JaydeMoon DMA Platform & Q&A

[Zelknolf]

I don't think that anyone can question whether you're productive when active (because you're prolific), but I have observed patterns of gaining a great deal of interest in ALFA and being that prolific writer, player, DM, or whatever, and then seeming to lose interest for some weeks after. What are your plans for keeping ALFA running smoothly during those less-active periods?

A sidebar to that: if you win this term, do you anticipate attempting a multiple-term tenure?

I also must ask about my own pet projects:
1.) Automated crafting: yea or nay?
1a) Should it be limited? How? (of course implicit in this is what point there is to automated crafting if the limit is DM intervention)
2.) Structure to create humanoid NPCs from the DM client without influence from the toolset: yea or nay?
2a) How about animals?
2b) How about constructs?
2c) How about undead?
2d) How about dragons?
2e) How about splugorthians?
2f) Should it be limited? How?
3.) Structure to allow DMs to change static spawns from the DM client without influence from the toolset: yea or nay?
3a) Should it be limited? How?
4.) Structure to create custom areas from templates stored on the module, or in submodules, to be controlled by DMs: yea or nay?
4a) Should it be limited? How?
5.) Player housing from instanced areas: yea or nay?
5a) <pattern repeats>
6.) Structure to support sub-modules in the jurisdiction of their linked servers, which could contain complex static content (in the context that I could make them technically feasible and dodge the current hosting issues of, say, footprint and process size)?
6a) <pattern repeats>

[JaydeMoon]

Zelknolf

I don't think that anyone can question whether you're productive when active (because you're prolific), but I have observed patterns of gaining a great deal of interest in ALFA and being that prolific writer, player, DM, or whatever, and then seeming to lose interest for some weeks after. What are your plans for keeping ALFA running smoothly during those less-active periods?

I dunno, actually, come to think about it, I don't think I want to do this anymore...



Is a good point, and it can certainly seem like that for sure! The last 4 years of my life have been one of major upheaval. 4 years is a long time and I'm only just getting out of the woods. I spent a year in Afghanistan and upon returning, came back to ALFA. Since then, I went back to unemployment, looked for work, found a job, moved, reacquainted myself with working, dealing with long distance relationship woes, etc. Now I'm in a position where I often have to go out of town on Army business, in order to ensure my unit is getting the training it needs.

Several times in the past half a year, I have dropped off a few times, as ALFA has taken a lower priority to... moving halfway across the country (for example). When I start thinking about coming back, admittedly, I start to look at how some things are going int he community and I kind of despair. Veilan's little Happy-o-meter poll is yielding interesting, if not actually surprising, results.

But there are a few things that have happened recently that have gotten me a little excited for future prospects and it has lured me right back in. Honestly, I feel I'll be able to work well with Vendrin as well as with a few other individuals who have shown some very positive interest in making things better. And honestly, I think that I'll work better with them than Curmudgeon will. And I don't mean in a civil and nice way, Curm is a very nice guy, but I mean that I am willing to forge results in a timely manner with some very smart people.

That's exciting, frankly. Getting to work with neat people to accomplish amazing things? Wow, that's simply amazing.

If Curm is re-elected and things continue for the next six months in the field of 'change' as they have in the last six, I'll probably be dispirited and turn my interest to other things. There is a lot of talk about whether ALFA is stagnant or not. A lot of the folks who believe that it isn't point to the fact that we have somewhat steady numbers on a regular basis. They are absolutely right and that is absolutely a good thing. But I am looking for growth. Growth will come from change, which is two parts adding wonderful, neat stuff (servers, mechanics, scripted content) and 1 part cutting the unnecessary chaff from rules and traditions that served us well in the past but may be holding us back for the future.

1.) Automated crafting: yea or nay?
1a) Should it be limited? How? (of course implicit in this is what point there is to automated crafting if the limit is DM intervention)

Yes. It removes a burden from the DMs and gives ALFA something that I can pretty safely assume a STRONG majority of ALFA wants to see implemented. I think that there may need to be some limitations imposed based on how it may affect standards, but up front I do not think that crafting, properly installed, will break our 'economy' and we can always tweak as we discover things that work or work well.

2.) Structure to create humanoid NPCs from the DM client without influence from the toolset: yea or nay?
2a) How about animals?
2b) How about constructs?
2c) How about undead?
2d) How about dragons?
2e) How about splugorthians?
2f) Should it be limited? How?

ZOMG, YES! Having to tool up throw away NPCs (or make them from the very limited palette) is a chore that we can just do without. If we can find a way to implement this without causing a heavy strain on the server, then we should do so. For EVERYTHING. Limits should not be Tech based. Tech should give us full range of options.

Limitations will come on the DM side, for example, PADMs not able to tool up something greater than CR X, or what have you. I'd be very interested in seeing how this works while also being able to give the DM creating the NPC through the interface the ability to know exactly how tough of a critter he is creating.

Also, Atlantean Blind Warrior Woman, yes.

3.) Structure to allow DMs to change static spawns from the DM client without influence from the toolset: yea or nay?
3a) Should it be limited? How?

You are talking about being able to lay down a static spawn type encounter in a given area? Change it from 2-4 orcs if 5 lvl 1s walk through to 18 Black Dragons if Persephone enters? Yes, I like this too.

4.) Structure to create custom areas from templates stored on the module, or in submodules, to be controlled by DMs: yea or nay?
4a) Should it be limited? How?

We can do this? Why haven't we?

5.) Player housing from instanced areas: yea or nay?
5a) <pattern repeats>

No. This is just 'stuff' that players could then 'get'. And the office of DMA is strictly against players 'getting' 'stuff'.

6.) Structure to support sub-modules in the jurisdiction of their linked servers, which could contain complex static content (in the context that I could make them technically feasible and dodge the current hosting issues of, say, footprint and process size)?
6a) <pattern repeats>

This sounds absolutely amazing.

BTW, I was joking about 'stuff'. I like players to have stuff. Houses too.

[Zelknolf]

I suspect that I did a poor job of defining my question three-- so I offer the same clarification here:

Take the custom NPCs made in number 2: give DMs the power to make those spawn statically. (i.e. DM runs a plot where generic ne'erdowells shank the local goblins and start raiding caravans. DM goes into cave X and says "You goblins don't spawn here any more. My ne'erdowells do.") -- would this be seen as appropriate power to give to DMs? And if so, what restrictions would you place?

[JaydeMoon]

Oh. Looks like I mostly understood it. I may have added more specific functionality in my imagination version that is probably far too onerous to make real (If PC = Persephone, change spawns to death).

Yes, this is good and can create a more dynamic feel for the server.

PADMs would not be able to do this, I would say, not without clearing it through the HDM.

ADMs should be given more latitude... generally an HDM call, but I think ADMs with a decent working knowledge of the server should be able to, so long as clear communication exists to inform other DMs of what is happening.

[JaydeMoon]

In closing:

Vote now, plzkthx! <-- Not link to voting page.

This one is

[danielmn]

Late questions:

Do you have plans to form a crack squad of leet testers to ensure all incoming newstuffs gets tested for abuse? I can recall Alfa had a time with abused newstuffs in ALFA-nwn1.

Do you think builder training should be something focused on, and if so, under whose perview? Builders submitted half-butt complete newstuffs has been a problem in the past...

[JaydeMoon]

danielmn

crack squad of leet testers?

I believe that testing would be under the purview of the Tech Admin. That said, yes, I think that anything implemented would be so under the condition that it be removed if it turns out that it breaks ALFA. However, I do not believe it should be removed it it turns out that it's exploitable and we have a couple of bad eggs who exploit it. Deal with the exploiters and let the folks in ALFA who play nicely have their toys.

Do you think builder training should be something focused on, and if so, under whose perview?

Yes, I think that people who want to build regularly should have proper training.

I think when we talk about building, we are literally speaking of manipulating the toolset to add areas/NPCs/items to the module. This is in the DMA's realm, managed by HDMs.

Scripting and other work that is related to building can be in Tech.

I have been toying with the idea of changing the Staff Teams to:

Standards
Training
Building

Not a formalized concept, and one I'd have to speak with the current team if I get elected.