Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
Moderator: ALFA Administrators
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
Well, we have a few regular games going-- Adanu has a thing on WHL; Ronan has a thing on TSM; I have a thing on MS. I would probably characterize mine as lending itself to a tactical approach (bad guys have finite resources at the outset and PCs can get up to whatever to reduce them-- though the response has mostly been "run up and hit em #yolo," so I'd probably advertise it as just "adventure."); might be another DM willing to start a thing for potential newbies.
There's some static content on BG that level 1s can do, but the interesting stuff runs out in a few days. I'd happily make more if people were going to do them, which could certainly reduce the pressure on a potential DM, though I can't really make interesting ones every week. (would be super easy to add new kinds of mushrooms or new mail routes or whatever-- but that sounds like a fine way to look boring to folk)
There's some static content on BG that level 1s can do, but the interesting stuff runs out in a few days. I'd happily make more if people were going to do them, which could certainly reduce the pressure on a potential DM, though I can't really make interesting ones every week. (would be super easy to add new kinds of mushrooms or new mail routes or whatever-- but that sounds like a fine way to look boring to folk)
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
I've said this in a few different venues now but I'll repeat it here for whatever its worth-
The original concept of ALFA as a persistent, dynamic and spontaneous representation of Faerun was fantastic and wonderful. The infrastructure is mostly intact to run a large persistent community, but we no longer have a large community. Density is our main issue, we can not field enough players and dms to keep things interesting on a persistent basis. We can't and shouldn't try and fill this gap with static content- the venue and the builders/ coders can't possibly compete with the free MORGs, so why bother, its not why folks are here anyway. Its not a matter of our goal of a PW being bad, or wrong, its just reality. What follows might be hard for some to accept but consider we could always just open a Campaign server that opens for dms to run what they want if you all aren't quite ready to give up the ghost.
Once we accept that the project is no longer about trying to run a PW I think we can focus on vastly improving the fun and utility of ALFA's resources and people, which are substantial. Many of our rules revolve around maintaining a stable and fair PW environment- we should scrap some of these and instead configure our rules and policies to maximize the use and play-ability of what we've built: ALFA should be focused on facilitating campaign style gaming for its members, and should change its rules and procedures to maximize the utility of the existing resources to accomplish this goal. The value in alfa now is it's members as players, dms and builders wanting to gather together and play D&D- it's the only thing that's worked for a long time. If we transition ALFA to a campaign style community that focuses on getting folks together for regular games we're going to be way, way ahead.
-We should stop worrying about number of PCs and start thinking about number of campaigns.
-We should stop limiting where players and dms play, if they play where they DM or if they have multiple toons there.
-We should stop worrying about levels, wealth, standards and all the other rules in place to keep things fair among players with toons in a PW- there is no PW play going on anyway.
-We should stop worrying about static content and focus on helping develop content and tools that empower dms running campaigns.
-We should make it a priority to on-board new members into campaigns.
-We should develop a tool to help schedule and organize campaigns that is visible to not just ALFA, and not just the NWN2 community, but to the tabletop D&D community at large- that's our market once we can agree we're in the virtual tabletop campaign business, and not the PW business.
The original concept of ALFA as a persistent, dynamic and spontaneous representation of Faerun was fantastic and wonderful. The infrastructure is mostly intact to run a large persistent community, but we no longer have a large community. Density is our main issue, we can not field enough players and dms to keep things interesting on a persistent basis. We can't and shouldn't try and fill this gap with static content- the venue and the builders/ coders can't possibly compete with the free MORGs, so why bother, its not why folks are here anyway. Its not a matter of our goal of a PW being bad, or wrong, its just reality. What follows might be hard for some to accept but consider we could always just open a Campaign server that opens for dms to run what they want if you all aren't quite ready to give up the ghost.
Once we accept that the project is no longer about trying to run a PW I think we can focus on vastly improving the fun and utility of ALFA's resources and people, which are substantial. Many of our rules revolve around maintaining a stable and fair PW environment- we should scrap some of these and instead configure our rules and policies to maximize the use and play-ability of what we've built: ALFA should be focused on facilitating campaign style gaming for its members, and should change its rules and procedures to maximize the utility of the existing resources to accomplish this goal. The value in alfa now is it's members as players, dms and builders wanting to gather together and play D&D- it's the only thing that's worked for a long time. If we transition ALFA to a campaign style community that focuses on getting folks together for regular games we're going to be way, way ahead.
-We should stop worrying about number of PCs and start thinking about number of campaigns.
-We should stop limiting where players and dms play, if they play where they DM or if they have multiple toons there.
-We should stop worrying about levels, wealth, standards and all the other rules in place to keep things fair among players with toons in a PW- there is no PW play going on anyway.
-We should stop worrying about static content and focus on helping develop content and tools that empower dms running campaigns.
-We should make it a priority to on-board new members into campaigns.
-We should develop a tool to help schedule and organize campaigns that is visible to not just ALFA, and not just the NWN2 community, but to the tabletop D&D community at large- that's our market once we can agree we're in the virtual tabletop campaign business, and not the PW business.
Game spy ID: Regas Seive
GMT -5(EST)
GMT -5(EST)
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
That's all well and good-- but if we try to turn ALFA into a place only for DMing and throw out persistency, then those of us who don't get DM time will probably leave. Given past patterns of relaxing policies (wherein the arguments include a few vivid examples of people who would do so much more, and then the actual behavior post policy change isn't measurably better for ALFA), I suspect that will reflect current populations absent DM attention: that's about half of the community.
Maybe you think that ALFA will survive and come out stronger; I don't much know, as I'll probably not be here to witness it if the community goes that way. I suspect that it'd be pretty easy to end what's left of persistency and leave behind a handful of splinter projects. I just also think that, like most splinter projects, they'll last somewhere between three months and a year before dying.
Maybe you think that ALFA will survive and come out stronger; I don't much know, as I'll probably not be here to witness it if the community goes that way. I suspect that it'd be pretty easy to end what's left of persistency and leave behind a handful of splinter projects. I just also think that, like most splinter projects, they'll last somewhere between three months and a year before dying.
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
I'm not saying we should throw out the persistent aspects of the community, but instead facilitate more campaign style policies. Why couldn't you have more dm time? None of the active dms or potentially active dms would prevent you from playing in a campaign if you had a new pc and wanted to join in. I don't want to take anything away from you or anyone else in suggesting we make it easier for members to play together in organized games. Hell we could run the campaigns on separate instances of the servers if need be but why not organizing and play together rather than stare at a bunch of empty servers? There's no reason why everyone can't be playing if they can make a regular time, assuming we can get folks to step up and DM. The hard thing now is untangling who can play where without running afoul of the PC and DM jurisdictional rules- it's silly, we're shooting ourselves in our own feet at this point with the damned restrictions. There's no CvC, there's no one building uber pcs through power gaming solo or farming, there's no more static quest farming, and if there was- there's no one left to feel bad about the other guy's ill gotten gains, no one cares about that anymore. If you don't want to join in that's fine zelk but no one is or has been forcing you or anyone else to sit on the sidelines. I get not wanting to risk a treasured toon to a dm you might have misgivings about, but what's the harm in rolling up a new one and joining the fun?
Game spy ID: Regas Seive
GMT -5(EST)
GMT -5(EST)
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
Suggesting that we throw out all of the traits of persistency still makes the game cease to be a persistent world. You can still call it persistent if you like-- and I can call myself the Duchess of Cambridge. Still unlikely that anyone will regard the result as the title.
So the rest is probably true or will become true-- take away all of the traits of persistency and no one who remains will care about the typical requirements of persistency. And while half of ALFA is unambiguously forced to the sidelines, and hearing that it's not so from someone who has had a preferred seat in long-term campaigns for years is insulting, those who are so forced will also leave, and those who remain will be involved. So I maintain my predictions.
So the rest is probably true or will become true-- take away all of the traits of persistency and no one who remains will care about the typical requirements of persistency. And while half of ALFA is unambiguously forced to the sidelines, and hearing that it's not so from someone who has had a preferred seat in long-term campaigns for years is insulting, those who are so forced will also leave, and those who remain will be involved. So I maintain my predictions.
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
How do you feel about using one of the servers to host campaign style games, so as not to disturb the persistancy of the other servers. You seemed to think WH wasn't necessary awhile back when we had trouble hosing it- wouldn't you like the chance to play with folks? Yes I can ask to dm on WH ALFA live and start a new campaign there, and would, except that anyone dming there or with two pcs couldn't play in the campaign. I'm really not trying to hurt your vision of a persistent world but what's the point of all this if folks can't get together to play? If you back out the active campaign times what do our numbers even look like these days? Maybe things will bounce back but I think for now aside from campaign play alfa live has pretty well gone dark. The only forums activity appears to be the handful of campaigns. Why not try and get others into long term campaigns too, is that such a terrible idea?
Game spy ID: Regas Seive
GMT -5(EST)
GMT -5(EST)
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
As a general rule, I would indeed advocate for people to host their own instances of ALFA servers if they find existing policies and implications of persistency to be dealbreakers. That doesn't require that we bring any of the existing ones down, and really just represents what people do anyway (but slightly more publically, where you're more likely to have the campaign live a little longer). I stand by my statement that WHL is probably still not ready for live, 'course; that wasn't said in anger or frustration-- I had to fix a lot of stuff on that server, and the result is still left wanting-- more a note that Castano has explicitly supported such in the past, and that the bar for running a server is much lower when there's no implications for anyone else's games.
It sounds from that question, though, like you'd expect to use our existing hosts' resources to host a non-persistent server-- which you'd probably have to take up with the host and the HDM. I can't make the call to shutter a server, though it does seem pretty wasteful to dedicate resources capable of persistency to a campaign server, which is pretty easy to just host yourself.
It sounds from that question, though, like you'd expect to use our existing hosts' resources to host a non-persistent server-- which you'd probably have to take up with the host and the HDM. I can't make the call to shutter a server, though it does seem pretty wasteful to dedicate resources capable of persistency to a campaign server, which is pretty easy to just host yourself.
-
- Dungeon Master
- Posts: 1327
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:43 am
- Location: The Frozen North
- Contact:
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
What if a player is allowed two different types of PCs? Persistent world characters who follow Alfa's standard regulations as they are now, and campaign PCs who are only played within specific campaigns. A player could have any number of campaign PCs on any server as long as each such PC is not played outside the campaign it was created for. Also within such a campaign, characters could start at various levels according to the DM's discretion and in general break any rules as long as it is good for the campaign (as in table top rpgs where the DM is the sole authority).
"[T]he dwarvern people, are machine-like, and it is impossible to reason with a machine." - Susana
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
You can already do that by hosting a non-persistent instance for your campaign.
Though I believe that the question of doing precisely that on the persistent servers has come up before to mixed responses (the negative side mostly being that drama is expected if a campaign ends and such a PC must be retired). It might be time to rehash it; always possible that old uncertainties have since been resolved, or that a simple change could fix it (easy enough to make a campaign PC flag, and just paralyze/silence such a PC if there's no DM on; would effectively enforce the requirement and establish early and unambiguously what life will be like if the DM stops running the event).
Though I believe that the question of doing precisely that on the persistent servers has come up before to mixed responses (the negative side mostly being that drama is expected if a campaign ends and such a PC must be retired). It might be time to rehash it; always possible that old uncertainties have since been resolved, or that a simple change could fix it (easy enough to make a campaign PC flag, and just paralyze/silence such a PC if there's no DM on; would effectively enforce the requirement and establish early and unambiguously what life will be like if the DM stops running the event).
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
I have no problems with campaign only PCs if the DM in question is allowed sole discretion on level and gear for that PC in accordance with their campaign. This would allow me far more flexibility for bringing in players for my two storylines.
First Character: Zyrus Meynolt, the serene Water Genasi berserker. "I am the embodiment of the oceans; serene until you summon the storm." Zyrus: http://tinyurl.com/9emdbnd
Second Character: Damien Collins, the atypical druid. "What? Being a stick in the mud is boring. No pun intended grins"
Western Heartlands HDM: On break. PM for emergencies
Second Character: Damien Collins, the atypical druid. "What? Being a stick in the mud is boring. No pun intended grins"
Western Heartlands HDM: On break. PM for emergencies
-
- Dungeon Master
- Posts: 1327
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:43 am
- Location: The Frozen North
- Contact:
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
Except for:Zelknolf wrote:You can already do that by hosting a non-persistent instance for your campaign.
Twin Axes wrote: A player could have any number of campaign PCs on any server as long as each such PC is not played outside the campaign it was created for. Also within such a campaign, characters could start at various levels according to the DM's discretion and in general break any rules as long as it is good for the campaign (as in table top rpgs where the DM is the sole authority).
"[T]he dwarvern people, are machine-like, and it is impossible to reason with a machine." - Susana
- oldgrayrogue
- Retired
- Posts: 3284
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 7:09 am
- Location: New York
- Contact:
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
I would totally support allowing an unlimited number of "campaign only" PCs completely outside of ALFA's rules and then leaving ALFA's PW environment as it is otherwise (i.e. you are still allowed 2 PCs playable on separate servers).
I currently play in 2 campaigns -- Ronan's Vilquari campaign on Sunday nights and Zelk's Queen Robyn campaign on Friday nights. These PCs are de facto campaign PCs. I rarely play them outside of the set campaign times because frankly there is not a lot to do outside of the campaign. Also, the campaigns are both essentially level restricted, so going out and "adventuring" is somewhat OOC to what is happening in the campaign.
I love the PW style of play. I wish we had more of it in ALFA. I think we can bring it back if we have more "overarching" storylines going on on servers like Heegz did recently with his "Gnoll War" on BG. Those types of open ended stories allow all players -- regardless of time zones or interaction with others, and regardless of level -- to join in the story and the fun. It works really well at getting players to log on and just RP. If there is one change we should think about in ALFA in terms of persistency its that each HDM be required (by DMA?) to implement some overarching story line on their respective servers with content to provide a backdrop for the story. All you need is a "regional" antagonist. This doesn't require more than the placement of spawns and set encounters and a few forum posts from time to time to keep things "alive" and interesting. I think this is the type of "static content" ALFAns like -- some with a story they can invest in behind it. The rest of the content is just too stale for most of us to play anymore (some recent additions excepted).
So yeah a mix of "campaign play" and "more story based PW play" seems to be what our membership craves. Right now, it looks like only the campaign content gives most people the impetus to log in. I don't include myself in that group BTW. I still like to just log in and RP with others player to player without a DM on, but sadly the number of persons doing so, at least when I play which has been ALFA prime time for a long time, has dwindled to next to nothing. If we want to save the PW aspect of ALFA then it seems we have to give players more of an incentive to log in to play that style of gaming. New (and more interesting) static content has been tried by Zelk and Rumple on BG and MS but I don't think its doing the trick. I think Heegz formula works, we should give it a try.
In the meantime, Regas' points are all well taken. We should open ALFA up to "Campaign Only" PCs completely outside of all ALFA rules except for these two: 1) the PC can only be played in the context of the campaign and 2) the PC MUST be retired at the close of the campaign. Its a choice to play one that comes with privileges so the concern about "drama" is not valid. Nor do we need elaborate scripts to quarantine campaign PCs who log on when no DM is on. Just because PCs are in a campaign does not mean that they should be precluded from logging on and RPing with each other in the context of the campaign. A DM may also place campaign encounters for them when the DM is not on. We need to employ an honor system here, and we have a PA to enforce violations if they occur. We are a small enough community to handle that easily now. The point is to implement changes that permit greater gameplay, not restrict gameplay.
I currently play in 2 campaigns -- Ronan's Vilquari campaign on Sunday nights and Zelk's Queen Robyn campaign on Friday nights. These PCs are de facto campaign PCs. I rarely play them outside of the set campaign times because frankly there is not a lot to do outside of the campaign. Also, the campaigns are both essentially level restricted, so going out and "adventuring" is somewhat OOC to what is happening in the campaign.
I love the PW style of play. I wish we had more of it in ALFA. I think we can bring it back if we have more "overarching" storylines going on on servers like Heegz did recently with his "Gnoll War" on BG. Those types of open ended stories allow all players -- regardless of time zones or interaction with others, and regardless of level -- to join in the story and the fun. It works really well at getting players to log on and just RP. If there is one change we should think about in ALFA in terms of persistency its that each HDM be required (by DMA?) to implement some overarching story line on their respective servers with content to provide a backdrop for the story. All you need is a "regional" antagonist. This doesn't require more than the placement of spawns and set encounters and a few forum posts from time to time to keep things "alive" and interesting. I think this is the type of "static content" ALFAns like -- some with a story they can invest in behind it. The rest of the content is just too stale for most of us to play anymore (some recent additions excepted).
So yeah a mix of "campaign play" and "more story based PW play" seems to be what our membership craves. Right now, it looks like only the campaign content gives most people the impetus to log in. I don't include myself in that group BTW. I still like to just log in and RP with others player to player without a DM on, but sadly the number of persons doing so, at least when I play which has been ALFA prime time for a long time, has dwindled to next to nothing. If we want to save the PW aspect of ALFA then it seems we have to give players more of an incentive to log in to play that style of gaming. New (and more interesting) static content has been tried by Zelk and Rumple on BG and MS but I don't think its doing the trick. I think Heegz formula works, we should give it a try.
In the meantime, Regas' points are all well taken. We should open ALFA up to "Campaign Only" PCs completely outside of all ALFA rules except for these two: 1) the PC can only be played in the context of the campaign and 2) the PC MUST be retired at the close of the campaign. Its a choice to play one that comes with privileges so the concern about "drama" is not valid. Nor do we need elaborate scripts to quarantine campaign PCs who log on when no DM is on. Just because PCs are in a campaign does not mean that they should be precluded from logging on and RPing with each other in the context of the campaign. A DM may also place campaign encounters for them when the DM is not on. We need to employ an honor system here, and we have a PA to enforce violations if they occur. We are a small enough community to handle that easily now. The point is to implement changes that permit greater gameplay, not restrict gameplay.
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
Yes, but my first point is already allowed. Right now. I can come home from work today and put up a campaign BG and DM anyone I like on it, under almost any conditions I like (except, of course, that I would need to keep my own vault and database). If ALFA also supports it, maybe I can have a forum for it; if not, lol? They're open source.Twin Axes wrote:Except for:Zelknolf wrote:You can already do that by hosting a non-persistent instance for your campaign.
Twin Axes wrote: A player could have any number of campaign PCs on any server as long as each such PC is not played outside the campaign it was created for. Also within such a campaign, characters could start at various levels according to the DM's discretion and in general break any rules as long as it is good for the campaign (as in table top rpgs where the DM is the sole authority).
Your response is not allowed right now, and these conversations typically don't work because the claimed problem (can't join DMed session with compatible style and time zone) doesn't match the usual requested solution (all of the liberty of a persistent character, plus free gear and levels).
-
- Dungeon Master
- Posts: 1327
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:43 am
- Location: The Frozen North
- Contact:
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
I'm sorry but this is not a correct representation of what I said. It would be either or. In my book, campaign characters actually should be quarantined until validated by their DM. No DM no game, like table top.Zelknolf wrote: (all of the liberty of a persistent character, plus free gear and levels).
Anyone remember Neverwinter Nights Connections? The idea would be to add that kind of function to Alfa, to add another tool to the toolbox.
"[T]he dwarvern people, are machine-like, and it is impossible to reason with a machine." - Susana
- Brokenbone
- Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
- Posts: 5771
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 1:07 am
- Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Re: Brainstorm: The Next Evolution of Alfa
The first components of the Summon Nalo Jade ritual have been invoked. Elohim, elohim.
ALFA NWN2 PCs: Rhaggot of the Bruised-Eye, and Bamshogbo
ALFA NWN1 PC: Jacobim Foxmantle
ALFA NWN1 Dead PC: Jon Shieldjack
DMA Staff
ALFA NWN1 PC: Jacobim Foxmantle
ALFA NWN1 Dead PC: Jon Shieldjack
DMA Staff