Shattered Kingdoms

There is no need to call them out on the forums. I mean it is nothing that they have done per say. I am just asking everyone in general that they should give people a chance.

Both sides of this debate are correct. Many people "see" a conspiracy and many people think that just better players get better positions. Again, I state, that both are correct, to an extent.

From my many years on this MUD, the most common policy of the IMMs I have seen on any type of "planned" RP, is that they work on a first come, first serve basis. They have a limited amount of time and they just help who ever runs into them first while trying to compete a "list" of their IMM duties. There have been exceptions to this, but we are talking in general.

Now, veteran players have played long enough to know what to look for when an Imm is around them. You just learn how the game breaths basically, plus I know many players who consider themselves vets, who don't even know how to interpret the Wizlist command. I consider myself a veteran player and when I want something done IC, the first thing I do is plant the seeds for it IC. I start the RP for it, well before I contact an IMM for help. After I have "planted" my RP concept, I then contact the IMM that is in charge of KD/Religion/whatever of the game, through forum PM or email address. Then I wait for them to reply OOC but at the same time, I continue to "nurture" my RP concept/event/what ever, to ensure that it has not "died out" by the time an Imm contacts me.

Believe me when I tell you this Carsetius, that I have had more stuff turned down then approved. My very first character ever on this MUD, or any MUD for that fact, was Altanon. I was a total newb then, still am in most way, yet I become the HF of Calrion/Alshain, the Leader of the Hammer, and held Paragon status for the Paladins (back when only one of each class could hold it), I even held leadership in a RPed group called the Order of the Star, oddly enough. You can still find items in the game that we had made for it.

At the end of the day, think of it like this....Imms are a speeding car going down the interstate and you are walking down the side along the interstate. Now catch the car and keep in mind that there are others running beside you to catch that car too. Now, this isn't done by design of some conspiracy, but due to the fact that there is a very limited amount of Imms around.

This is the stupidest thread ever and you should all feel ashamed for it.
No one wants leadership unless they want to feel popular because leadership sucks.

I try to avoid it like the plague and the only time I get leadership positions now, is when I get them by default. That is only due to the fact that I play my characters to age death and most don't.

Your statement is exactly what the thread was (supposed to be) about!

I want leadership so I can declare war on everybody.

You should all bow down to me, I am your leader.

Climbing a ladder is made more pleasant not only by knowing what wondrous things await at the top, but by knowing the rungs you must travail are all worthwhile and stationary.

This talk of 'veterans' begs the question as to what a veteran is. Also worth noting is, perhaps, that retention isn't automatic. For one reason or another, these magnanimous veterans are veterans, and not -- I should think -- by lack of anything better to do. It stands to reasons lurkers are either weeded out or engaged.

If veterans are simply experienced people, it makes plenty of sense that the pool of experienced people can produce more frequently quality results than the pool of the untested. How does one earn their stripes, though? Through time well roleplayed? Through chains of characters? Through nefarious network opportunities? Perhaps there are multiple routes... some more noble than others.

My hope is that whoever decides who the leaders are has their own protocol to adhere to, whatever that may be. Consistency would be the key. While I personally don't see a direct correlation showing that the best characters are always the best leaders (c.f. Peter Principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle ) I have accepted that in joining a group, I respect the decisions of people involved. I'm not sure whether or not a player's character history should be considered when evaluating a character's merit for a leadership position, but what I may consider hubris others may rightfully consider indicators of commitment and competence.So someone's characters always become leaders ... if you know that, then the next step is to have fun anyway.

To avoid derailing completely, I see three factors in making leadership more accessible and enticing: first, make it worth the work; second, appropriate competition; third, transparent procedures. The first issue seems to have been discussed based on perks, responsibilities, and so forth, and the consensus appears to be that its not a glaring issue.. but certainly one to consider. The second issue brings up the kettle of fish with the veteran conspiracy, but more importantly, highlights the trouble that can occur when everyone wants to be in charge... which, if finding leaders is a problem, may not be an issue at all presently. The third issue is the one appearing most turbid as of yet: the pathways to the top of the ladder aren't known with ubiquity. However, the charm of SK seems to come from the notion that with a layer of ambiguity comes the enticement of mystery. I am not sure how much it could be addressed without running contrary to the MO of the MUD, as, well, I'm new, myself.

To give an example of that third point, one could make leadership interesting by taking the approach most real organizations do: establish not only clear and enumerated powers, but clear and enumerated requirements. Let's say I want to make a character and aim to poise them as the MC of the MC... right now, I don't know what it would take to do that nor what it would take to do it successfully once I got there. Knowledge of only the former can make for terrible leaders, knowledge of only the latter can make for terribly executed aspirations. It would not be as thrilling, though, were the whole thing a rote process. Sad are the days when membership in a tribunal, cabal, or faith is seen as a tenure-track position, in my view.


tl;dr: one of the best ways to entice someone to lead is to show them how.

See, your problem is that you use "should" when speaking to your underlings, which implies that there is an option other than obedience. I promise that you will reap nothing but insurrection if you continue on your current path.

Okay, NOW ITS MANDATORY! SINCE YOU WANTED TO BACK TALK ME! NOW GET TO YOUR KNEES AND KNEEL AT MY FEET PEASANT!