Shattered Kingdoms

Every character made nowadays is in a cabal/tribunal. This game has turned into one, if you don't mind me quoting one of your immortals:



Don't you have to question why this is happening, and if it somehow doesn't completely lie on the shoulders of the players?

What was different between 2-3 years ago and today? My major thoughts are: Cabals rejected a lot more people. Cabals made people go through a process before being inducted, sometime lasting over a month. Cabals were secretive, and most new players knew of only 1-2 Druid/Adept/Harlequin.

I look back fondly on the 2-3 month period on my first cabal'd character where I roleplayed being an Imperial Legionnaire, then an Imperial Sergeant, then eventually a Captain inside the Midnight Council. I completely -do not understand- why you are against long roleplays before inductions. If I ever stayed quiet and held back from conflict enough to get a character of mine as the leader of a cabal, I would not induct anyone before two weeks after they specifically asked me for cabal membership, and any player who was forward enough to ask for cabal membership when I ruled over a 'secret' cabal would have a -far slimmer- chance of enterring compared to if they had simply waited and roleplayed and waited for me to pose the question.

Even the majority of the immortal staff, and obviously the vast majority of the players of this mud, think that the game was better off when cabals were more secretive and were able to care more about roleplay than whether or not they would be ganked.

I don't think CRS is the real problem here, but rather the problem is that the immortal staff has been stressing for over a year that -everyone- should be in a cabal/tribunal, and the coded advantages of these groups have been shown to be so completely powerful that nearly every player joins them just for that edge.

I plan on keeping my next character 'Independent' for the majority of his carreer, and I think that will stay the same for my future characters. Players who haven't been playing for 1-2+ years don't know enough about tactics to survive without a cabal or tribunal to help if they ever want to engage in pk. That isn't how things should be - cabals + tribunals should not be a -necessity-. They should be something that only 20-25% of the mud is involved in, not 90% of grandmasters.

And when the bad RPer is the leader, then what?



:O

I think Gilgon has the right idea. I think Dulrik makes valid points. I think everyone agrees that only the best of RPers should be in cabals. It is upto leadership to make this direction and change in dynamic. I would say that it is completely possible to keep your relic and get it back with less than 30 members in your cabal. That's a given. As long as all those players are active it shouldn't be a big deal.

I think any cabal leader who is allowing players of characters to play alts more than their cabal character is letting the potential of their cabal slip. Character hopping hurts the game as much as CRS or inactive or ineffective leadership.

I think the IMMs are doing as much as can possibly be done to promote RP and fair play. The rest is up to the playerbase. The people who have the say in how the groups run, are the leaders. Yes, IMMs might have an impact on this, but if the leaders aren't keeping the group in line, then they are hurting the game. Holding onto leadership because it is your pretty does not help anyone out. It only frustrates those people who want to see things happen with their group.

Start making an effort to bring the cabals back to elite. End of story.



Tell me which leader, explain the situation, and it will be dealt with.

A

I tend to base my inductions on the philosophy of "Does the character fit the cabal." Not "Does the cabal fit the character."

There should be more than just skill sets when looking at a cabal. And there should be more than raiding.

You know what? That's fine. My entire post assumes you already know the induction policy, which is probably a bad assumption. At least I should review these important points:

1. Once a seeker manages to contact the faction in question, then the faction has two weeks (real time) to make the decision and induct them. From what I'm hearing people are getting in instantly, which I'm okay with if they demonstrate good RP, but there isn't a RULE forcing that.

2. You are not forced to induct anyone who asks. If you have criteria, and they don't fit, that's fine. All the rule says is that if you are going to deny them entry, then notify them of that ASAP. If they aren't getting in, it's not fair to have them twiddling their thumbs hoping.

Why do we have this rule? Because I want new characters to be able to join the game and get included in what is going on right away. There's no better way to learn than to be brought into a group of active players that have a vested interested in helping your character. Two weeks is not a big limitation. To a truly new player, two weeks is an eternity. Any longer than that and I can't blame them for quitting the game in disgust.

While I have no particular love for the cabals due to the usually rather rampant rpless PK, I have to say the above quote is true nonetheless, at least in my experience. Leri got inducted into the Druids rather early in her life, and it was best thing that could have happened to her. Ghijk, Alcheon, Archelor, Felnoris and the Gnome Congregation (Neazche, Selzmar, Tlyvlorn) taught me the game as an SK newbie.

My newbie experience wouldn't have been half as fun without them.

On the one hand I would like to help foster the narrowing of cabal induction. On the other hand I understand how much being in a cabal can help a new character learn about RP/PK/the SK world in general. Being in a cabal is a good excuse for direction/meaning in a character, and can allow some players to stick around a lot longer than they would have otherwise. When you're alone, you have to find your own direction; RP at it's purest form. That's why, IMO, some of the best characters one meets are those loners. But from my experience it's not a path for the inexperienced.

The issue is further complicated by other cabals, and CRS. When I was leading last year, there was a brief period when the Hammer had very few members and the Harlequins had basically spam-inducted an army. As a result we were getting beaten on fairly often. The existence of CRS creates the pressure to have an active and able force, both to be able to defend HQs and to pose as an actual threat for raiding them.

IMO, some cabals simply don't have "army" RP, and yet essentially that's what the cabals are right now. Little battalions with fortresses. But when I look at the Fist, or the Harlies, I feel the RP should be more conducive to independant, roaming characters. Instead they're forced to gather up, unite, and as Ardith said often unite with people they wouldn't want to, in order to defend these forts. I don't know why I bother, though. CRS is probably here to stay.


I guess the focus now should be on a solution or movement of some kind. Perhaps instead of going by a 2-week "yes" or "no" induction policy, characters with weak/mediocre RP but who hold potential can be sort of "tutored", RPed and interacted with outside of the cabal, until they reach the level required. I don't know, I'm just throwing it out there. The absence of strong leaders is always an issue. I browse around and see the things that Burton was doing in terms of the cabal and faith, and it's somewhat inspiring... what a leader really needs is ideas, and the motivation to pursue them. I think he had that. I think Frollith has some of that too, however I can't speak for other cabal/tribunal leaders obviously. Admittedly, I never had a lot of ideas, never really had a vision except attempting to restore some dignity and respectability to the group. I came upon leadership the same way I did last time: process of elimination. Nobody else really fit the bill. And while I'm trying, understand I'm no Lorias.

I'd like to change things for the better, but figuring out how...

What do you think of the quality of roleplay in cabals now compared to years back?

If there is a difference, what do you think is causing this?

How do you think we, as a mud, can go about fixing that? (Players and Imms)

What happens in an organization when one or both leaders of an organization become inactive. Generally - a fallout. Members will attempt to rally and pick a second, which rarely gets immortal support. A leader will leave a spot open for a month while membership falls to below a dozen active members.

Recently enough one organization went through this, and after a lot of pressure was put when 'the vote didn't seem to matter because the leader was suppose to be the only person to maek a choice' is the leader was forced to select an existing member for a temporary leaderflag. This at least helped cover things over the next couple of weeks while someone else was prepared to climb the ranks.

While I see value in letting one leader choose the other leader flag, it's been stated in many places by staff that there is no coded #1 and #2 and not an enforced #1 and #2. That is suppose to be handled by the RP of an organization (ie co-leadership is possible). It also does not help a group any when not only does 1 leader delete, but the second becomes inactive.

I believe it would be in the best interests of THE GAME that an organization be allowed a 'temporary leader' by vote until which time the other leader would make their choice as to a perminent replacement. At least then recuitment could continue on and the group isn't taken advantage of while there is no one active to tarnish/pardon, etc. It could also open up further RP doors as well as keep recruitment active.

C.

Oh, there's an enforced #2 all right. Back when I was leading the fists, I'd gone without a #2 for 3 months, until my hours dropped, and Jinn forced me to pick one.