasonable and what's fair.
Then again not sure how fair it is to have a few players join every possible quest and then some who can't join the few they actually could manage because someone else already has the spot on that quest and a few others too. Don't think I can really say whether I agree or disagree with it.

Having more quests in all the timezones would be the ideal solution really... there's just the matter of getting the people to run the quests, which isn't all that easy.

[laurabunny]

I think I've been on a total of four quests, one spontaneous, including someone else's CDQ.  In the case of the two regularly scheduled quests, I went prepared to wander away cheerfully should too many people show up.  However, I don't think there were more than five for either of those.  Certainly not the twenty-some who had signed up.

Perhaps the real problem is that the quest "descriptions" on the calendar are not very descriptive.  Some of them list level limits, group size limit, RP vs. hack & slash, and have a short paragraph describing the premise.  Those are the only ones I would consider signing up for.  Some are "details to come later," although the details never show up on the calendar at all.  A lot of them seem, to me, to give some very basic idea of what the quest is about, but don't state whether it's open or closed, what the level limits are, how big the party can be, or any other details that might help to decide whether or not the quest is appropriate for YOU.  Only the first type of description I mentioned is particularly inviting to someone who's just looking for a quest to join.  The others tend to leave one with the impression that they're aimed at someone else, who already knows the details.  Maybe they are; in that case, there DO need to be more open quests.  Otherwise, I think quest descriptions should be required to conform (at least somewhat) to the situation-levels-groupsize-type format.

Thank you.  That is all. *bows*

[Chnmmr]

Weeblie - 12/4/2006  3:23 PM

Looking at the last month I can count:

Open Sessions: 1111111111111111
Closed Sessions: 1111
CDQs (or similar): 111111

And stopped checking at the 18th of the month. As it was quite pointless to continue. I just don't understand what you mean with "the majority of quests are multi-session ones which tend to be closed in some respects".

Surely you are not taking into account that many of the quests are 'open' but preference given to returners from part 1 or whatever of the quest.  Essentially thats a closed quest as maybe there is one or two available places sought out by 5 or more non-returners.

[Dorganath]

I'd like to chime in here.
  First, the broad strokes with which the quest situation is being painted is not really looking at the whole picture. And in reality, this stuff goes in cycles. Some other points  
  A series does not mean "closed".
  Many series started out as one-shot or short-run quests.
  Don't look at who is all signed up for a quest and decide not to attend. Often, many people don't show. Take the chance.
  In most cases, the length of a quest series is determined by the players, not the GMs. In almost every case of which I am aware, the GMs planned for a quest series of a particular length, and the actual length ended up being significantly longer because of the actions of players and their characters.
  A good example of this is the Angel's Tear series, which has now been running for over a year. It's been open to anyone (preference given to those who have shown dedication to it, of course) for its entire length except for the few times where due to geographic and/or temporal necessity the party was locked into a particular configuration. It is currently in such a state right now, because the party is in Voltrex. Having someone just show up fresh on a continent that is restricted just would not make sense. There are several people who are on the quest now who were not at the beginning and who indeed had a lot of catching up to do, and there are several who were with the quest for a very long time but who no longer participate. There have also been a few who have come for a few sessions, contributed and left. And this is certainly one of those quests that has been elongated by the actions of its players and their characters, though it was never designed to be short.
  Just some things to think about.

[minerva]

My two true

You cannot please everyone.  
My Explorers series is just that , a series.  
Why?  As IDii stated so well, it is because that is what makes it enjoyable for me as a DM to run. A story that can change the world as well as have an impact on the characters that participate in it.  It is open to new players at any time, you just need a reason to be there RP wise.
In an effort to make it available to more people I split the quest into two groups. Now Geryon and I have 24ish questers to participate instead of 12. A dozen more spots.  Not every one can make every quest. This leads the possiblity of open spots for new people. In the last series only once did I have so many returning players that they had to roll spots.  Broad generalization but there is ususally one spot  or more up for grabs.  

All that said:
I have some free time Fri am.  The saga of Iona Woodenspoon continues.

[Weeblie]

Chnmmr - 12/4/2006  5:00 PM

Weeblie - 12/4/2006  3:23 PM

Looking at the last month I can count:

Open Sessions: 1111111111111111
Closed Sessions: 1111
CDQs (or similar): 111111

And stopped checking at the 18th of the month. As it was quite pointless to continue. I just don't understand what you mean with "the majority of quests are multi-session ones which tend to be closed in some respects".

Surely you are not taking into account that many of the quests are 'open' but preference given to returners from part 1 or whatever of the quest.  Essentially thats a closed quest as maybe there is one or two available places sought out by 5 or more non-returners.

Yes, I do indeed count the quest series giving preference to returns. And I also do disagree with your last statement.

On the quest series I've been too, I have only seen the dices been used ONCE! It was... well... a really large amount of people showing up at that time. And, as with most cases, people only attend a few sessions, so the free spots were available again shortly afterwards.

In my own experience (which might be because I'm mostly playing at Aussie times when the server has low traffic), it's not the "there is too many" that's the problem, but rather "there is too few".

Don't be scared away by the number of sign up. Usually, 50% or less actually shows up. Also, don't be afraid of the "previous attendants have preference". Not everyone can attend every single session in the quest series. The chance for at least some spot to be free is extremely high.

I've been to many quest serie sessions, spontanteous quest sessions, short sessions quests, etc. I've only seen the dices been rolled twice: Once at that time I mentioned, the other, on the Defence of the Great Oak quest (one of the end plot quests).

If you haven't had the opportunity to attend quests due to the fact that there was no slots left, just keep trying. It was most probably simply bad luck.

Edit: Forgot to mention that even though the dices were used on the Defence of the Great Oak quest, no one was rejected still (due to some IC choices)!

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

Good points all around, but I really only have one point to make...  I've been here over a year, now, and I've seen the cycles they're talking about. Many of the people posting in this thread have been here much longer, and have seen those very same cycles. The answer really is to just stick it out; your time will come.  This goes for everyone.

[LordCove]

In my own experience (which might be because I'm mostly playing at Aussie times when the server has low traffic), it's not the "there is too many" that's the problem, but rather "there is too few".  -  Weeblie



I've seen that a few times. 30 people have signed up, and only 5 attended. As I recall, the GM's had to quickly replan, making it a little easier.

But on a side note....keep glancing at the Calendar. I've just spotted 3 new quests available to join which must have been put on tonight. Poor Woodenspoon.

[Dezza]

LordCove - 12/4/2006  5:53 AM

In my own experience (which might be because I'm mostly playing at Aussie times when the server has low traffic), it's not the "there is too many" that's the problem, but rather "there is too few".  -  Weeblie

I've seen that a few times. 30 people have signed up, and only 5 attended. As I recall, the GM's had to quickly replan, making it a little easier.

__________________________
I have to agree with this. I often have planned elaborate single session quests expecting the number of people signed up to attend and when we get to it only a handful show.

I think another concern might be the people who sign up to every possible quest they can without even thinking about them and then don't show up to half of them anyway. I have noted over time that some people do this on a regular basis. Not always the same people mind you. When this happens people look at the numbers and don't even bother attending..especially if it would require them to maybe get up and hour earlier or stay up an hjour later in order to make the event if there is a chance they will have done it for nothing.

Also in chmmnr's case if you show up for a quest that you can actually get to only to be turfed out and half the group going on the quest have already been on a number of quests that month...well thats got to smart a bit.  So I think there just needs to be a bit of consideration for peoples concerns and a realisation of where they come from before everyone starts voicing objections to their opinions.

[Pen N Popper]

As someone that very, very rarely is able to make it to quests, I'll add the following:  If you are an infrequent quest goer, don't be afraid to say this OOCly during the dice roll portion.  Everyone on the server is pretty friendly and I suspect you'd get someone to offer you a spot.  Also, if you PM the GM running the quest ahead of time with your reasons for wanting to join the quest (either IC reason or OOC reason) you may get in anyway.  That said, use this wisely and be respectful of others that may be worse off than yourself.  
  Also, you may just have to face the reality that you won't make any GM quests.  There is a player event calendar too:  No XP, but the RP is often on par.

[laurabunny]

Awww... I thought I had made a good point.

*gets ignored*

*sulks*

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

*Pets Bunny.* That's okay, you did make a good point. Have a brownie.