Charter Revisions

[dergon darkhelm]

I appreciate your reply, BH.

I guess that I just don't buy in to the fundamental premise that allowing 2PCs will have any long term effect on our player base. Personally I think that would simply make us have the *same* player base playing 2 PCs.


* Open areas to use as recruitment tools -- Go for it (if done right).

* Build/script lots of content - Of course. That's a no brainer.


I just don't think we should put all those little things (including 2 PCs) in the same grouping of "things that ALFA can do to increase the player base". I we want to change them based purely on their own merit, well ...fine. But, I just don't buy the argument that those little changes will draw more players.

[Brokenbone]

*chums water*

Reward contributors with perks.

You volunteer to DM at least one solid session biweekly or more frequently? Congratulations, you are trusted and admired enough to have not just one but two PCs, as long as the two never-shall-meet and all other metagamey rules are obeyed. Sure they can play on their own home server turf, sign of trust (but check the logs once in awhile for no exploiting eh?)

You donate what an HDM views as "significant" content to a module for more than just personal use? Say, build a store, create a dozen templates for well put together bugbear tribes, script some other doohickeys, or maybe are a genius "tech department" person who puts out fires left and right across servers? Thank you for taking HOURS AND HOURS out of game, we'll give you the RPXP and maybe even some GOLD for your PC that represents the time you could have been playing. Or a personalized DM quest for you and a few guests of your choice (if gold and XP on a silver platter make too many people lose their minds). Or something else that the reward-giving entity considers a fair bounty, to say thank you.

I can feel a reaction of the screaming (or is it howling?) fantods could be provoked by the above, but who cares? Lot of dissatisfaction out there, just as there's a lot of status quo not-so-bad sentiments expressed too.

Implement "some idea, any idea" once in awhile, even if it's on the understanding that some programs may be pilots or temporary only. If it turns out a program delights 10 people but causes 20 to quit, that's a bad program. See Veilan's now tracking stats for unique logins and all that stuff, so at least some evidence of positive / negative change will be showed by "voting with your feet."

Implementing something even as a "summer only" program, the time of the traditional lull, may serve to somewhat counteract the doldrums. "Surprise, we're willing to do a rebuild program for inter-server movement between Exodus and ALFA despite maybe some differences, we'll try to synch up character sheets and inventories as much as possible though you'll need to help tool things that exist in one community's pallette but not the other and that a DM avatar-guest can't mule for some hak related reason." There's all kinds of silly ideas that could be tried out. If it turns out that whoever cares to sponsor/oversee a problem finds an idea "bad" or fields too many complaints, shut 'er down.

By the way, any Charter changes, make the proposals simple ones to say yes/no to. Was reading a humorous analysis of sovereignty / separation of Quebec type referendum questions that have failed a few times in Canada over the last thirty years in a little news article, each question is well over a paragraph long and full of maybes etc. designed to elicit a "yes" answer, since the sovereigntists were writing them. Big legalese questions turn off voters, even if a lot of debate had to take place to get to that stage.

[thinkpig]

Even as a DM who also plays and would benefit from something like that, I have to say I am completely opposed to incentivized DMing, that is going to get people who don't really want to do it in game, and to do something as consuming and involved as DMing for any other reason than that you enjoy it and want to contribute to a game you love is, to me, a really bad idea, and likely to result in some really bad DMing. we don't just need MORE DM's, we need good DM's.

There are tons of you guys who I know would make great DMs! If ten people stepped up and DM'd for even just two or three hours every week, the impact would be 20-30 hours of additional DM coverage a week. We have three servers now and more coming, pick one of those servers and give it just a couple hours a week, and you're greatly contributing to ALFA just like that.

You don't have to be logged in for five hours to show some players a good time, either. Heero and I were playing on BG and spiderjones logged in and DM'd us for what felt like probably 20 minutes-- just added a little encounter to our game the day would have been totally incomplete without-- made all the difference in the world to our RP to have some consequences to our choices, a feeling of risk and excitement... If spidey gets on and DM's ANYONE, for just half an hour a week even, to me that's a huge contribution. I could name at least a dozen of you guys who play for 20-odd hours a week and probably get zero DM time each week-- when you haven't seen a DM all week, that little appearance makes a huge difference. you could all be doing that, for each other. I think something like that stands a greatly better chance of drawing players and adding fun to ALFA than something like 'allowing 2 PCs'.

Shit, in the time we all spend pissing and moaning about lack of population, we could be DMing. In the time it took me to make this post, I could have hopped on TSM and given someone a little ad-hoc session. I think there is a new player on right now...

[Adanu]

Just to be on the record.

I don't that any of these minor changes to game play, 2 PCs, more PrCs, lvl 3 start, wealth standards, (or whatever is your own pet complaint) would have a long term significant effect on the ALFA player population. Neither is it ALFA's cumbersome pseudo-democracy that is keeping players from logging in. N

We need:


24/7 DM coverage. Now that would bring players in game. People come to ALFA to play D&D in a persistent world. D&D requires a DM.

I understand that I have just stated something that is unlikely to occur. I bring it up because all this other little stuff is just nibbling around edges.

I disagree. I know of at least one player who won't play on ALFA starting from level 1. Personally, I'm in favor of people starting at level 2. This might help population.

[thinkpig]

Just to be on the record.

I don't that any of these minor changes to game play, 2 PCs, more PrCs, lvl 3 start, wealth standards, (or whatever is your own pet complaint) would have a long term significant effect on the ALFA player population. Neither is it ALFA's cumbersome pseudo-democracy that is keeping players from logging in. N

We need:


24/7 DM coverage. Now that would bring players in game. People come to ALFA to play D&D in a persistent world. D&D requires a DM.

I understand that I have just stated something that is unlikely to occur. I bring it up because all this other little stuff is just nibbling around edges.

I disagree. I know of at least one player who won't play on ALFA starting from level 1. Personally, I'm in favor of people starting at level 2. This might help population.

IMO someone who is such a wuss that they refuse to play if they have to start at level 1 does not belong in ALFA in the first place, let them go powergame somewhere else. I am not *completely* opposed to starting at level 2, but come on... how hard is it to get to level 2? If you think it's hard to get to level 2 now, you should have started a toon on BG a couple years ago, took me about a week to RP Gibreel to level 2. what is the rationale for refusal to start at level 1?

To the player who has that attitude, I say: Your loss. Level one is your chance to be a fledgling, it provides RP character development that makes becoming more powerful significant and gratifying.

[Galadorn]

I hope 2 PCs per player is never passed. ALFA was always 1 PC only. I really hope it stays that way.

I also think DMs should not play on the same servers they play. Trust my a$$. Only thing I truly trust is human nature. Enough said.

Adanu: Tell your friend he can't handle level 1... challenge him to... get him in and 1-2 weeks later he'll be level 2. Problem solved. Or as thinkpig said, if he can't handle 1-2 weeks at level 1, who needs HIM?

Love to all.

and let's advertise!
I would call foul! if all ye reading this said ye never frequent a dozen weird gaming forums a day! so go post some nice adverts on all the Off Topic forums you have ever had access to!

wheeeeee

[Adanu]

Just to be on the record.

I don't that any of these minor changes to game play, 2 PCs, more PrCs, lvl 3 start, wealth standards, (or whatever is your own pet complaint) would have a long term significant effect on the ALFA player population. Neither is it ALFA's cumbersome pseudo-democracy that is keeping players from logging in. N

We need:


24/7 DM coverage. Now that would bring players in game. People come to ALFA to play D&D in a persistent world. D&D requires a DM.

I understand that I have just stated something that is unlikely to occur. I bring it up because all this other little stuff is just nibbling around edges.

I disagree. I know of at least one player who won't play on ALFA starting from level 1. Personally, I'm in favor of people starting at level 2. This might help population.

IMO someone who is such a wuss that they refuse to play if they have to start at level 1 does not belong in ALFA in the first place, let them go powergame somewhere else. I am not *completely* opposed to starting at level 2, but come on... how hard is it to get to level 2?

Yes, taunting people with being a wuss is really the best way to make people listen to you.

[dergon darkhelm]

I want to keep it all civil. As I said in Magile's thread, I am not wholly opposed to a level 2 start.

However, I have a very difficult time believing that there is a significant number of hard-core rules, D&D style roleplayers out there who would be playing in ALFA now but aren't because a level 1 start is a deal breaker for them.

That said, I don't think that a level 2 start would cause many issues. *shrugs*

[DMyles]

As someone who has played for a long time here I am usually opposed to any kind of major changes and a change to the one pc rule would be just that. However after giving it some thought it seems to me that allowing multiple pcs makes way more sense now then ever before. In fact the more I roll it over in my mind it seems obvious it is the path we should take.

The decline of the player base is because NWN2 isn't a very good game compared to other current games. Yea there are a few other servers, but when NWN1 was hot there were an ocean of servers. You had to put the alfa servers in your favorites just because it was such a pain to scroll through the whole list. Nothing is going to change this except a game that isn't on the horizon any times soon. It isn't about attracting new players. It is about making the experience as enjoyable as possible for the people left who are playing, reaching out to those that have left us, and making sure the game is as good as possible if they decide to come back.

When we had 2000 players the one pc rule made a ton of sense. You couldn't keep track of everybody for one thing, and there were tons of noobs always making a million lvl one pcs to try things out too ( I know.. I was one of them ) We had a much lower DM to player ratio so it was very hard for dms to police all the players just based on sheer numbers.

A large number of players was naturally able to play the roles off all the needed pcs and make the world feel real but five or six regular players on a sever cannont unless each person plays at least a few different characters.

We have to ask ourselves which is the greater threat to our fun. The possibility that someone might cheat if we loosen the rules a little bit, or the possibility that our game will bore us to tears because it is the same pcs don't the same things over and over. If Alfa looses it's fun value it is going to die quickly so we should do our best to protect that.

The way I see it working is an even more dm based concept. A dm might say I am going to run x adventure on such and such night sign up if you want to play and know you can make it, and by the way send me a character list so we can talk about what might fit with the other pcs and the plot.

We could see a lot more balanced groups which would make the game more fun. We would see a lot more lvl one adventures which would be fun. I think dms would be a lot less bashful about killing people if it was just one of your pcs, so we could see more danger and combat which would be fun.

I also think we should introduce the concept of random roll pcs. Something like once per month you get to roll a set of stats that can be used in game for a pc. Instead of the point buy system maybe we roll 2d6 + 6 for each stat. This could make the pcs feel unique and further heighten the danger of permadeath. I don't know if it would work with the game engine though except through occ items or something b/c I think point buy might be hard coded.

[DMyles]

I was looking through the forums the other day and I found some stuff were people were complaining about the clicks in alfa. I kind of laughed to myself about this because Alfa is all about forming clicks just like D&D is about forming a group of friends and going to one dudes house to play.

The problem is we make it overly hard to find a clilck in alfa that works for you. We have to deal with time zones, and real life schedules before we find a game that works. On top of that we further split ourselves into groups based on character lvl and alignment. If we all had a few pcs we could eliminate the last tool. It would make it a lot easier for all of us to find a good game.

[Castano]

I was looking through the forums the other day and I found some stuff were people were complaining about the clicks in alfa. I kind of laughed to myself about this because Alfa is all about forming clicks just like D&D is about forming a group of friends and going to one dudes house to play.

The problem is we make it overly hard to find a clilck in alfa that works for you. We have to deal with time zones, and real life schedules before we find a game that works. On top of that we further split ourselves into groups based on character lvl and alignment. If we all had a few pcs we could eliminate the last tool. It would make it a lot easier for all of us to find a good game.

+1

[dirsa]

...On top of that we further split ourselves into groups based on character lvl and alignment. If we all had a few pcs we could eliminate the last tool. It would make it a lot easier for all of us to find a good game.

i personally still oppose 2pc change, but this is the first argument in it's favor that i like... things can change...

[NickD]

24/7 DM coverage. Now that would bring players in game. People come to ALFA to play D&D in a persistent world. D&D requires a DM.

I kind of hinted at that being a large part of it in my post but first you need to get enough players for the DMs to DM! And you also have to make an environment that DMs want to DM in. Although I'm not all together sure what the issue is there - I DMed for a little bit on NWN1 and short of not having enough players, I didn't have any issues. Personally, I'd probably give DMing another twirl if I could play on the same server that I DM on, but I have always thought that's a very bad idea.

But also, it's not enough. I am sure I am not alone in enjoy playing casually as well. Otherwise you may as well go the campaign server route.

I guess that I just don't buy in to the fundamental premise that allowing 2PCs will have any long term effect on our player base. Personally I think that would simply make us have the *same* player base playing 2 PCs.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Either way, if people could play multiple PCs, you might not get more playing players, but you'd definitely get players playing more.

[Swift]

I also think DMs should not play on the same servers they play. Trust my a$$. Only thing I truly trust is human nature. Enough said

I find this statement utterly hilarious while at the same time perfectly describing much that is wrong with ALFA.

Trust.

Simply put, it is virtually non-existent in ALFA anymore.

[NickD]

I find this statement utterly hilarious while at the same time perfectly describing much that is wrong with ALFA.

Trust.

Simply put, it is virtually non-existent in ALFA anymore.

Anymore? I believe "trust no one" is one of the original pillars of ALFA!