Regas's PA Info

[Zelknolf]

I didn't think anyone is calling Mick/ Regas/ Brokenbone/ Oldgrayrogue's activity into question? It's SSM, Mizbiz, and Hollyfant who seem to be inactive, and Rotku seems to have burnt out as PA and withdrawn to just playing (somewhat infrequently)-- hence my own statements being qualified with "active," and my best guess at what Cloud meant (the new ones seem to be gone?)

[Rotku]

Rotku seems to have burnt out as PA and withdrawn to just playing (somewhat infrequently)

If only I could play more. It's more of a case of "Curse you real life for giving me paid work", rather than avoiding due to burn-out (a nice break cured that).

[t-ice]

You certainly seem to be very up-to-date to the inner workings of the ALFA machine and what is required of this particular cog in it we call the "PA". So excuse me for thinking of you as the "establishment candidate" here, and thus the inevitable question: What new energy, enthusiasm and ideas would you bring to the table?

Frankly I read your OP as so many words for "keep the wheels turning, hopefully with some more lubricant, for another term". Lots of generalities on what should be better, even extending well into wishful thinking. Could of course be my failing to grasp what you want to say, but what in all that are your actual ideas and/or vision on shaping ALFA the way you wish it? Certainly you can't achieve all those niceties you mention - there's only a few projects one can push (at a time and in a term). So what would be your priorities?

[Regas]

So what about the fact none of those people chosen as ARs have played regularly and/or have had 3-5 month absences in last six months or more? At least two don't even have active characters or actively dm.
How does that inform you to represent that community if everyone you depend on for in the AR informed counsel is detached or absent from it?

SSM and Holly have been away since sometime in April. If they are not able to continue their duties we will look to add euro volunteers to the ARs in their steads. This a gaming community and folks have rl issues sometimes that keep them away. Rotku is actually alive and well (and out posted me!) I do not plan on kicking him off the ARs … no telling what those darn Aussie’s will do when provoked!
I’ll elaborate a bit more on this below, but I think the idea of inclusion is a good one. I plan to help Dan get the OAS moving, and will push for a new group to be formed within the PA- the Player Leads. This at least will open up lots of opportunity for various members to come together and help advance ALFA’s goals of promoting more active play.

You certainly seem to be very up-to-date to the inner workings of the ALFA machine and what is required of this particular cog in it we call the "PA". So excuse me for thinking of you as the "establishment candidate" here, and thus the inevitable question: What new energy, enthusiasm and ideas would you bring to the table?
Frankly I read your OP as so many words for "keep the wheels turning, hopefully with some more lubricant, for another term". Lots of generalities on what should be better, even extending well into wishful thinking. Could of course be my failing to grasp what you want to say, but what in all that are your actual ideas and/or vision on shaping ALFA the way you wish it? Certainly you can't achieve all those niceties you mention - there's only a few projects one can push (at a time and in a term). So what would be your priorities?

Hah! Great questions! I look at ALFA as a hobby and I try and give back to it as much as I can while doing what I’m really here for, to get my D&D fix. I have always tried to help the admin, dms and any members I thought might be in need, in part because I have an interest in keeping things running so I can keep playing. One thing already noted is for all the fuss, ARs have no real power. I have never been able to direct any change in ALFA from the ARs or as a DM or in any other position I’ve held. Certainly part of my goal in running for PA is an interest in keeping the wheels turning; we all like it when the train runs on time. I actually have quite a number of ideas pent up in my brain relating to alfa, ideas that as PA I’ll finally be able to show the light of day, until they die a horrible death in committee . And that’s the other side to your point T-ice, I am realistic enough to know no matter how well intentioned, idealistic or energetic I am I’ll need to focus on at most a few things.
With that in mind I’ll throw out three major goals and a bonus:

Goal 1) Bring players and dms together for more play.
To help Dan get OAS2 and RP101 off the ground. I really don’t want to steal Dan’s thunder as he’s very passionate about this project. I would add a third leg he and I discussed- namely bringing back the Player Lead concept (something Dan also wants to do).

To my mind, the thing we’re lacking more than anything else in alfa is organized play with DMs. As both a story DM and a player that successfully plays with a large active player group I think I can help “seed” our servers with tools to help organize play and make sessions easier for dms to run.
What I propose are several players(player leads) whose job it is to help organize members in similar time zones on servers and make it easier for the dms to run regular sessions. I know these sounds basic, but as a DM it’s very frustrating to never have the same group twice for a session; to waste all the ig time on housekeeping issues like loot splits and “reading in” players joining late; or to have players drop out of play after the challenges are set. Providing DMs with one point of contact for organizing play and removing the burden of social director from the dms will help.

Additional efforts need to be made to help capture the interest of new players as they join. The second role of player leads will be to ensure that new players have a go-to person in their time zone that actively plays who will show them the ropes and make sure they are included in both dm and non-dmed player interactions.

Obviously there’s going to be a lot to this, but you get the idea…

Goal 2) Add more fun to ALFA with community wide event days.
We have an amazing sand box, why not use it more? We could set aside one weekend every four to six months or so to hold alfa wide events. We could hold tournaments, play various team scenarios, allow players to do all the things they might experience in an rp convention virtually. We could use these days to revive past members’ interests in alfa with an e-mail blast to our mail list and we could even consider using it to recruit new members. Best of all, we can bring our members together across different time zones, ciques, groups, servers, ect and begin to build stronger ties with one another.
One of my fondest memories in ALFA was an alfa wide event we held back in 2004 or 2005. It involved a day long contest where the community put up a server and alfans randomly joined teams in a version of capture the flag, it was drows vrs surface races and it was a real blast.
I would love to bring this sort of thing back to alfa, and see folks having as much fun with it as I did.

Goal 3 ) review the dispute and complaint process:
The dispute/ complaint process needs a top-down review. Many prior PAs have expressed frustration at the inflexibility of the process, especially in being flexible in offering a wider range of censures. A priority would be to engage the current admin, Past PAs and the community at large in a review of the process for consideration of possible improvements.

And the bonus goal:
I would like the pa, using the folks in our application review department, to be able to reward xp of between 500 and 1,000 points to new pcs below 4th level whose players submit a detailed biography. We are all about the rp- why not reward it?

Ok, so if you’re with me this far, I’d like to comment on one other point, made in another thread. The question was asked, to paraphrase, “to what extent should the PA use technology to police players”.
I think what the tech department has done recently is fantastic. I look forward to other solutions that help the game run more smoothly as well. I do not however believe that technology should be the focus of the PA. Technology is absolutely necessary to our project but no one comes to alfa for technology alone. Indeed, much better, newer, and more engrossing challenges are found in shrink wrapped boxes if we are looking for simply the best computer game to play. People play alfa to play with other people; to rp; to improvise; to socialize and to experience D&D in a community setting with real life players and dms. We are not here to play against NWN2s AI but with other players and dms who breathe life into our world. The role of the PA should be to foster this human element, to help it along and expand the pool of players, builders and DMs. ALFA runs on people and fun, the tech doesn’t do us any good without ‘em.

[t-ice]

Thank you for the detailed and carefully thought-out answer.

[Dorn]

hey mate,

1)
I am sometimes concerned that we are beginning to lean on tech systems to prevent cheating. These systems add complexity, take time to design and implement (time that could be used for new DM/player-fun-features), and are sometimes hard to implement to target a minority of cheaters without impacting on a few good souls who's RL circumstances may mean they are penalised by a one size fits all 'automated PC regulation' systems.

We have a system of prevention for cheating in ALFA. You cheat you get punished (if it's an honest mistake, you dont). We elect PAs to interpret the rules properly to ensure ALFA remains the game we love.
Except I feel that the punishment's currently do not establish enough of a disincentive to cheat and so we look for alternatives like system approaches.

I would like to see major exp/level losses, permanent attribute penalties, major item/gold losses, and premptive rejection of PrC/EO char approvals in the toolbox for the PA. I believe these more 'close to home' measures may be more of a disincentive (at least from mid-level on) than a strike and can always be IC played out in a world of random events.

What's your view on this?

2
Dan started picking people up on stuff that previously has been let go. I applaud Dan for this and think those that got away with it previously...'got away with it'.

Do you think the standard Dan implemeted was too lenient, too harsh, or about right.

[Regas]

hey mate,

1)
I am sometimes concerned that we are beginning to lean on tech systems to prevent cheating. These systems add complexity, take time to design and implement (time that could be used for new DM/player-fun-features), and are sometimes hard to implement to target a minority of cheaters without impacting on a few good souls who's RL circumstances may mean they are penalised by a one size fits all 'automated PC regulation' systems.
We have a system of prevention for cheating in ALFA. You cheat you get punished (if it's an honest mistake, you dont). We elect PAs to interpret the rules properly to ensure ALFA remains the game we love.
Except I feel that the punishment's currently do not establish enough of a disincentive to cheat and so we look for alternatives like system approaches.
I would like to see major exp/level losses, permanent attribute penalties, major item/gold losses, and premptive rejection of PrC/EO char approvals in the toolbox for the PA. I believe these more 'close to home' measures may be more of a disincentive (at least from mid-level on) than a strike and can always be IC played out in a world of random events.
What's your view on this?

Hey Dorn! Thanks for the CR 10 question (no one asks true or false anymore?)

So you’ve said a lot here. One thing to keep in mind is complaints come in three flavors for the most part. First are the easiest- the blatant cheaters, folks who use multiple pcs and accounts, folks who mule, loot their own corpses ect. These cases are very strait forward for the most part and usually come from newer members, but not always. The second group is made up of the members who run afoul of our rules by either not knowing about them, not believing them to be enforced or not believing they will be called on them or caught. The rub here is that many of the power gaming/ farming complaints that come from this class require both quantitative analysis against community norms as well as qualitative (judgment) calls. The third group is made up of member conflict complaints, meta, CvC, PvP, harassment, ect.

All of the controversy lately has come from the latter two types of complaints. The main issue is that many of the complaints made by dms and players in the second group against players feed into issues in the third group, the member conflicts. So what you have are different cliques of players and dms cross complaining against one another. Groups and individuals alternately feel persecuted by the admin/ PA when on the receiving end of complaints and likewise unsatisfied with the prosecution of complaints they themselves make. The PA is often left with not only with interpreting our rules and applying them fairly and objectively but also in factoring in complex member conflicts. Often times the most important facts in a case are not public information, and so the full reasoning for a ruling can’t be made public, beyond noting extenuating circumstances.

This last year or so is the first time I’ve seen members actively trying to use the PA and the complaint process to undermine members. This is the first time I’ve seen the PA regularly threatened with complaints by multiple members for not getting the outcomes they desired. I think one of the consequences of this trend is the PA is left with less room to exercise discretion or common sense in the face of the written rules. It’s one reason why I think we need to review them. This is the first time that I can remember we have multiple orders to members to not associate ic or ooc. For every member that screams for a quick and firm sanction another cries that the rules are being applied unfairly, with bias, ect.

As for the style of sanctions you suggest, these are really the purview of the HDMs of the server where the offenses occurred. Part of the challenge for the PA is the limited options presented by either informal strikes (with the possibility for other agreed upon sanctions) or formal strikes. While your ideas make sense, they are not really part of the sanction regime available to the PA. This is one reason my third plank is to review and revise these rules.

2 Dan started picking people up on stuff that previously has been let go. I applaud Dan for this and think those that got away with it previously...'got away with it'.

Do you think the standard Dan implemeted was too lenient, too harsh, or about right.

We had a very brisk complaint season over Dan’s tenure as PA. Dan was extremely technical in his approach to dealing with complaints. As much as any other PA, Dan tried to apply the letter of the rules to every case; where there was quantitative data availably Dan used exhaustive analysis to determine not only the basis for the offensive but to examine the behavior in context to peers. Likewise, Dan made every effort to factor in qualitative factors within his discretion to do so. Dan never displayed bias that I could see. I don’t know if I would have arrived at the same rulings as Dan in every case, but I do know that ALFA could do a lot worse than Dan in the complaint department. Hopefully the above post helps shed light on how difficult these rulings are to make. I can tell you this; if the PA is doing the job right there will always be people unhappy with the outcomes. I once had two different members express their anger at one of Dan’s ruling within an hour of each other. One believed the censure too harsh, the other too light. Both are excellent members as far as I’m concerned.

Thanks for the question Dorn!

Regas

[Dorn]

It's true, that was complex. I apologies and will make amends.

Cake or Pie?

[Regas]

Both - so I can eat my pie and have my cake too!

Cheers mate!

[t-ice]

Could you clarify your view on the "technological approach" to the "second class of complaints" in your classification?

I think what the tech department has done recently is fantastic. I look forward to other solutions that help the game run more smoothly as well. I do not however believe that technology should be the focus of the PA.

Assuming that a dimret system is implemented, it will clearly cross to the PA's complaits process as comes to powergaming. I read this as you supporting the notion that scripts, particularly XP gain scripts, can be altered in a way to reduce the slushing forth of powergame complaints and hurt feelings. Even if you don't want to inject yourself (as PA) into the making of such a system, you support it?

The rub here is that many of the power gaming/ farming complaints that come from this class require both quantitative analysis against community norms as well as qualitative (judgment) calls.

But here, as well as elsewhere, I get the notion you to put human judgement calls to the fore. Obviously the downside of a automated code is that it's completely void of this careful consideration for per-case circumstance.

So I suppose the question is, what do you see the role and limits of automated systems as comes to the powergaming/farming rules, enforcement and complaints?
If the extremes (as I see it) are:
- Role of automated systems is to provide information only, judgement is made by humans (DMs and ultimately PA), and each player is responsible for not metagaming. Builders and HDMs don't need to worry about more than putting about appropriate, constant XP rewards for their content.
- Static content must be coded so that anything available for a PC in-game must be ok for a player to play, without having to constantly worry about getting smacked for powergaming.
Where do you stand?

[zilvai]

I've invited two players over the past two months, both great friends of mine that I know in real. Both left and considered ALFA a rather dull environment with little RP and hardly anything to do, which made me sincerely sad to hear. Also they frowned a little at certain rules, hampering their play style extremely, as they said.

Do you have any ideas on how to change this in the future? Will you change rules to be less forceful on people or will you do the exsact opposite?

[Regas]

Could you clarify your view on the "technological approach" to the "second class of complaints" in your classification?

I think what the tech department has done recently is fantastic. I look forward to other solutions that help the game run more smoothly as well. I do not however believe that technology should be the focus of the PA.

Assuming that a dimret system is implemented, it will clearly cross to the PA's complaits process as comes to powergaming. I read this as you supporting the notion that scripts, particularly XP gain scripts, can be altered in a way to reduce the slushing forth of powergame complaints and hurt feelings. Even if you don't want to inject yourself (as PA) into the making of such a system, you support it?

The rub here is that many of the power gaming/ farming complaints that come from this class require both quantitative analysis against community norms as well as qualitative (judgment) calls.

But here, as well as elsewhere, I get the notion you to put human judgement calls to the fore. Obviously the downside of a automated code is that it's completely void of this careful consideration for per-case circumstance.

So I suppose the question is, what do you see the role and limits of automated systems as comes to the powergaming/farming rules, enforcement and complaints?
If the extremes (as I see it) are:
- Role of automated systems is to provide information only, judgement is made by humans (DMs and ultimately PA), and each player is responsible for not metagaming. Builders and HDMs don't need to worry about more than putting about appropriate, constant XP rewards for their content.
- Static content must be coded so that anything available for a PC in-game must be ok for a player to play, without having to constantly worry about getting smacked for powergaming.
Where do you stand?

Hi T-ice, you’ve scored a 20 on your SM roll! I do like the idea of using a version of Dim Ret (and other scripts) to help put a fence around the potential of farming xp. I do however have concern about using scripts to police this behavior alone. The issue is that a true power gamer will simply adjust their behavior to maximize payoff regardless of dim rets or other tech solutions. Can’t farm the same thing, farm many things; can’t farm critter xp, farm static rp; can’t farm statics, farm rp xp or dms or whatever the source of the xp- aka- power is. Alfa is blue water for power gamers, they can come in and eat with impunity until someone calls “shark”. We are fooling ourselves if we think tech alone can fix power gaming. At best it will slow the sharks down; at worst, it will tangle all the other fish in nets, and make them bait for the sharks.

I don't know too much about the specifics of coding but I'll take a stab at your second question. Any tech solution designed for policing farming should in my opinion be dealt with by the core rules haks and not something individual builders should have to police themselves. To the extent that these farming scripts create more work for builders I'd say they are less desirable.

I would really prefer to trust our players to play responsibly and then deal with the outliers as they pop-up. The issue becomes applying that sort of approach evenly across many players, and in trying to do so, creating a great deal of analytical work. How the scripts work is important too. A dim ret that’s too restrictive hurts innocent players- and might offer a false sense of inoculation from power gaming behavior.
Another gret question.. now don’t you have a server to build? …

I've invited two players over the past two months, both great friends of mine that I know in real. Both left and considered ALFA a rather dull environment with little RP and hardly anything to do, which made me sincerely sad to hear. Also they frowned a little at certain rules, hampering their play style extremely, as they said
Do you have any ideas on how to change this in the future? Will you change rules to be less forceful on people or will you do the exsact opposite?

Hi Zilvai.. I apologize that your ALFA experience has so far been lackluster. I do think you highlight a very critical issue that needs addressed in ALFA, focusing better on new member experiences. I can tell you that we have two programs in the works that might help. The first is OAS2, which is short for the open application server, a place for new players to interact with alfa in a more focused and protected setting. The second is RP101, a set of classes and interactions with dms and experienced members designed to help new players wade through all the alfa core rules and information that might be difficult to absorb quickly without help. We are also looking to add a new group called player leads, players to help organize and co-ordinate play for alfans – especially focused on new players. It sounds like you’re already working with Paazin to help new players; hopefully you can lend some of your energy to one of the upcoming alfa projects to help new players and promote fun- as you can see, we need all the help we can get .

I am sorry your friends didn’t have a very good experience. I’m not completely clear on what the issues were, but maybe it’s the low reward, permedeath environment. I will be looking to revamp the PA complaint rules, but this shouldn’t be taken to mean a change in the moderate reward, moderate advancement approach to the game. I hope you have a chance to experience the positive things about alfa, the builders, players dms and the magic of the tech department, and that these might make the stay enjoyable. If you have anything specific though, I’d be happy to try and address it.
Thanks,
Regas