PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Forum rules, feedback, speak with game masters, suggestions, etc.

Moderator: Game Masters

PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Xian Zhu Xuande » 11 Nov 2012, 02:54

So there was some discussion about the PR system and problems associated with it, and taken at face value, I can see merit in some of the concerns. I don’t know much about the PR system as it exists in the game today and I’m even not sure of any existing plans for V6 (I suppose I could find them if I rummaged around a little bit), but hey, if people have feedback to share about a game mechanic, why not share? I imagine if you, the player who is interested enough to have opinions and ideas about this matter, comes up with excellent solutions, ideas, or considerations, the staff would be inclined to take them into consideration.

So as I see it there are few things to keep in mind. (These off the top of my head. A staff member may be inclined to come along and elaborate on considerations which I may not have thought of, given that I've been out of the loop for a while.)

The PR system:
• Applies a penalty for brutal kingdom tactics.
• Discourage excessive PC execution; mechanic-driven execution.
• Applies some incentive for noble behavior.

And I imagine the PR system probably should not:
• Be so restrictive that even PCs who deserve death aren’t executed.
• Be so restrictive that it strongly discourages personality and role-play.
• Be so restrictive as to make a cruel kingdom completely unviable.
• Significantly contribute to an atmosphere where rulers don’t want to battle.

If anyone feels they have good feedback to share about the system, I can imagine two types of information which might be helpful to the staff. 1) Information about how the player-base would receive certain concepts, and 2) Actual ideas and suggestions to take into consideration for any future PR or PR-like system.

As far as number 1 is concerned, I can think of a few questions right off the top of my head which are pretty important.

How much should the PR system discourage PC death?
As the PR system becomes more lax with PC death, PC death is bound to become more common in the game. On one hand I can see this as a good thing. With more PCs dying through the course of gameplay, gameplay itself will carry more meaning. There will be more depth to relations between kingdoms. And more depth to vendettas. But at the same time I think there should at least be enough of a system in place that nobody starts executing everyone that comes along simply for a mathematical advantage.

How might you respond to the death of your experienced PC?
So now that you’ve considered the question above, this question gets to the meat of the situation. How are you inclined to respond when your own PC is killed? How about if that PC is killed in a somewhat less meaningful death? Would you rage quit? Or would you build a new PC and continue along, happy in the knowledge that, even if your PC may have died in a way you didn’t appreciate, that PC death one one of many which adds greater consequence and meaning to game actions?

How important is it that this system is public and transparent?
Now think about this one a little bit before you answer. Sometimes we are inclined to believe ‘public’ and ‘transparent’ are good things, but that is not always the case. A public PR system has to work on pretty strict guidelines to appear fair and balanced. The consequence of this is a system which can be rigid and somewhat uninspired. A private system can contain much more depth—the sort of depth which, if it existed in public, could generate accusations of bias simply by virtue of creating drawbacks which a given player might not like.

What is the PR system good for? What should it accomplish?
Self explanatory.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

So that said, ideas. As I’ve been considering a little bit about what was written, I’ve got a fledgling of an idea for people to take into consideration, and to, perhaps, kick off some conversation. And this idea depends on the weight of questions above (in addition to, of course, any evolved requirements of the PR system in the game today).

First, the PR system becomes private. This means a kingdom’s actual PR number will be completely hidden from them (except in observing in-game results). This allows the PR system to become richer in terms of when a penalty or bonus is applied (or not applied) without creating drama every time a change takes place. Additionally, it removes one more mechanic from front and center and encourages kingdoms to focus a little bit more on more enriching endeavors.

Second, the PR system, while retaining some hard rules for certain things, becomes more of a series of guidelines. A given event (such as a PC death) will trigger a PR consideration rather than resulting in a set-in-stone change. This consideration will be governed by various secondary considerations. Did that PC die after mouthing off against the ruler in his own audience hall? Not good for the PC. Was that PC a messenger killed on a diplomatic mission? Probably not good for the ruler.

Third, some simple guidelines are devised for measuring a PR loss. I would suggest the first guidelines should be how a ruler’s own civil servants and generals feel about what was done. If the ruler executes someone without cause or reason that will not be received well. If someone has been slandering that ruler and kingdom in the audience hall, they might actually want to see that person killed! This can also allow flexibility for special cases. Say, for example, a general in another kingdom killed the ruler’s son under sad circumstances and is now despised. There might be celebration for killing that person, even if under circumstances which would not have been received well for a more generic circumstance. Two other considerations come into play: how the populace receives what was done (an officer execution probably won’t matter to them—they just want to get by and survive—but if a ruler is burning cities, or doing something which impacts their lives directly, it will matter); and two, and this being the least meaningful of the three considerations, how the action is received across the land (Dong Zhuo’s actions would be a good example of consequences here).

That may sound a little too fluid, but if it is governed clearly with a flow-chart like approach with general structure and consideration for special cases it could run quite smoothly.

And finally, as to the player base, while the actual number and changes would remain private (possibly with the exception of ‘feedback’ from the populace or ‘generals’ after major events), the rules themselves would outline the general structure of what can be good and bad without going into mechanical details. It would be explained, for example, that there are certain choices or actions which usually won’t go over well, such as killing a diplomatic messenger from another kingdom. It would also explain that there are exceptions to everything—even killing that diplomatic messenger.
User avatar
Xian Zhu Xuande
Powder Addict Huo Hu
Powder Addict Huo Hu
 
Posts: 5851
Joined: 23 Mar 2003, 06:18
Location: Please Direct Gameplay Questions to the Game Rules Forum.
Kingdom: Huo Hu

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Xian Zhu Xuande » 11 Nov 2012, 02:55

Dear staffly people of this fine Sim: feel free to move this wherever if I placed it in the wrong forum.
User avatar
Xian Zhu Xuande
Powder Addict Huo Hu
Powder Addict Huo Hu
 
Posts: 5851
Joined: 23 Mar 2003, 06:18
Location: Please Direct Gameplay Questions to the Game Rules Forum.
Kingdom: Huo Hu

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Xeniphon » 11 Nov 2012, 03:53

Nah, its in the right place. I do love seeing staff seeking opinions and suggestions from players though, not only do I personally love brainstorming/problem solving but it makes us feel like part of the team making this game better than ever!

First the questions...

1) How much should PR discourage PC death?
This is tricky since there are so many variables to work out... Generally speaking losing a PC is bad and most people do not take it well unless it is a cool/important death (see my first ever character Tiao Lisu getting shot in V3 sounding a horn to summon reinforcments to protect Bai Dangao from a plot, thats not a death to cry over while being killed for calling a ruler an idiot would probably not go over well with a player even if it is being rude). I personally think th eline is somewhere between "intent" and "significance". Intent is a bit slippery because it speaks to opinion, but a threat vs an insult would have very different intents. Significance would in part be the impact of the situation and in part be the severity/intensity of it, for instance the difference between a blustering enemy general and an unrepentant assasin who just tried to gank the ruler/an officer and got caught (accomplishing it before getting caught would be even more significant). Its a tough line to toe, or even find, but thats my personal opinion. I tend to favor the "balance scale" method where you weight pros vs cons and the remainder is the result, but thats just personal taste rather than any clear mechanical superiority.

2) How would I react to a killed PC?
I tend to react (and see others react) badly in direct proportion to how much effort they have put into their character. While most of the core players of this game will not rage quit some new players do and there is generally gripes even though they roll up a new PC. Also we need to remember that even in experianced players a death sometimes spawns a "revenge character" which while logical turns the game into an unending string of hard feelings and personal disputes on an OOC level. Of course there is no fair way to protect the player's investment in a character with the PR system, the sign-up system and death penalties need to handle this load... A degree of discouragment for killing PCs plus a decent sign-up/death penalty system will still have the player losing out on exp/items/skills but not as badly, and that will take some of the sting out of it (not all, but this world will never be perfect so it has to be good enough).

3) Is it important for PR to be public/transparent?
I think many people mistake these, public is open to all while transparent simply means its understandable even if it isn't totally public. I think a mix of public and privet is best, the numbers are public and players have an general (not specific) idea of what will effect PR but the specifics/qualifications/ect... are hidden so people can't calculate the most effecient way to gain PR (see how SCZ's kingdom in V5 worked out the proportion of taxes in their cities that gave them the most gold while still gaining PR from lowering taxes in several cities). You could keep it all hidden but that would mean needing to change the way ranks can be gained, or require another system in an already complex game, so I doubt thats a good idea... Of course this could be partially defreyed by turning the PR system from a number ladder you need to clime into a less defined and more fluid set of generalities with the exact degree hidden.

4) What should PR do?
- Provide a detirant to PC death
- Provide a reason for agreements to be held to "the majority of the time"
- Encourage improvements to the kingdom and victory in battle
- Effect how NPCs are likely to react and how likely the people are to rebel
- Reflect how well you treat your officers (do you listen to them or just pay minimal salary and make them work, or even take their stuff?)
- PR should represent the views of the people, not always stable and not always logical (can be used to break up long term alliances and exploited by plotters for interesting results)
- ect...

------------------

I have some ideas floating around, but since the "Xeni Wall of Text" is known to knock out your average SimRTKer at 50 paces I think I will leave it for another post... :ppys:
Oh well, back to the drawing board...

V6 Character: Now Undecided
User avatar
Xeniphon
SimRTK's Own Cyborg
SimRTK's Own Cyborg
 
Posts: 4440
Joined: 22 Mar 2005, 18:40

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby The Sixth Tiger » 11 Nov 2012, 04:21

How much should the PR system discourage PC death?
I favor a very lax system. The idea that you could die at any moment adds more tension and a feeling of high stakes to the game. Going on a diplomatic mission to a hated enemy is kinda fun now, but add to it the risk of summary execution and just adds another layer to the game. Even if you don't succeed in your diplomatic mission, coming back in one piece could be seen as an accomplishment!

How might you respond to the death of your experienced PC?
I've had a PC killed, by a staff NPC no less! It was back in V1, but I'd played that character almost since the launch and had a rich history with him, and was killed as the sim was coming to an end. To be perfectly honest, it sucked. At least at first. I really mourned the death of v1 Zhang Gao. And I was surprised by it. I didn't expect Liu Bei of all people to order my summary execution. But I didn't gripe or complain, after all I had been responsible (directly and indirectly) for the deaths of a lot PCs and a prominent NPC and as I said had a rich history with the character. It was a blast playing him and the fact that he ultimately met an untimely and ignoble death was fitting in a way. I got over it rather quickly and made another character.

I always thought rage quitters were rather silly. Fictional characters in a online sim aren't worth getting too worked up over. As long as you had fun playing the character, that's what counts. SimRTK is both a story and a game. I fun telling the story of v1 Zhang Gao and realized that PC death was a part of the mechanics of the game. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. I learned long ago as a kid not to get too mad when Mario was killed by Bowser, because I could always play again. Similarly, I don't get too steamed when a RP character dies, because I can always make another one.

How important is it that this system is public and transparent?
I'd be OK with a private system. I don't always agree with the rulings of the staff, but over the years I've been here I can say they are pretty impartial. You may not always agree with their reasoning, but they do usually have reasoning behind their actions and rulings and don't play favorites. And the system XZX outlines is much more fluid and realistic than the set in stone, always play a boy scout system we've had in the past.

What is the PR system good for? What should it accomplish?
This is a good question. Is it mainly to provide a level of protection for PCs? Eh, I've already stated I prefer a more dangerous, free wheeling sim where assasins could lurk anywhere, the executioner's blade flies freely, and you best know your place when speaking to those in power. Survival becomes an accomplishment rather than an expectation. Plus, officer death wasn't exactly uncommon in the actual setting. How many prominent figures were either executed, killed in battle, or died in what we would calla plot? Off the top of my head ... Dong Zhuo, Lu Bu, Guan Yu, Zhang Fei, Wei Yan, Dian Wei, Yan Liang, Hua Xiong, Tian Feng, Ding Yuan, Cao Ang, Li Ru, Pang Tong, Fan Chou, Ma Teng, Gao Shun, He Jin, Ju Shou, Li Jue, Taishi Ci, Xun Yu, and many more lesser figures.

Should it enforce some basic code of conduct? Maybe. The idea that you might become hated if you break treaties, torch cities, and summarily execute innocent diplomatic envoys is a fair one. The idea that there would be consequences for these sort of actions - at least without some extraordinary circumstances to justify them - is realistic.
Pre-Game Character:
Zhang Gao (18) 41-36-70-86-70 Administration, Acumen, Architect (e), Propaganda, Zeal
User avatar
The Sixth Tiger
Cao Cao’s Duck Hat
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: 23 Apr 2003, 13:20
Location: How should I know?
Kingdom: Ma Su

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Jolt » 11 Nov 2012, 16:12

The Sixth Tiger wrote:How much should the PR system discourage PC death?
I favor a very lax system. The idea that you could die at any moment adds more tension and a feeling of high stakes to the game. Going on a diplomatic mission to a hated enemy is kinda fun now, but add to it the risk of summary execution and just adds another layer to the game. Even if you don't succeed in your diplomatic mission, coming back in one piece could be seen as an accomplishment!

How might you respond to the death of your experienced PC?
I've had a PC killed, by a staff NPC no less! It was back in V1, but I'd played that character almost since the launch and had a rich history with him, and was killed as the sim was coming to an end. To be perfectly honest, it sucked. At least at first. I really mourned the death of v1 Zhang Gao. And I was surprised by it. I didn't expect Liu Bei of all people to order my summary execution. But I didn't gripe or complain, after all I had been responsible (directly and indirectly) for the deaths of a lot PCs and a prominent NPC and as I said had a rich history with the character. It was a blast playing him and the fact that he ultimately met an untimely and ignoble death was fitting in a way. I got over it rather quickly and made another character.

I always thought rage quitters were rather silly. Fictional characters in a online sim aren't worth getting too worked up over. As long as you had fun playing the character, that's what counts. SimRTK is both a story and a game. I fun telling the story of v1 Zhang Gao and realized that PC death was a part of the mechanics of the game. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. I learned long ago as a kid not to get too mad when Mario was killed by Bowser, because I could always play again. Similarly, I don't get too steamed when a RP character dies, because I can always make another one.

How important is it that this system is public and transparent?
I'd be OK with a private system. I don't always agree with the rulings of the staff, but over the years I've been here I can say they are pretty impartial. You may not always agree with their reasoning, but they do usually have reasoning behind their actions and rulings and don't play favorites. And the system XZX outlines is much more fluid and realistic than the set in stone, always play a boy scout system we've had in the past.

What is the PR system good for? What should it accomplish?
This is a good question. Is it mainly to provide a level of protection for PCs? Eh, I've already stated I prefer a more dangerous, free wheeling sim where assasins could lurk anywhere, the executioner's blade flies freely, and you best know your place when speaking to those in power. Survival becomes an accomplishment rather than an expectation. Plus, officer death wasn't exactly uncommon in the actual setting. How many prominent figures were either executed, killed in battle, or died in what we would calla plot? Off the top of my head ... Dong Zhuo, Lu Bu, Guan Yu, Zhang Fei, Wei Yan, Dian Wei, Yan Liang, Hua Xiong, Tian Feng, Ding Yuan, Cao Ang, Li Ru, Pang Tong, Fan Chou, Ma Teng, Gao Shun, He Jin, Ju Shou, Li Jue, Taishi Ci, Xun Yu, and many more lesser figures.

Should it enforce some basic code of conduct? Maybe. The idea that you might become hated if you break treaties, torch cities, and summarily execute innocent diplomatic envoys is a fair one. The idea that there would be consequences for these sort of actions - at least without some extraordinary circumstances to justify them - is realistic.


I wholeheartly agree with this.

SimRTK lacks a lot of dieing. Both NPCs and PCs. Especially in battle. Something which happened last game during the Runan vs Xuchang fight was that we captured was Xiahou Meng/Strong Bad. An high officer who had made several remarks of how he was going to massacre every officer of Runan, especially the ruler, and so on and so forth. When he was captured, realistically, there was really only one obvious course. Execution. So I pushed as hard as possible for that outcome. And indeed he had his head chopped off, as it should be. Now, if this was with most of the rulers of the Sim, they'd probably release him for fear of negative PR. I think that such a mechanic is extremely silly.

To give the opposite reaction, when my character, Liu Jingjing, purported King of the Han (And hence, claiming the whole of China) was captured in Luoyang against Chen Wei, realistically, there would also be one solution (Provided my character didn't join him or relenquish his Imperial claims). He was the de jure leader of a dead dynasty who claimed the whole of China as his own, and had considerable support, in the form of a city and dozens of thousands of soldiers ready to defend the city. The only obvious route was execution. But since Chen Wei had to play the silly PR game, everyone who had led the opposing army which murdered thousands of his own invasion soldiers simply recieved a pat on the back and were free to go, regardless if they were hostile or friendly towards Chen Wei and his folks. He didn't even want explicitly to recruit any of us, since if so, he couldn't recieve the PR benefits of freeing officers. Those that were to join him had to be freed and only then of their own accord would go to his AH and then join him properly. That's what you get when you impose silly mechanics. You get rulers doing absurd things and playing around the rules to get a little benefit out of it.
Liu Jingjing (劉勁勁), zi Congling (聰靈), 28, King of Han (漢王)
89*.42*.91*.57*.71*
Skills: Ambush, Aid, Arson (e), Medic*, Mystic, Trap(e)*, Wile
Items: Plumed Steel Helmet (War +2, Cha +1, Lead +1), Warhorse (Lead +5), The Life of Lord Shang (Pol +2, Lead +1, Int +1), Formation Theory (Lead +1, Int +1, Battle MP on land: +1), Trapper's Map (Lead +1, *Trap). Jade Phoenix Pendant (+2 Cha, Medic), Silver Ornate Ring (+1 Cha)
Gold: 1398
User avatar
Jolt
Experienced Officer
 
Posts: 366
Joined: 31 Jul 2003, 11:47
Location: In democracy, it's your vote that counts. In feudalism, it's your count that votes.
Kingdom: Han

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Han1977 » 12 Nov 2012, 00:21

- I think PR system should not help ruler to get new ranks.
- I think PR system should be handled the way staff handle civilian gossip.
- I think PR system should affect people's loyalty & morale (both peasant and officers).
- I think PR system should not be inherited by new ruler who take over the kingdom from previous ruler.
Huang Dong, 39
Starting Stats: 71*-61-70-70-69
Skills: Ambush, Arson, Duelist, Loyalty, Mobility, Navy, Weaponmaster
Item: Smuggler Map (Lead +1, Ambush limit +10 unit)
Gold: 52
User avatar
Han1977
What am I still doing here?
 
Posts: 3145
Joined: 10 Oct 2003, 05:00
Location: Somewhere
Kingdom: Chang Sha?

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Connor » 12 Nov 2012, 02:01

I'll say now that I'm not a particular advocate of the PR system being part of the game in a mechanical way. It could serve a purpose from an informational standpoint in helping new players/people who miss a week/month of the game but it actually carrying weight in the actual game has never really sat right with me.

How much should the PR system discourage PC death?
It shouldn't. If anything, like a couple of the other posters here, there isn't enough death at all. If a character deserves to die, say by visiting an enemy's Audience Hall/visiting a ruler who is openly playing a bad guy/a captured officer who's been a thorn in the side of the capturer for months, then the ruler in question should be able to execute them from a roleplaying standpoint. Like I mentioned previously, an information thread with no concrete implication would suffice for letting other players know there's a distinct risk of death if they follow the same pattern, but it feels like the PR system curtails any attempts at any viable tyrant/despot characters that would make the game more interesting for both players and staff.

How might you respond to the death of your experienced PC?
This is a game. Sure, you might put weeks and months into a character, but if you're putting them in dangerous situations then you expect that there could be death. Mouthing off and rage-quitting because a general was captured and executed after fifteen/twenty battles makes little sense to me. If there's no risk of death, it takes a lot of the point and a lot of the fun from playing the game.

How important is it that this system is public and transparent?
I don't really think it matters. Like I said before, if Ruler X executes sixty officers, burns cities and kicks babies, people are going to know he's got bad public relations wherever you put it.

What is the PR system good for? What should it accomplish?
It needs to be provide some protection for players and the time they invest, but it shouldn't protect them so much that it makes the game stagnant. We're playing a game based on war, set in an era where a ridiculous amount of people died, and the Simorial from last version had two pages, some of which I'm sure were GMNPCs/standard NPCs. The PR system at the moment seems to mollycoddle the player-base into having to act like goody two shoeses or not really get anywhere. I'd favour a model where there were simply random events based on a ruler, or even a particular officer's, actions. A peasant rebellion mini-event, an attempted assassination or whatever. Something that keeps the RP spirit of the game, allows players to interact with each other and create a complex and engaging storyline that keeps people interested for the years this upcoming game will go on for.
I am Jaden Smith.
User avatar
Connor
Desires Many Manly Cuddles 2
 
Posts: 2681
Joined: 26 Oct 2005, 00:02
Location: Cuddle Town.

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Sun Tang » 12 Nov 2012, 13:44

I am in favor of an overhaul. I would not mind seeing a PR system in which you start off neutral and your actions can determine if your regarded as a noble and righteous lord or a tyrannical and villainous lord or just in the middle. I think the lack of villains and surplus of do-gooders pits players in sticky situations. If we had more villains it would seem in my opinion at least, more purposeful. To make that a reality, I think villainous lords could receive benefits from villainous rule or deeds, much like how righteous lords would.
I would love to see a few Dong zhuos who work together against the wave of Liu bei's in the sim.
User avatar
Sun Tang
Stalking Xiahou Mao
 
Posts: 3918
Joined: 26 Mar 2003, 19:53
Location: Im on a boat! With Lord Ouch.

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Jolt » 12 Nov 2012, 14:33

Connor wrote:What is the PR system good for? What should it accomplish?
It needs to be provide some protection for players and the time they invest


It could be done, over the top of my head that if a player's character who has roughly lived more than 1 year and has improved more than 2 skills/+8 stats, if that character meets an untimely demise due to circumstances outside of the player's control (e.g. Plot/execution by others), then the said player instead of getting a penalty at sign-up, actually gets a boon to his new character, allowing him to make the new character with, say, 90% of the Stats and Skill Points that his previous character had at the time of his death.
Obviously, characters retiring or suiciding by their player's decision because they want to play someone else, are not affected by this.
And likewise, if a ruler (Rulers get buffed usually pretty quickly) gets executed and creates a new character to continue ruling, it shouldn't also be affected by said boon.
Liu Jingjing (劉勁勁), zi Congling (聰靈), 28, King of Han (漢王)
89*.42*.91*.57*.71*
Skills: Ambush, Aid, Arson (e), Medic*, Mystic, Trap(e)*, Wile
Items: Plumed Steel Helmet (War +2, Cha +1, Lead +1), Warhorse (Lead +5), The Life of Lord Shang (Pol +2, Lead +1, Int +1), Formation Theory (Lead +1, Int +1, Battle MP on land: +1), Trapper's Map (Lead +1, *Trap). Jade Phoenix Pendant (+2 Cha, Medic), Silver Ornate Ring (+1 Cha)
Gold: 1398
User avatar
Jolt
Experienced Officer
 
Posts: 366
Joined: 31 Jul 2003, 11:47
Location: In democracy, it's your vote that counts. In feudalism, it's your count that votes.
Kingdom: Han

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby SCZhuge13 » 14 Nov 2012, 19:36

How much should the PR system discourage PC death?

The PR system should do very little to discourage PC death. We do need it to serve as some layer of protection against simply mass-slaughtering people with impunity, but:

As Jolt so correctly describes, the realistic IC move when Tian Shui took Luo Yang would have been to execute Liu Jingjing and likely a number of his higher-ups. However, the in-game result of that would have been a massive drop in PR. This reality directly contributed to Tian Shui freeing them instead.

Outside that example, however, death was a much larger part of real-life China in that era than this game so far allows (per the PR system). You have no idea how often I wanted to kill people for IC/RP reasons and yet did not because I would get PR dinged for it. And since PR directly tied to my Ruler Rank and thus what Officer Ranks I could give out, I was forced to bow to mechanics instead of following through with RP as doing otherwise would be irresponsible to my players and the viability of our kingdom, given how everyone else in the game was following the same line of action for exactly the same reasons.

In short, we need to decide if we want to be an RPG faithful to real-life China or if we're okay with diluting that filial piety. If we're okay with diluting it, to what degree are we okay? Ultimately, however, I agree with and love that Context is being considered as a deciding (or, at least, contributing) factor when it comes to player deaths. When Mechanics force RP to go against what's "right" RPly, that's usually a bad thing.

How might you respond to the death of your experienced PC?

Again, I agree entirely with Jolt here. My reaction to PC death relates entirely to how I'll be addressed re: my next Character.

If a Character has been RP faithful and generally has contributed to the game without being a Jerk and isn't just suiciding his PC, he should see a new character which is roughly approximate to his old one. Maybe a bit less (so as to reward true veterans some) but overall he should not be penalized. He played the game as it was meant to be played, contributed to the enjoyment of all, and died as he should have.

If a Character is purposefully being dumb? If he's trying to game the system (e.g. knows PR is shielding him and so bends the RP some) or otherwise not playing faithful to the RP spirit (or even just fun game spirit) of SimRTK? Then he deserves to see a new character who is relatively basic and might even be a penalty compared to what he had before. Certainly nowhere near the previous example who was a good player and deserves his just reward.

In short, the old system of where a player's second character saw a penalty should only occur if that player deserves such a penalty. Otherwise, players should have no fear of player death outside of having so much fun with their now-deceased character since they know that they will be able to jump right back into the game freely.

If we do not implement this system, however, every player should rightly be expected to cling for dear life to their characters. They'll know that even if they play the game the way it's meant to be played that they'll be the lesser for it, seeing as their next character (and any others, should it happen again) will just keep sliding down the totem pole into uselessness (as compared to the rest of the playerbase). And while half the fun of an RPG is RP, this is still a Game and people would like to succeed at it. Half of that success is represented by your character him/herself and if your character just keeps getting worse despite you playing the game in good faith?

Well, that's really not much fun at all.

How important is it that this system is public and transparent?

That depends on if context is going to be considered or not.

If context is going to directly play into how PR is rated, it should not be entirely stated. This provides a screen to the staff on how it is decided and as a secondary effect helps prevent people from "gaming the system", since the staff can simply invoke "the rules" (which we don't really know) to correct things accordingly.

If context is *not* going to contribute to how PR is rated then it should be 100% entirely public so that people know what they're getting into.

What is the PR system good for? What should it accomplish?

The PR system, in my opinion, is intended as means of quantitatively gauging how the rest of the game views your kingdom. This includes both NPCs and PCs, as ICly they should be aware of what your PR means and respond accordingly. This, in turn, is what I believe it should accomplish. It should not impact your Ruler Rank in the least but rather directly affect how likely NPCs are to serve or work with you. A Kingdom with terrible PR would be hard pressed to find allies without some coercive aspect to things ("Help me or I'm going to assassinate your daughter, who I took hostage on her last diplomatic visit here!") while a Kingdom with awesome PR should have no trouble with NPCs trusting in that kingdom's rule.

Now, you'll notice that the above example I gave for PR seems to imply that "High PR = Good Guys" and "Low PR = Bad Guys". This is not the case.

PR is the quantitative value of how people perceive your kingdom in terms of reputation. It is *not* a moralistic device. If you can imagine Mass Effect and how you could be a Jerk while still being Highly Respected, this is exactly what I'm going for in how PR is de-linked from Morality. "Evil" Kingdoms should have just as fair a shot as "Good" Kingdoms in gaining PR, though obviously theirs will take a more threatening and darker tone.

Now, will "evil" gameplay result in PR losses? Most likely. And some people will likely point at this and go "But SCZ! Good Kingdoms are now at a mechanical advantage?". Very true, in respect to PR. But tell me this:

When Liu Bei captured/took in Lu Bu, what happened?

When Cao Cao captured Lu Bu, what happened?

And that, my friends, is why the above example is, in fact, balanced.
V6: Jin Zhi, the warrior with big biceps and an even bigger heart
50-85-70-65-50
Aid, Duelist, Fortunate, Reversal, Valor, Weaponmaster (e)

V5: Emperor Chen Wei of Tian Shui
User avatar
SCZhuge13
"fish flopping"
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 20:42
Location: Wan
Kingdom: My shield is here!

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby SCZhuge13 » 14 Nov 2012, 19:49

I would also like to note that I may be entirely wrong in the above examples (Luo Yang, "I'm going to get pinged for IC actions!"). However, I would like to note that if I am, it was because we as players were not aware that certain contexts would contribute to the opposite effect happening (e.g. We would not have been pinged for executing The King of Han).

If I am in fact wrong, then this also needs to be addressed. Regardless of what path we choose, the player base should never be surprised by the PR results of their actions, good or bad.
V6: Jin Zhi, the warrior with big biceps and an even bigger heart
50-85-70-65-50
Aid, Duelist, Fortunate, Reversal, Valor, Weaponmaster (e)

V5: Emperor Chen Wei of Tian Shui
User avatar
SCZhuge13
"fish flopping"
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 20:42
Location: Wan
Kingdom: My shield is here!

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Jolt » 14 Nov 2012, 21:19

SCZhuge13 wrote:PR is the quantitative value of how people perceive your kingdom in terms of reputation. It is *not* a moralistic device. If you can imagine Mass Effect and how you could be a Jerk while still being Highly Respected, this is exactly what I'm going for in how PR is de-linked from Morality. "Evil" Kingdoms should have just as fair a shot as "Good" Kingdoms in gaining PR, though obviously theirs will take a more threatening and darker tone.


Indeed. To be honest I'd drop the PR-link to Kingdom Ranks. I'd make the requirements for ranks more on:
1. Having a required number of cities, for warmongering expansionist kingdoms.
Or
2. A required number and specific types of buildings & accumulated kingdom-wide resources (As in Food and/or Gold and/or Armaments and/or Troops) for small, defensive or blocked in kingdoms. Obviously, balance would be important, and the peaceful requirements would be quite steep the higher the rank goes to make sure that small kingdoms wouldn't be able to gain high ranks either way.

As to officer recruitment, I think adapting the PR system to RTK11 would be a good alternative I think. Classify all officers as Good, Evil or Neutral, and establish a hidden PR system where it establishes whether the rulers are Good, Evil or Neutral.
Good rulers would have bigger recruitment chances on Good officers but lower ones on Evil officers (Simulating a preference of the officers for a ruler with similar morality to them), and vice-versa. Neutral rulers would have equal chances for all.

That way, Genghis Khan-type rulers would be viable in both equal rank promotions and officer recruitment as Mahatma Gandhi-type rulers.
Liu Jingjing (劉勁勁), zi Congling (聰靈), 28, King of Han (漢王)
89*.42*.91*.57*.71*
Skills: Ambush, Aid, Arson (e), Medic*, Mystic, Trap(e)*, Wile
Items: Plumed Steel Helmet (War +2, Cha +1, Lead +1), Warhorse (Lead +5), The Life of Lord Shang (Pol +2, Lead +1, Int +1), Formation Theory (Lead +1, Int +1, Battle MP on land: +1), Trapper's Map (Lead +1, *Trap). Jade Phoenix Pendant (+2 Cha, Medic), Silver Ornate Ring (+1 Cha)
Gold: 1398
User avatar
Jolt
Experienced Officer
 
Posts: 366
Joined: 31 Jul 2003, 11:47
Location: In democracy, it's your vote that counts. In feudalism, it's your count that votes.
Kingdom: Han

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Sun Tang » 14 Nov 2012, 22:12

Jolt wrote:
SCZhuge13 wrote:PR is the quantitative value of how people perceive your kingdom in terms of reputation. It is *not* a moralistic device. If you can imagine Mass Effect and how you could be a Jerk while still being Highly Respected, this is exactly what I'm going for in how PR is de-linked from Morality. "Evil" Kingdoms should have just as fair a shot as "Good" Kingdoms in gaining PR, though obviously theirs will take a more threatening and darker tone.


Indeed. To be honest I'd drop the PR-link to Kingdom Ranks. I'd make the requirements for ranks more on:
1. Having a required number of cities, for warmongering expansionist kingdoms.
Or
2. A required number and specific types of buildings & accumulated kingdom-wide resources (As in Food and/or Gold and/or Armaments and/or Troops) for small, defensive or blocked in kingdoms. Obviously, balance would be important, and the peaceful requirements would be quite steep the higher the rank goes to make sure that small kingdoms wouldn't be able to gain high ranks either way.

As to officer recruitment, I think adapting the PR system to RTK11 would be a good alternative I think. Classify all officers as Good, Evil or Neutral, and establish a hidden PR system where it establishes whether the rulers are Good, Evil or Neutral.
Good rulers would have bigger recruitment chances on Good officers but lower ones on Evil officers (Simulating a preference of the officers for a ruler with similar morality to them), and vice-versa. Neutral rulers would have equal chances for all.

That way, Genghis Khan-type rulers would be viable in both equal rank promotions and officer recruitment as Mahatma Gandhi-type rulers.


As far as ranks are concerned, i think they could remain tied to PR and allow "evil" rulers to have "evil" ranks to bestow on their minions. Just change the wording a little bit in the ranks and perhaps give evil ruler different ranks with different attributes, as well as neutral. I think a ruler might need to state at the onsite of ruler signup rolls if he choose to be good, neutral, evil. Also i think at ruler signup a ruler should state supporter of Han, non-supporter and neutral to that as well. Some rulers might say they support the Han, but really dont and only want to use it to their gain, while others might be able to openly not support it and could gain a following like perhaps the Yellow turbans did. I know a lot of NPC's could be turned off by whatever choice or belief regarding the Han a ruler (or officer/free-officer) might prefer.
User avatar
Sun Tang
Stalking Xiahou Mao
 
Posts: 3918
Joined: 26 Mar 2003, 19:53
Location: Im on a boat! With Lord Ouch.

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Jolt » 14 Nov 2012, 23:38

Sun Tang wrote:
Jolt wrote:
SCZhuge13 wrote:PR is the quantitative value of how people perceive your kingdom in terms of reputation. It is *not* a moralistic device. If you can imagine Mass Effect and how you could be a Jerk while still being Highly Respected, this is exactly what I'm going for in how PR is de-linked from Morality. "Evil" Kingdoms should have just as fair a shot as "Good" Kingdoms in gaining PR, though obviously theirs will take a more threatening and darker tone.


Indeed. To be honest I'd drop the PR-link to Kingdom Ranks. I'd make the requirements for ranks more on:
1. Having a required number of cities, for warmongering expansionist kingdoms.
Or
2. A required number and specific types of buildings & accumulated kingdom-wide resources (As in Food and/or Gold and/or Armaments and/or Troops) for small, defensive or blocked in kingdoms. Obviously, balance would be important, and the peaceful requirements would be quite steep the higher the rank goes to make sure that small kingdoms wouldn't be able to gain high ranks either way.

As to officer recruitment, I think adapting the PR system to RTK11 would be a good alternative I think. Classify all officers as Good, Evil or Neutral, and establish a hidden PR system where it establishes whether the rulers are Good, Evil or Neutral.
Good rulers would have bigger recruitment chances on Good officers but lower ones on Evil officers (Simulating a preference of the officers for a ruler with similar morality to them), and vice-versa. Neutral rulers would have equal chances for all.

That way, Genghis Khan-type rulers would be viable in both equal rank promotions and officer recruitment as Mahatma Gandhi-type rulers.


As far as ranks are concerned, i think they could remain tied to PR and allow "evil" rulers to have "evil" ranks to bestow on their minions.


That would mean that if you play an Evil ruler, then you would be stuck to doing evil actions to raise your negative PR to get a rank, whether you truly want to do those actions or not. That doesn't work well. Most people, from the do-goodie Liu Bei to the evil tyrant Dong Zhuo were actually different shades of grey. They might be kind to some folks or in some situations but outright cruel or scrupless to others or in other situations. (Cai Yong and Liu Feng come to mind). By removing most implications from the PR, rulers get the freedom to RP as they truly want, be it an evil ruler who turns good, or a ruler who is very idealist in words but very pragmatic in actions, and they don't have to keep going along a path just for the sake of mechanics.

I don't think rulers should make morality choices in the beginning, where saying good or bad or Han supporter or far from it. From the onset, everyone was a sincere Han supporter. It is only when they things got heated up that we began to really see how many of those rulers were true Han partizans.
Liu Jingjing (劉勁勁), zi Congling (聰靈), 28, King of Han (漢王)
89*.42*.91*.57*.71*
Skills: Ambush, Aid, Arson (e), Medic*, Mystic, Trap(e)*, Wile
Items: Plumed Steel Helmet (War +2, Cha +1, Lead +1), Warhorse (Lead +5), The Life of Lord Shang (Pol +2, Lead +1, Int +1), Formation Theory (Lead +1, Int +1, Battle MP on land: +1), Trapper's Map (Lead +1, *Trap). Jade Phoenix Pendant (+2 Cha, Medic), Silver Ornate Ring (+1 Cha)
Gold: 1398
User avatar
Jolt
Experienced Officer
 
Posts: 366
Joined: 31 Jul 2003, 11:47
Location: In democracy, it's your vote that counts. In feudalism, it's your count that votes.
Kingdom: Han

Re: PR Problems? (Discussing the PR System)

Postby Marik » 05 Dec 2012, 20:56

Jolt wrote:It could be done, over the top of my head that if a player's character who has roughly lived more than 1 year and has improved more than 2 skills/+8 stats, if that character meets an untimely demise due to circumstances outside of the player's control (e.g. Plot/execution by others), then the said player instead of getting a penalty at sign-up, actually gets a boon to his new character, allowing him to make the new character with, say, 90% of the Stats and Skill Points that his previous character had at the time of his death.
Obviously, characters retiring or suiciding by their player's decision because they want to play someone else, are not affected by this.
And likewise, if a ruler (Rulers get buffed usually pretty quickly) gets executed and creates a new character to continue ruling, it shouldn't also be affected by said boon.
This^

I can see where the staff would come from on having to penalize everybody that dies for equity's sake, and while in the end it's all just a game and it's all about having fun, it does suck to have your character die. It takes a considerable amount of time and effort to train one's role-relevant skills/stats and gathering enough gold to buy that +5 War weapon and other staple items for that role, etc. I think it would help players if they felt their newly rolled character didn't turn out to be so useless compared to their previous one if they managed to get a bonus for being a good player (hell, inheriting items and gold would be nice, but that might be pushing it a little).

That said, one would have to define what an event "outside a character's control" would be. I mean, if a character plays a battlefield general, that character would be expected to die sooner or later by exposing themselves to dangerous situations. As well a duelist would be expected to die if they participated in multiple deathmatches. Death occurring in any of those situations could be deemed as outside the player's control, even though they would be expected to be put into that position anyway. It would put that kind of character at a disadvantage compared to, say, a strategist that never leaves the capital's castle. If it were up to me, I'd leave said bonuses to a staff vote upon reroll, though I can understand if it doesn't want to be implemented.


As far as PR is concerned, I think it should be removed from the game completely; or at the very least have little to no impact on the game's mechanics. As many of the posters before me stated, there shouldn't be any game mechanic that prevents characters from acting the way the player wants them to. Aside from maybe random events occurring in a city, if a ruler wanted to be a jerk and break treaties or execute anyone that stepped into their AH, then their city/rank/successor/etc shouldn't suffer for it.

Either way, if a ruler gained enough notoriety through RP or events to national proportions, then it's almost guaranteed that a goody-two-shoes ruler would take advantage of the situation and justify an invasion, or even the formation of an alliance (as opposed to the morally questionable justifications made in the previous game in order to launch invasions and form alliances). The way I see it, there are other ways in the game to balance it out other than applying PR penalties or any sort of direct penalty, especially if it puts them at a disadvantage against kingdoms who sell out character integrity for the game's sake.
V5:
Ma Conda zi Feijian (朏囝), born 192 AD
Bearer of the Gilded Mace & The Demon's Wife
User avatar
Marik
Really Old Officer
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: 16 Mar 2004, 18:48
Location: In a place just south of Witches' Valley
Kingdom: Metal

Next

Return to Hall of Supremacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest

Copyright © 1998–2016 SimRTK Project Team. All Rights Reserved

 
cron