Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

OOC General Discussion

Moderators: Active DMs, Forum Moderators

Seven Sons of Sin
Posts: 2198
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:40 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Seven Sons of Sin »

I'll affirm that I agree with Griefmaker and WanderingPoet about creating incentives to be a better roleplayer should have a greater hand in designing systems.

I don't think, however, we should give incentive for longevity in character or prolonged, dynamic, "epic" tenure.

But also, Scurvy Cur, I wonder how much the "higher RPR = a thank you for being a good RPer" sentiment still has roots in 2018 design. Ten years ago the XP offered by a 30er or a 40er was much more of a noticeable luxury than today. Sure, today a higher RPR will scale dramatically higher ... but leveling is a more enjoyable experience than before.

So maybe RPR equating to an XP boost isn't enough of an incentive, and isn't enough of a "thank you."

There's always going to be subjectivity around RPR, there's always going to be gossip, there's always going to be disagreement, but since irongron's inauguration there has been significant policy decisions that have really made RPR a more forgiving process. There's been more transparency about DM approval. Your RPR isn't going to get lowered for infractions anymore - you take an XP hit instead. RPR is less malleable.

I don't really know how to give incentive to roleplaying beyond "good storytelling." I inherently find value in that, I just wish there were more systems in place in Arelith to promote that as the chief goal, as Septire originally laid out.

All I know is that RPR is overshadowed by the Reward System. I don't think the Reward System goes away - I just think these two systems need to be on more equal footing.
Previous:
Oskarr of Procampur, Ro Irokon, Nahal Azyen, Nelehein Afsana (of Impiltur), Vencenti Medici, Nizram ali Balazdam, (Roznik) Naethandreil
User avatar
Hunter548
Posts: 1869
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 5:40 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Hunter548 »

Seven Sons of Sin wrote:I'll affirm that I agree with Griefmaker and WanderingPoet about creating incentives to be a better roleplayer should have a greater hand in designing systems.

I don't think, however, we should give incentive for longevity in character or prolonged, dynamic, "epic" tenure.

But also, Scurvy Cur, I wonder how much the "higher RPR = a thank you for being a good RPer" sentiment still has roots in 2018 design. Ten years ago the XP offered by a 30er or a 40er was much more of a noticeable luxury than today. Sure, today a higher RPR will scale dramatically higher ... but leveling is a more enjoyable experience than before.

So maybe RPR equating to an XP boost isn't enough of an incentive, and isn't enough of a "thank you."

There's always going to be subjectivity around RPR, there's always going to be gossip, there's always going to be disagreement, but since irongron's inauguration there has been significant policy decisions that have really made RPR a more forgiving process. There's been more transparency about DM approval. Your RPR isn't going to get lowered for infractions anymore - you take an XP hit instead. RPR is less malleable.

I don't really know how to give incentive to roleplaying beyond "good storytelling." I inherently find value in that, I just wish there were more systems in place in Arelith to promote that as the chief goal, as Septire originally laid out.

All I know is that RPR is overshadowed by the Reward System. I don't think the Reward System goes away - I just think these two systems need to be on more equal footing.
We had threads (And discussions on the discord) complaining about how much faster 30 and 40 RPR players get adventure exp and thus get levels than other people. Given the way the quest system works, said players do get vastly more benefit from it.
UilliamNebel wrote: Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:24 pm You're right. Participating in the forums was a mistake. Won't do this again.
Anime Sword Fighter wrote: I have seen far too many miniskirt anime slave girls.
User avatar
Septire
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:05 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Septire »

On Scurvy's post:

On merit: Arelith originally had the exact system you are describing as disastrous during Jjjerm's time: Content was gated behind RPR and DMs could give out items or other things largely at their own discretion without much oversight. Jjjerm had the power to overturn decisions but largely trusted the DM team to make the right move. Certainly we moved away from this style of things when Mithreas took over, but I wouldn't say that this shift ensured Arelith's longevity in its own right, nor that keeping the old system would be a death sentence to the server. There was a long period where the DM team was overzealous in doling out punishments, and automated systems were really starting to take root. That lasted for a while, tapered off, then Mith stepped down and Irongron took over. We then started reworking a lot of the systems, including the 5% roll system, respawn, and a bunch of others I am sure you had your hand in as well for balance testing. I would say things started to shift back towards the earlier style in some ways (especially if you consider grandfathered characters, artefacts, runecrafting, as a form of stacking incentive), and despite this, the playerbase is still going strong. Having been there when planetouched were removed as an RPR race there was a pretty strong sentiment of regret among the playerbase that their RP concepts were being placed on the top-shelf, out of reach to all but the most dedicated of grinders.

First, without a subjective system of what is good RP and what isn't, there is no directionality for RP improvement. If we wade out into the mire of "there is nothing objective that can be determined from anything subjective", it becomes impossible to even begin to qualify RP. By that logic we can't claim that RP is good or bad anywhere without first escaping the subjectivity argument, and have little hope for any player "improving" at any rate. Yet, these sorts of assessments still happen all the time on the server: DMs continue to step in on RP they deem to be unsuitable for the server and dish out punishments. What gives them the right to decide what is constructive and destructive RP if they're ultimately just players? It's because they are the referees, they have been given a level of authority to referee the game to ensure its integrity and fun! The goal of an RP server is to support roleplay. If you can't define desirable roleplay in any capacity, you don't have an RP server, you have Second Life. So concessions are made towards maintaining integrity. If it can be done in the capacity of positive punishment, it certainly can also be achieved through positive reinforcement, and reinforcement of good RP is a huge morale boost and a lot nicer than just punishing the bad.

Second point: Visibility is of course an issue, I don't think there's any escaping that one. Background characters would need to rely on observant DMs, a ping from a player to check their RP, or from another player to check a background character's RP. It was already mentioned as one of the key things which would need to be addressed in any system. Arguably, the 5% system is very much blind to a character's RP as it is, and I don't see that as a benefit, even if fair.

Third point: We already have accusations of unfairness, favoritism, clique boosting and OOC corruption as is, as you mentioned. I think this relates back to my point of just having a little faith in people to do the right thing. Without that, the conspiracy theories just run rampant. I argue that turning a blind eye to roleplay, good or bad, makes the situation worse: Now we have situations where players can go on long, fast-paced grinding sessions without fear of their RPR being docked (not that it really matters anyways - the harder you grind the less relevant it becomes), and subsequently rolling for rewards into a system that doesn't bother checking if any RP really took place. You get apathetic players who really don't care what their RPR is (EDIT: With the adventuring XP system this might be more of a factor now, but there still doesn't seem to be strong interest in trying to adjust RPR based on those I've played with) or what other players think of them, and nothing exists in the structure to really bother with any sort of improvement to RP. If they want to play unique stuff, just grind out 5%, simple as that, RP isn't even a factor into the equation at that point. There's no checks for roleplay quality, because we don't measure quality out of concerns over subjectivity. Not evaluating RP subjectively, or tying rewards into that assessment, comes with its own set of problems. It is bizarre to me that subjective roleplay assessment would not be a mainstay of a roleplay-first server for the aforementioned reasons, but I suppose it's not an issue because subjective roleplay assessment is and always will happen so long as there are DMs, and the whole objectivity/subjectivity mire becomes more of a thought experiment than a model of what is really happening in the regulation of the playerbase.

Fourth: This one requires DM discretion the most, and for DMs to supplement what players are doing rather than oversteering the narrative. The way you describe it though paints a very bleak picture of the DM team, one that suggests that players pandering to the DMs get all the cookies and that players must relinquish their agency to the DM team. I've not found the DM team to be this way in the slightest having worked alongside them so I don't really know what more to say on that. It's a fairly dystopian outlook onto the DM team and playerbase as a whole, and woefully generalizing.

All of your concerns are valid points, but I don't think we're going to roll 1's across the board on such a system. There may be egregious instances you can cite, maybe where a DM made an error or a good player went unnoticed, but I do not believe they will crop up nearly as much as the post suggests it will.

I see it providing more good than harm.
Last edited by Septire on Thu Mar 01, 2018 5:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Septire
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:05 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Septire »

Seven Sons of Sin wrote:All I know is that RPR is overshadowed by the Reward System. I don't think the Reward System goes away - I just think these two systems need to be on more equal footing.
This summarizes it quite nicely. I don't know if it needs to be RPR precisely or just one-offs done by DMs based on specific instances of good RP that they catch in the moment, but there seems to be a clear disparity between the reward system and actually telling stories.
User avatar
One Two Three Five
Posts: 1139
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:09 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by One Two Three Five »

I've always thought RPR was kind of, uh, a bad system for reasons scurvy's outlined (among others)? I don't think more prominence of the thing is the answer.

Also, and I mean no offense, can you tl;dr your posts sometimes?

Edit: Also, like, I know of a handful of characters from back when I started that are still around (they maybe shouldn't be?) and I can only imagine what the server would look like without incentive to roll every now and then. Hell, pay enough attention to servers without retirement plans for long enough and you'll get a preview. I know of several servers where the characters in power and doing things have been the same ones for upwards of ten years.
The devil does not need any more advocates
Clerics are just socially acceptable warlocks.
User avatar
Septire
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:05 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Septire »

The tl;dr is just this: DMs should be able to positively reinforce RP through any means deemed reasonable by the admins and head DM, and I feel DMs need to be given more leeway on how they support stories. It's not necessarily about the RPR system, or the reward system or whatever other mechanical systems exist; these are auxiliary points. I'm talking about good story = good cookie.

Everything else I've posted in this thread is just argumentation to dismantle the common arguments I've seen over the years to try to reinforce the point I am trying to make (as above), and hopefully catch something from another player I might have missed. Naturally, other systems are going to get pulled into the argument that have tried to facilitate good story = good cookie in the past but were a little obtuse in how individual characters were rewarded, leaning towards unlocking perks for players moving forward from then on, or locking those same perks away. This is different because it is character-specific.
Last edited by Septire on Thu Mar 01, 2018 5:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Tourmaline
Posts: 308
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 7:51 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Tourmaline »

There's a bit of a weird undercurrent here that RP is drudgework and you have to dangle a carrot on a stick to get people to do it better. Are there people on Arelith who don't love role-playing but will go through the motions to level their character faster or get a 5% roll? I feel like either you're inspired with who you're playing or you're not (and there are times I have been not, which is when I usually -delete) and the only thing the promise of a rolled character reward has done for me is kept me grinding to 16 if I was already close so I could get a -1 ECL or finally make that forest gnome.
User avatar
One Two Three Five
Posts: 1139
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:09 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by One Two Three Five »

Yeahhhhhh. This thread is basically predicated on the opposite of my 'everyone knows it's an rp server' assumption.
The devil does not need any more advocates
Clerics are just socially acceptable warlocks.
User avatar
Septire
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:05 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Septire »

It's not so much that RP is drudgework as it is grinding is drudgework to access roleplay concepts that are gated behind -delete_character.

I'd rather the uniqueness of -delete_character manifest itself not at character creation, but just through roleplaying any character well, which then allows any given character to become special by virtue of the RP and time put into it and skip out on the mindless grind completely.

Of course, leave the system in for those who like it I guess.
User avatar
Scurvy Cur
Posts: 1346
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2015 3:48 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Scurvy Cur »

A couple of Many things:
Septire wrote:On merit: Arelith originally had the exact system you are describing as disastrous during Jjjerm's time: Content was gated behind RPR.
This is true. And I have no desire to move back to those bad old days. Ungating all of that stuff was a move in the right direction, and I think the server as a whole is better off, with better RP quality and numerically fewer abject shitters than the old days.
Septire wrote:DMs could give out items or other things largely at their own discretion without much oversight
This is untrue.

I DMed during those days, and there was a very strict policy on DM reward handouts. XP was to exceed no more than a few hundred for most events, with a few longer events awarding one or two thousand. DMs could hand out a token amount of gold, but if it hit 4 digits, questions would be asked.

During my tenure, more than 1 DM was told to take back what they had given out, and was scolded for being too generous and handing out a couple thousand gold for a quest.
Septire wrote:despite this, the playerbase is still going strong.
Playerbase, imo, is still going strong because the server is as broadly accessible as it is without DM assistance. It's also going strong because of the large amount of new content that's being put into the game.
Septire wrote:Third point: We already have accusations of unfairness, favoritism, clique boosting and OOC corruption as is, as you mentioned.
That they exist now does not mean that the suggestion will not make it worse. My concern is not that these problems will spring into existence where they formerly did not exist, but rather that they will go from odd grumblings in a few discords where they can largely be safely ignored, to a broad and arguably legitimate discussion for the entire community at large.
Septire wrote: By that logic we can't claim that RP is good or bad anywhere without first escaping the subjectivity argument, and have little hope for any player "improving" at any rate.
Fallacious.

There exists a reasonable metric that is completely independent of DM approval and has a lot more to do with the health and success of the server than any externally imposed metric: good RPers encourage other players to spend time around them and emulate them. Players improve all the time, because they get practice writing, they get practice designing and implementing character concepts, they learn from players around them, and grow generally more sophisticated.

Our server by and large has better RP now than it has at essentially any point in the past 12 years, and there are plenty of faces around that have been here for most of that journey, myself included. The improvement did not come because the DMs set out a series of rewards for the players, but because the players themselves have gotten more talented all on their own.

I've yet to see a player that has made significant improvement in striving for a high RPR. I have seen a couple of players disgrace themselves with overly inclusive pander RP trying though.
Septire wrote:Yet, these sorts of assessments still happen all the time on the server: DMs continue to step in on RP they deem to be unsuitable for the server and dish out punishment
Inaccurate, but worthy of clarification. DMs will step in on occasion, but in my experience, punishments are usually distributed for one or several of the following:

1) The player is breaking rules (this includes the in character at all times rule). This is not a judgement on the player's writing.
2) The player's RP is so flagrantly immersion breaking that some portion of the needs to stop. Again, this isn't actually all that subjective, and it's not really a judgement on the player's writing so much as it is removing writing elements that conflict with the established setting and ethos of the server.
3) The player's RP crosses some sort of RL taboo that we'd rather not have for reasons of comfort and wholesomeness. Again, not a judgement on the character's writing so much as a safeguard of server comforts.

Worth considering as well that there's a substantive difference between creating a floor below which we're unwilling to let server RP sink, and handing out cookies for what is subjectively deemed to be good. The former doesn't provide any of the players with goodies that can't be gotten through regular, unsupervised game play. The latter does.

I have yet to see a player stomped on because their RP has just not been up to snuff.
Septire wrote: Fourth: This one requires DM discretion the most, and for DMs to supplement what players are doing rather than oversteering the narrative. The way you describe it though paints a very bleak picture of the DM team, one that suggests that players pandering to the DMs get all the cookies and that players must relinquish their agency to the DM team. I've not found the DM team to be this way in the slightest having worked alongside them so I don't really know what more to say on that. It's a fairly dystopian outlook onto the DM team and playerbase as a whole, and woefully generalizing.
On the contrary. It paints a glowing view of the playerbase. This isn't in the least a slight on the DM team, but the fact of the matter is that a story that comes about because of a collection of individual characters played by individual players giving each character their all and few limits to where the plot will go will involve more detail, more creative energy, more emotion and soul than will an overarching plot where one person is juggling a gazillion NPCs, trying to make sure to include everyone (even those that really don't have any business being involved), and with only some small subset of the possible outcomes considered ahead of time. This is not to say that the DM team isn't doing their best, just that the best the DMs can do will never match the best the players can do acting of their own free agency.

Part of the reason you have likely not seen a whole lot of pandering on Arelith is that there actually isn't a lot to be gained from pandering. DM events are (properly) ephemeral. The rewards stay within the boundaries set out by what the players can do on their own. In the end, very that comes out of a DM event will have any bearing on where the server will go unless the rest of the playerbase agrees that it ought to (I have to take a moment here to differentiate special occurrences like Benwick's destruction; these are cases where the event was driven by a dev team decision, not purely player-DM interaction). I think you are, in effect, making my point for me here. We've largely avoided pandering, and have done so simply because it's not worth it to pander.

I've played other servers where the DMs could in fact hand out what they wanted and whose quests would permanently alter the module. They were panderfests, and I think they are also a more likely predictor of what will happen than a server where the pandering has never really been worth the effort.
Septire wrote:I see it providing more good than harm.
I mean, yes? Presumably, you'd not suggest something unless you thought it would be a net benefit. You're not, so near as I can tell, a malicious guy.

I disagree, however, and you did solicit feedback.

User avatar
Septire
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:05 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Septire »

Good post. I'll have to think more on the feedback I've seen so far.
User avatar
Seekeepeek
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:44 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Seekeepeek »

The only player i know, who have won the 5% roll twice had a 30 RPR the whole time. I don't think one should underestimate how much XP they get from adventure XP each 6 minutes.
TimeAdept
Posts: 1337
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:02 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by TimeAdept »

5% roll isnt indicative of RPR though, just how quickly you can grind a GoH Druid or, before, Goblin Warlock.
Cataclysm of Iron
Posts: 235
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:01 pm

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Cataclysm of Iron »

Griefmaker wrote:
Seven Sons of Sin wrote:This is probably an unpopular opinion, but a higher RPR used to be something to strive for. It used to put pressure on people always, because there was a constant threat of being demoted down from a 30. There was constant pressure to strive for excellence in the OFF CHANCE a DM was watching.

I'll disagree with Nitro, and others who believe that moving back towards a heavier emphasis on RPR as a step back, or a bad thing. To be frank, I don't see many other methods for instilling a greater desire to become the best storyteller you can possibly be.

Back in the day, planetouched were locked behind a RPR 30. Everyone wanted to play a tiefling or a genasi. Not only were they badass, they were special. It was also a designation within the community as someone who has "earned their stripes." It was not always the case, but there was a degree of respect towards people with 30s, and there was a degree of expectation too - you really expected them to be great roleplayers.

Having a 40 was like being a god.

People really tried to focus and "work hard" at their roleplay in order to achieve a 30, because of all the trappings that came with it. Nowadays, you might say that's a little "reward orientated" but I honestly believe people become better roleplayers because of it.

Nowadays, there is absolutely no incentive whatsoever to be a better roleplayer.

You know what's more subjective than a DM Team? A kudos thread. 1000x more. At least DMs are anonymous.

If a RPR is not given weight, it's very difficult to see how roleplaying is given weight. If rolling characters for rewards takes precedence over becoming the best roleplayer one can be, than why bother getting better at roleplaying?

Roleplaying is not going to let you create a special snowflake character, ironically. Grinding and chance is. I find that wholly ironic, and probably the extreme response to races being tied to RPR.

If I started out in Arelith in the contemporary system, I bet my experience would be entirely different. I wouldn't be gunning to be a better roleplayer. I'd be gunning to achieve Greater Awards and mass recognition.
This definitely is the unpopular opinion, but I agree with you on it. I would like to see good RP being what one strives for again. I think that the trusting the playerbase to want to strive for it is not going to work in general because of human nature. Especially when they can ignore it and still get their cake and eat it too.

There will always be the argument that it is subjectively judged and that DMs are not always present and so forth, but unfortunately that is just the way life goes.
Yeah, as another player who remembers the era SSoS is talking about - I agree. I love most of what Arelith is these days and the changes are really exciting, by and large, but it's a shame that RPR has less impetus on what you can do and be.

I have a lot of faith in the Dev and DM teams' oversight of the server so it may well be that there were thought-out alternative reasons for moving in that direction, but if it is the case that it just wasn't worth their time with the grief they were getting because "omg favouritism so unfair"... that's so sad. Firstly because let's be fricking real here, there's no or negligible favoritism, you're just a human being, you (like literally everyone else dw) suck at balanced self-examination, and if you feel like your RPR is the result of bias against you then you're probably not as good as you think you are. Even if you are, the fact that mechanical gateways and experience points is more important to you than being a good roleplayer invalidates that because a high RPR player should not prioritise those things over the stories they can tell with their characters.

The new approach seems to have a roughly similar efficacy in keeping special and off-the-wall things rare (which is that they're kind of uncommon but still a little too prevalent to be truly easy to believe), but back in the day, you at least had the assurance that there was a general, considered, expert consensus amongst the DM team that people trusted to make those things fun and credible rather than wacky and detracting from the setting were good roleplayers who had earned that trust. Nothing like that now.

(Not that I disagree with the 5% roll, by the way. But back when it worked well, in my opinion, it was literally just the 5% roll - you rolled a 26+ character, had a 5% for something cool, and it was a bespoke project worked out with the DMs when you did).
Xerah wrote: People have a very weird possessive nature over a lot of things in Arelith.
User avatar
One Two Three Five
Posts: 1139
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:09 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by One Two Three Five »

Arelith feels a lot more like a fun game now that everyone isn't worried all the time about their 'it's not a rating we promise' rating, personally
The devil does not need any more advocates
Clerics are just socially acceptable warlocks.
User avatar
Thanatosis
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:47 pm

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Thanatosis »

This thread is very strange for me to read. I see so many posts acting as if, somehow, RP has taken a backseat in favour of grinds. That there needs to be a solution to this, and fast!

But this has not been my experience at all? Roleplaying is the objective. It's the fun part, the point of playing on the server. Maybe there are a lot more mechanical cookies than there were before, but frankly I don't have a problem with that. The crunch part of Arelith has always been less interesting than the fluff.

As for tying more special races or whatever to RPR... no, I don't agree with that. But it's not because I have some snarl with the RPR system, but more because I really don't like "special" things at all, from greater awards or 5%s or RPR or anything else. Very rarely have I ever seen them actually add something to the server narrative that a normal human or elf or something could not have.

I've always liked the fact that one can access a very vast majority of the server's options as a new player who knows nothing about anything -- he can just login, make his guy, and tell the kinds of stories he wants to tell.

To append, if you need "motivation" to be the best storyteller you can be that isn't just because it's fun, I don't know what to say to that. It sounds like you have issues with priority.
BegoneThoth wrote:Hardcore player here
User avatar
A little fellow
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 12:03 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by A little fellow »

I've played the same character for nearing on 2 RL years now, and have been a settlement leader for nearing a year and a half. It's only natural to get fatigued and feel like you're stuck in a pattern that is tough to break out of, and I think when most people experience this they move on to a new character. There's no problem with that, but I do think there is a problem when it comes to the consistency of a settlement or a factions story .. In our settlement we are blessed with a group of characters who have largely committed to long term character, and because of that I feel like the RP we are taking part in is all the more meaningful.

There is of course that feeling however that having played the same character for 2 years, the RP is it's own reward, but I'm under no illusions that these players are unlikely to get any rewards for their efforts beyond that. It's statistics, the player who rolls 5 characters a year is more likely to get a better reward than the player who rolls 1 character a year. It's not a great feeling, and I'd welcome changes, but I too hesitate when that system is predicated on DM input.

Not to say the DMs are bias or incapable .. but I am not sure there are the numbers or wherewithal in this case to piece together a consistent picture of who exactly is creating great RP for the server.
Lovin' you is easy 'cause you're dutiful
User avatar
Seekeepeek
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:44 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Seekeepeek »

I don't know.. if people keep playing a character for irl years.. it's a choice they make. What they get in return is a lasting legacy in other players mind. That people still mention Skeflock after all these years most surely make the player happy whenever he read it. i personally feel more proud if people remembering who i played rather then what my RPR is.

it's the same with most inventors. They get happy by seeing people using what they have created more then the money they earn. Seeing some random player mentioning your past characters ic while your on a secret alt feels really really good if not a little weird.

I do know i'll remember Ghestaldt Blimth and mention him ic.. far far after his gone too. you play him well. so kudos for that.
User avatar
The GrumpyCat
Dungeon Master
Dungeon Master
Posts: 7115
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 5:47 pm

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by The GrumpyCat »

Hello! Not venturing much of an opinion here - but I just want to put in one point of order.
Nowadays, there is absolutely no incentive whatsoever to be a better roleplayer.
With adventure XP, higher RPR really gives you a LOT quicker leveling.
10 rpr + adventure xp = 30 xp per tick
20 rpr + adventure xp = 60 xp per tick
30 rpr + Adventure xp = 90 xp per tick
40 rpr + adventure xp = 120 xp per tick

That's quite an advantage for leveling.

Not that I'm saying there isn't an argument for more perks for higher rprs, or that any of the other arguments that flow within this thread are invalid. But it's worth pointing this out as an example of why having a higher rpr is still a good thing.
This too shall pass.

(I now have a DM Discord (I hope) It's DM GrumpyCat#7185 but please keep in mind I'm very busy IRL so I can't promise how quick I'll get back to you.)
User avatar
Seekeepeek
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:44 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Seekeepeek »

DM GrumpyCat wrote: 40 rpr + adventure xp = 160 xp per tick?
User avatar
The GrumpyCat
Dungeon Master
Dungeon Master
Posts: 7115
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 5:47 pm

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by The GrumpyCat »

Huh? No. 40 + 80 = 120.
This too shall pass.

(I now have a DM Discord (I hope) It's DM GrumpyCat#7185 but please keep in mind I'm very busy IRL so I can't promise how quick I'll get back to you.)
User avatar
Seekeepeek
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:44 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Seekeepeek »

DM GrumpyCat wrote:Huh? No. 40 + 80 = 120.
hmm.. i was under the impression it was

10 +10 (x1)
20+40 (x2)
30+90 (x3)
40+160 (x4)

guess i remember wrong. my bad. :oops:
User avatar
Dovesong
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2017 10:10 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Dovesong »

Scurvy said everything I wanted to say, at greater length and better. CataclysmOfIron as well.

The higher RPBs are still something to strive for, especially for those of us who spent many years at one. They have a sense of validation to them, whether that's the intent or not, a sense of accomplishment, and a constant sense of "How do maintain this?"

As Thanatosis says as well I, in the last several years, have only seen RP increase. I've watched players increase in dedication and talent. Are there characters who have hung around absolutely forever and become Deus Ex Machinae? Yes. And there always will be, because some people do not /want/ to roll, regardless of the incentives offered. That boils down to personal player choice, and that's something that we can't legislate or force while maintaining our integrity.

Even now, our populace is growing. Our DM team remains relatively stable. They already need to handle reports and playerside conflict, and that duty will only increase. Let's not add more. Also all the reasons Scurvy gave.

Nelene - Cager with some Issues, Just A Little Guy

Black Wendigo
Posts: 663
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 4:09 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by Black Wendigo »

I have long stopped striving for higher RPR because I have found that it is futile. The requirements for getting it raised rely on DMs seeing you, and you can RP your heart out and never see your rpr raised because either you are not seen by DM or not enough of them see you to make it happen. I am much better with the mechanical systems of rewards rather than those that require DM action or input.

Frankly I do not care if I am rewarded mechanically or by DM for good RP. I am here to have fun and fun to me is roleplaying. If I wanted cookies for playing I would play an MMO or something. MY rewards come when people tell me I did something they liked, made them laugh, and so forth. THat is my incentive to be a better player and try to improve my RP.

If I were to ask anything from the devs (and I'm not), it would be to not to dumb down the game or make it less role playing because casual gamers or grinders or so forth want it made easier. I feel this is important because when the predicted flood of new players comes to Arelith through NWN EE, it is likely many of them will be new to RP or people who have been taught that MMOs and Games like Diablo are RPGs.

ANd if people want to grind or do something that is not RP Im fine with that. I only ask that this is not done at other peoples' expense, as I have seen happen sometimes on Arelith.
User avatar
If Valor Were Inches
Arelith Platinum Supporter
Arelith Platinum Supporter
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 5:57 am

Re: Policy change regarding rewards for interactive RP

Post by If Valor Were Inches »

Seekeepeek wrote:
DM GrumpyCat wrote:Huh? No. 40 + 80 = 120.
hmm.. i was under the impression it was

10 +10 (x1)
20+40 (x2)
30+90 (x3)
40+160 (x4)

guess i remember wrong. my bad. :oops:
With a mark of destiny it gets even higher than the max 120. The best thing about the RPB system is I do not feel I have to grind and can keep up with my RP merits.

I actually am of preference having some races locked behind the RPB system as a reward, like it was before. Not all of them, or maybe you could do both as long as one requirement or the other was met. Normal races with 30, Greater with 40 etc. For example, currently the only way you can play a fey is if you have a 30. This can serve as a race limiter if you combine it with the reward system.

But I also agree that I rarely see reward based races ever really play much different of a narrative that they would without that race's skin.
Locked