Shattered Kingdoms

This thread was created to try to force players, after reaching a certain level/notoriety, to give a title of some kind. In response to it, Dulrik has proposed restricting players from using certain titles.

Did I miss something?

I'm with stupid ^

It's a post about titles and while I didn't agree with the original poster, I had my own idea for titles that I'd been thinking about for awhile, so I thought I'd share. If you prefer that I not share ideas with the player base and just go ahead and implement them first, then feel free to continue your persuasive comments.

As far as Jardek's concerns, I hadn't thought about wanting to have two titles at the same time, but it shouldn't be a problem. You could just type in both of the titles that you want to display as part of a combined title, and the code would allow it as long as you've earned them both.

How does one convince the code that one should be using both titles? For example, if you are NOT the leader of the MC, surely the code would be all "Bleep bloop, you can't do that" - even if you have convincing RP to the contrary.

It is essentially adding a rule (to my understanding) whereby the code will say "You can't do that", which runs against the mud's catchphrase.

Please keep sharing your ideas.

sleeper

I could swear I've seen similar discussion here somewhere before, and it's certainly not a new idea that I'm going to put forth here... but how about some kind of 'finger' command that would allow players to present themselves in IC public record? That way the 'title' command retains its common usage, and if you wanted to have game-granted honors and titles that a player could achieve, this could be added to their 'finger'.

I think this was already presented as something else, like a public record of a player's history or personal biography, but ultimately, 'fingers' are really only limited to whatever parameters you set them for.

Although it's been understood that title has something to do with your commonly known reputation, it's never actually been defined. It's just a game mechanic that's been kept unmodified since the days of Merc and Diku. Because you can claim anything with a title right now, they are effectively meaningless.

The point of the idea is to give titles a chance of being meaningful by actually enforcing that definition of being commonly known reputation. You wouldn't be allowed the title "High Priest of Mira" because everyone has heard of the High Priest of Mira and knows that it isn't you. Similarly with quests that provide titles, these would be the results of great deeds whose tale has been spread throughout the common folk.

I mean if you see someone on the who list like:

don't you think it woud be cool that meant he actually slew 1000 orcs?

And I say again, this idea doesn't restrict you from other custom titles. Even though I've never been a fan of custom titles, I've never removed them because players do seem to like them. It just keeps you from claiming things that the general populace "knows" is not true.

Don't remove custom titles.

Titles based on quests just screams Diablo2 to me, thats why I'm against it.

I realize the reimplementation will probably greatly differ from how it works in Diablo2 but thats the first thing that comes to mind.

No!

I think that titles are intended to spark interest and roleplay. With so few folks on at times that is the only way to start a conversation between players. I also think that trying to come up with reserved titles would detour creativity. I would suggest that the admins especially coders stick to the mechanics of the game and leave the roleplay to the players.