|
|
Post by Beowuuf on Apr 25, 2008 1:53:07 GMT -5
Our verison of Magnamund is build on the gamebook version though, there is no point saying 'yeah, after the NO GM everyone couldn't get that high *whistles*
What we don't need to do is make the above level 20 mean anything outside the kai class, which can have internal benefits for higher ranks. Even though level 20 is a simple d20 sell. Why don't knights only have five very spaced out levels? Do Telchos need levels for their heirarchy? The forum 'level' may equate directly to ones standing, but unlike in the previous TotS the steps do not have to all be adhered to just to keep in line with the BCS and Kai models with more powers each rank.
|
|
|
|
Post by Al on Apr 25, 2008 2:31:33 GMT -5
Wuufy raises a couple of good points - the first is power and rank. Why are they related? In a real army the most powerful soldiers are not the highest ranked soldiers, the opposite is usually true. Who would you place money on one to one, a General or a Sergeant? My money is on Sarge.
Also, the most powerful person in a class is also not necessarily going to be the best administrator - the class hierarchy assumes that the two go hand in hand when in reality running an organization requires a very different skill set than being a powerful member in it. For example, if you have two Kai GrandMasters, one at lvl 21 and the other at lvl 27, should the lvl 27 one be the leader just because he is highest ranked? If the lvl 21 is a better administrator and has a higher charisma, then it may make more sense for him to become the leader.
|
|
|
|
Post by eviltb on Apr 25, 2008 2:56:49 GMT -5
Hmm. If we use the ranks as they where listed, most of them go up to lvl20, a few go upto 30 and only 3 classes break up past that - the Kai, the NAK and the Sages. Now the Kai levels/ranks are canon, theres no disputing that as they are lifted straight from the gamebooks. The NAK are a perversion of the Kai, so it would make sense that they follow suit (and Im not just saying that cause Im a power-hungry servant of Naar  ). The Sages I cant comment on, as I don't know much, if at all anything, about their class. So breaking everyone at level 20 would be fine for those whose classes currently dont surpass that level anyway, but for those who have the potential to reach lvl 30+, they would possibly find themselves restricted. Still I second Doomys suggestion that we do away with ranks/levels completely. Its working for us here anyway, so theres no reason we cant carry it over to the new board. But again as Wuuf as said, we really need Winterhawk in on this before anything can be actioned. Either that or wait for the new RPG to come out! |
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Bear on Apr 25, 2008 5:50:35 GMT -5
Restricted, yes. But not terribly so. If you're an active member of the site, you're going to earn medals. Maybe not a huge number, but from memory, I earned 4-5 medals just for being a member and posting regularly.
Besides, I (personally - can't speak for BC and the other Supreme Masters) have no problems capping the Kai at level 20 if they don't do anything else bar post. Bringing medals into the equation means that we can also reward people who do more than post earlier (with forum access and the like).
I would even be prepared to go lower, and say that you can only get to level 10 or 15 through posting, although that might be too extreme.
BTW, It's not just the Kai and the Brotherhood who have a rank structure in d20 - I think the Knights of the Realm do too - do the dwarves? My books are at home, so I can't check.
Also, power doesn't necessarily have to equal rank. It's up to each class to decide on their leaders. Currently, the only rule we have is that the class leader must be level 20. I think this is a sensible rule - especially if we go with Sarra's suggestion of making both medals and posts count towards level. That way, the 'suitability' of the class leader for the role can be due to his/her posts, medals, or a combination of both.
Here are my favourite suggestions from this thread so far:
1. Double the post count requirements for each level.
This will better reflect the busy forum that we now have, rather than the old system where we were dealing with less prolific posters.
2. Each medal increases your level by 1
Is each medal increases by 1 too much? Should it be 1 level for every 2 medals? I'm leaning towards 1.
3. Levels for posting be capped at level 20
I'd be happy to go lower as I say, but this might be too extreme.
The concern is from an administrative point of view. Posts per level is easy enough, as is capping level for posts at 20. I don't know if the forum level allows for adding medal count to the level - although I can't see a problem with this, from a coding perspective to be honest.
Thoughts? Opinions? Rotten tomatoes?
-GB
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarra on Apr 25, 2008 6:11:35 GMT -5
Wuufy raises a couple of good points - the first is power and rank. Why are they related? In a real army the most powerful soldiers are not the highest ranked soldiers, the opposite is usually true. Who would you place money on one to one, a General or a Sergeant? My money is on Sarge. Also, the most powerful person in a class is also not necessarily going to be the best administrator - the class hierarchy assumes that the two go hand in hand when in reality running an organization requires a very different skill set than being a powerful member in it. For example, if you have two Kai GrandMasters, one at lvl 21 and the other at lvl 27, should the lvl 27 one be the leader just because he is highest ranked? If the lvl 21 is a better administrator and has a higher charisma, then it may make more sense for him to become the leader. Which takes us to the conversation we've been having in the Knight's Thread about how class leaders should be chosen based on who has the highest post count at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Bear on Apr 25, 2008 7:48:05 GMT -5
I'm in favour of each class choosing how to choose their leader, provided that the leader meets minimum criteria set down by the site.
For example, the Knights might choose to run some sort of public Tournament to decide the leader, while the Kai may decide on a member vote, while the Sages might go for a test of wisdom/intelligence in the form of a riddle contest.
Provided each entrant meets the general guidelines (currently case, level 20+), I think each of these methods are valid.
-GB
PS: I realise I've done a lot of talking in this thread. Please don't assume that I'm trying to force my thoughts on you guys, because that's not my attention - if it comes across that way, then it's accidental. My ideas are just that - ideas to be torn apart and spat out if they're rubbish.
|
|
|
|
Post by Agrarvyn on Apr 25, 2008 7:59:31 GMT -5
I actually like those ideas, GB, but I don't think anyone should be instantly promoted to level 20 simply because people want him to be boss.
For instance, Tyrenis started as an overweight, prematurely grey, 33 year-old Sage who was more interested in books than moral debate. Somewhere along the line, the whole "level 20 and getting more experienced" thing turned him into a veritable super-powered, kindly old grandfather and paragon of Good.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Bear on Apr 25, 2008 8:04:07 GMT -5
No I agree. What I was suggesting is that you can't be elligible to become boss until you get to level 20 (either through posting or through medals).
-GB
PS: You make Tyrenis sound like Dumbledore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Al on Apr 25, 2008 8:22:36 GMT -5
For example, the Knights might choose to run some sort of public Tournament to decide the leader, while the Kai may decide on a member vote, while the Sages might go for a test of wisdom/intelligence in the form of a riddle contest. And we Dwarfs can have a drinking and shooting contest! |
|
|
|
Post by Doomy on Apr 25, 2008 8:50:04 GMT -5
And we Dwarfs can have a drinking and shooting contest! We could call it the Bor Biathlon. We keep the shooting bit, but dump all that tedious dicking about on planks of wood and down brews instead. I suggest live Giaks would make suitable targets for the shooting. |
|
|
|
Post by Agrarvyn on Apr 25, 2008 9:07:13 GMT -5
PS: You make Tyrenis sound like Dumbledore. Well, other than the fact that Tyrenis looked younger, was younger and had a good line in dual-wielding duelling weapons rather than a wand, they definitely both fit into the Wise Kindly Grandfather (Who Can Actually Kick Your Arse) stereotype  |
|
|
|
Post by eviltb on Apr 25, 2008 10:13:44 GMT -5
For example, the Knights might choose to run some sort of public Tournament to decide the leader, while the Kai may decide on a member vote, while the Sages might go for a test of wisdom/intelligence in the form of a riddle contest. And we Dwarfs can have a drinking and shooting contest! Us NAK would just roshambo for the top spot. Could be difficult when facing off against KHFA though.....  |
|
|
|
Post by zipp on Apr 25, 2008 10:33:25 GMT -5
I have to say I don't like the idea of medals giving levels. I remember when I was staff (and even afterwards) recieving pms from members who'd been hurt by not recieving levels, and asking me if they weren't considered part of the community enough to gain one. Adding the bonus of a level gain seems to be to exasperate this potential problem.
Furthermore, having a medal is honor enough... does it have to be packaged with another honor? Personally I think the lists that we have here are working out fine. It's an easy way to see who has contributed and in what way.
I'm actually with Maerin on this one. After consideration... what do we need levels for? Unless it's going to have a direct impact on some aspect of the site, I think it will be another cluttery pointless feature. As he said, I think THAT'S the discussion we need to have. Not implementation... application.
Medals have a purpose. As of now, I can't see any purpose for levels outside of the WW and tournaments.
|
|
|
|
Post by Beowuuf on Apr 25, 2008 10:50:02 GMT -5
I liked the level and the rest of the RPG stuff since it made the tots site different from other sites and gave it a little structure.I agree it put new people off and so should be hideable until requested in a profile setting, but afterwards I liked it. It made sure you couldn't just start at the forum and try to dominate a storyline because you were the next Ka iUber master, and meant somethign to swap out your character and start again
The medal system (or any honours) shows a failing in having it used enough. If it was important, maybe those repsonsible would do more to distribute it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maerin on Apr 25, 2008 12:08:35 GMT -5
Actually, the level thing didn't make TotS any different from any of the rest of the forums out there, because almost all such forums (including this one!) ascribe titles (which is essentially the same thing) to people based on post count. For those of you who didn't immediately jump on the "purple lots-of-circles" bandwagon on this site, look at the titles (and the number of circles...might as well be a level number, eh?) of the people who didn't. In reality, it was the monetary reward, offered for length of posts, that marked the Tower as being unique in rewarding a certain quality of post (be it only wordiness) over quantity of one-line posts one might come up with. Unfortunately, money quickly was rendered insignificant on the site for various reasons that were much debated, and so the uniqueness of that system faded in the past couple years.
As for newcomers "dominating" a storyline or what have you, I think that is just blowing smoke in the hopes that people all assume there must be a fire. I have never seen that situation arise, at least not to the level that is being considered here. I have seen a person get on a site and try to be a jerk, sure. In nearly 15 years of participation in various online communities, I have never seen more than two or three such working together at it at one time. Since a group effort is about the only way that such a situation is actually capable of swamping the sheer number of existing participants on a community that can all see and recognize that nonsense when it occurs, it is a stretch to cite that as a reason justifying a level system that, as has already been pointed out more than once, has nothing to do with any of the roleplaying aspects of this community. Certainly there are far more examples of a small number of long-standing members of a community abusing their priviledges over a newcomer. One can cite illustrate not a few examples of there being a fire there.
|
|
). The Sages I cant comment on, as I don't know much, if at all anything, about their class. So breaking everyone at level 20 would be fine for those whose classes currently dont surpass that level anyway, but for those who have the potential to reach lvl 30+, they would possibly find themselves restricted.
