Open comment period, proposed changes to ALFA's CvC policy:

[danielmn]

Yeah. With this problem, for once, the issue doesn't seem to be sloppy rule design, but people.

This whole things looks an awful lot like trying to somehow codify common sense and basic courtesy... good luck.

Or teaching a pile of horseshit to jump through a hoop....

[Mikayla]

As is obvious, I am not really up on what is going on in ALFA currently, but I do have a fair amount of experience with CvC from back in the day, and I have it in two forms: first, as player, I was involved in a whole lot of CvCs and CvC attempts, usually on the giving end. I never got CvC killed, but I killed (or ordered killed, or helped kill) a bunch - half-a-dozen or more, and we tried for more than that.

Of all those CvCs, the only ones that turned into DM/Admin type problems were the ones involving people outside our regular play-group, and I mean the extended group - the folks we played with at least semi-regularly, even if they weren't in our party. It was the visitors to the server (be it Lonelywood, Skullport, Underdark, etc.) that seemed to complain when things went south, but even then, nothing ever came of the complaints.

Then, I served for what, 4 1/2 terms as Player Admin, and I saw almost zero bad CvCing. There were lots of problems and people doing bad things, but actual CvC griefing? Almost none, at least while I was PA.

So, while the threat of it seems real, like the threat of shark-attacks and plane-crashes, it actually doesn't seem to happen all that much (bad CvCs that is). I can't really comment too much on the specific "legislation" but I have to wonder if this is a solution in search of a problem. Has there really been that much bad CvC in ALFA recently?

Anyway, carry on. Cheers!

M.

[kid]

Or teaching a pile of horseshit to jump through a hoop....

V showed me something similar in one of those german flicks.
Though for a hoop they used...
never mind. move along.

[StephenUmpf]

A couple of follow-up questions and another suggestion… again, trying to be constructive.

If I may ask, who has broken the CvC system?

Is it the player that create and act on a one sided CvC? Are they bone-heads who going looking to ruin others fun? Seizing each opportunity to kill other PCs? And then acting on it without good RP or just basic etiquette of trying to avoid it as best they can?

Or is it those who find their toon dead because of it? Are they upset because their toon got killed by another player?

From reading the posts and considering the current low numbers on the servers and small player base, I am guessing it more of the second reason. But honestly, I don’t know.

If my above assumption is true, here is my second proposal… again trying to keep it simple.

All CvC must be preceded by a warning from the aggressor.

Example:
Player 1 - Tell / Chat Room / PM - If your toon continues to upset my toon by his/her actions, my toon will attack you directly or indirectly with the intent to kill your PC.

Player 2 - Reply 1) - I don't want that. I will avoid your PC. My behavior towards your PC will be neutral. Please try and avoid mine. All CvC between us now and forever will not be acted on.

Player 2 - Reply 2) - That sucks. For RPing purposes my PC is going to continue his behavior, sorry. Game on.

Why should Player 2 have to be the one who avoids:
It should be the responsibility of the player who backed out to avoid… not the other way around.

Two Possible Grievances (probably a million more):
Player 1 – Player 2 is not avoiding his PC. Player 2 is still behaving in an upsetting manner towards Player 1 and is hanging out where Player 1 PCs hangs out.

Solution
Tell Player 2 again.
Tell him a third time and copy the local DMs and Player Admin in the same PM.
Wait for Player Admin to step in.

Player 2 – Player 1 is going after my PC based on no information. He is 10 levels higher. Player 1 is a jerk and a CvC Pger.

Solution
Decline CvC and Avoid Player 1. Longer term, if Players 2 complaint is true, it is a small world and news will get out. Player 1 will spend his time alone on the servers. There are plenty of Inns for the other players to go to.

Again, trying to keep it simple and offer a solution.

[Castano]

The CvC options were discussed at length by admin and HDMs. If there are issues trust us there are issues. Please vote. If you want the old rules vote option 1 and you get to keep them so long as you stay IC within ALFA's definition of IC (not your own personal I killz all definition).

[oldgrayrogue]

As is obvious, I am not really up on what is going on in ALFA currently, but I do have a fair amount of experience with CvC from back in the day, and I have it in two forms: first, as player, I was involved in a whole lot of CvCs and CvC attempts, usually on the giving end. I never got CvC killed, but I killed (or ordered killed, or helped kill) a bunch - half-a-dozen or more, and we tried for more than that.

Of all those CvCs, the only ones that turned into DM/Admin type problems were the ones involving people outside our regular play-group, and I mean the extended group - the folks we played with at least semi-regularly, even if they weren't in our party. It was the visitors to the server (be it Lonelywood, Skullport, Underdark, etc.) that seemed to complain when things went south, but even then, nothing ever came of the complaints.

Then, I served for what, 4 1/2 terms as Player Admin, and I saw almost zero bad CvCing. There were lots of problems and people doing bad things, but actual CvC griefing? Almost none, at least while I was PA.

So, while the threat of it seems real, like the threat of shark-attacks and plane-crashes, it actually doesn't seem to happen all that much (bad CvCs that is). I can't really comment too much on the specific "legislation" but I have to wonder if this is a solution in search of a problem. Has there really been that much bad CvC in ALFA recently?

Anyway, carry on. Cheers!

M.

Mik

There have been numerous problems and an inordinate amount of time spent by Admin dealing with them. Like you I have never had a problem with CvC and have been involved in many over the years. Some people appear not to be mature enough to handle CvC, and this I think is the impetus for the rule.

[danielmn]

If everyone were as mature about it as OGR, there'd be no problems.

I always think of OGR as the exemplar when this topic arises.

[Regas]

StephenUmpf, and Mika too i suppose- the issue is that alfa has much less dm resources now- and the current CvC system has over the last 18 months dominated much of the time of our DM teams. This has resulted in DMs loosing interest and leaving or just avoiding general live dm interaction in favor of more closed campaign style games. This change has come from a need to protect our dms' sanity, not for the benefit of the players (though this was impacting players as well). Some players are getting bored and using CvC as a way to get attention and entertain themselves for want of dming; others simply don't have a good sense of how to play with others and over-react or are irrational about CvC. We probably have the same number of problem players we always have, they are just undiluted in our mostly evaporated pool of player.

Admin's priority and consequent policies are to protect and foster the creative efforts that keep alfa going for it's members. That means builder's DM's, Staff and core players. We will continue to manage the things that undermine our ability to keep these resources happy and engaged in the project. CvC as it stood was becoming too expensive for these resources.

I know this is a long discussion but it might help clarify things to read it from the beginning if you have time, maybe you already did that though.

Hope that helps...

Reg

[Adanu]

There are some players who simply suck at separating OOC and IC. I know of two at least that I won't play with for those reasons. Ignoring that some players are inclined towards being dicks is just foolish, and a red flag bit for that sort of thing sounds very reasonable. Sure, those players won't be happy... but those players won't ever be happy unless they can CvC everyone without consequences, so I say let them learn or leave.

[Mikayla]

Fair enough! I shall leave y'all to it - I've been gone too long and haven't been back long enough to have an opinion on the substance of the rules, so, I will trust in the collective wisdom of ALFA.

[t-ice]

If I may ask, who has broken the CvC system?

You are essentially voicing the current rules, Stephen.

As an answer to the question, going as deep into it as I can see, I would say: "attention whores". CvC is a way to create something exciting, and to make you central. Nevermind that in the longer term it is often antithetical to creating a fun game where players play together, especially when the players don't 100% trust each other. It's always possible for CvC-inclined players create PCs with purpose-built rub-offs to get into "my PC must CvC because of IC". When players don't have anything else exciting to rather do, focusing on cvc-flareup points comes easy, and pretty much every character has something that would get him/her really incensed.

It is of course sad that ALFA doesn't have the DM time to keep players entertained in more constructive ways. But there we are, and we cannot let cvc be an attention cry that forces DM teams (and admin) to spend time and effort on the players involved when there are so many more constructive and inclusive things to do.

I would add that probably most of the time the attention whore-iness is entirely unintentional: The cvcers just think they're just creating an exciting game for everyone involved, all the while doing good hardcore rp. Unfortunately what they're most often doing is tearing the player base into cliques that in the future cannot ICly play with each othe anymore. Not with those PCs anyway, and ALFA PCs do tend to live in timescales of years. The drama arises when some people want to play the cvc-excitement game, others don't, and the former attempt, in different ways, to force that game on the latter. (And the cvc desire in a player sure can change, depending pointedly on who's got more levels)

[kid]

Main issue is trust.
We're all kids who don't trust each other.
And from what i've seen while DMing we don't trust each other for good reason.

Either way, with the new add ons the new rule seems alright.

A shame, as the tension of possible CvC keeps people on edge, more so in a prema death game.
(yes, you can die to statics and DMs, but in those cases you can usualy get rezzed - CvC not so much - hence why its more scary)
It has the potential for good RP and plots (and plotting).
Maybe those could happen with DM supervision under the new rule, who knows.

Let's hope we have not broken ALFA too much and we keep on having quality RP.
As some has said, best RP i've ever had has been in ALFA.
Some with people I admire and appriciate and some with a-holes I can't stand.
Still this is what unites this community.
Hopefuly we can keep this going,
with one CvC rule or another.

[t-ice]

(yes, you can die to statics and DMs, but in those cases you can usualy get rezzed - CvC not so much - hence why its more scary)

This would certainly be a problem in its own right if true. Revolving door afterlife is right there in the pnp books. But that is intended for a single campaign and party pnp. A PW operating witht that at face value is anything but permadeath.

As some has said, best RP i've ever had has been in ALFA.
Some with people I admire and appriciate and some with a-holes I can't stand.

[Wild Wombat]

After re-reading this, I will say that the following is about as much of a rambling rant as I hope to ever post, guys...

This, I couldn't agree more with:

Yeah. With this problem, for once, the issue doesn't seem to be sloppy rule design, but people.

This whole things looks an awful lot like trying to somehow codify common sense and basic courtesy... good luck.

No rule is going to fix this problem. Only common courtesy and the ability to empathize with others will fix it. Like the thoughtfulness and courtesy that we see from everybody that posts on these very boards.

Which of the two ppoposals will I vote for? I haven't made up my mind since I am one of the people that doesn't like CvC at all. It just isn't for me, as I have said. I am not passing judgment on those that do enjoy it. Some of the very best RPers and most mature of us really do like it. Indeed, it does add a great deal of spice to RP, I just find it to be a pandora's box.

I have never let anybody else know this, but the reason that I burnt out in ALFA before had CvC at its core. Not a CvC that I was involved in as a player, and not as a DM (I never DMed). No, it was as a CvC that I was brought into as an ALFA Rep. Actually multiple CvC's, all tied together.

It was by far my most frustrating experience in ALFA. But it was really puzzling why it was so frustrating. See, I knew most of the players very well. I also knew the DM that was closely involved with the events took place pretty well, having been DM'd many times there myself. I also had a reputation for being able to bring people together (I did not name myself the Care Bear, but I suppose it had some merit).

However, I was powerless. I kept trying to schedule meetings to discuss the problems with the DM and kept being ignored. It seemed that the DM had already decided the issue and did not want to discuss anything and would not let me try to broker any sort of agreement. All of this in spite of multiple complaints by long-time players against other long-time players. I was actually afraid that we would lose a server and players over this.

So, everything got swept under the rug, or more to the point, ignored. It left a very sour taste in my mouth. It made me pretty darn cynical about ALFA and made me less of a Care Bear on the boards. This led to the one disagreement with an ALFAn that I could not work out, though lord knows, I tried. Is the CvC issue connected to this mini-flamefest I had? Who knows. My point is that while I see that CvC does liven up the game and the threat of it makes it more exciting, you had better make sure that all parties are into it. Under some (most?) circumstances it can negatively impact even the most mature player. CvC is a delicate issue and needs to be dealt with as such.

So, in my experience CvC has caused problems all along, and not just between two players or even two player factions. It can cause problems that can be felt by everybody in some form or another. This isn't anything new.

That is why my own attitude is that CvC is not for me. I don't need the frustration. If anybody wants to CvC with me, forget it. No way, no how. I will not buy the excuse that "our PCs hate each other so much that they have to fight to the death or be on different servers." Smells of a cop out to me. We the players choose how we RP our toons, not vice versa. It is not your PC that is deciding to go CvC, it is you. And if you want to make my PC the target of your CvC, good luck.

Also, as has been noted many times above, it seems to spread ALFAs already thin DM resources even more thinly. Plus, it leads to DMs getting disillusioned and bogged down. That is a huge negative to CvC.

[Castano]

FR consists of millions of inhabitants, fight the opposed NPCs first That's always been my rule.

Is the tiny Bane cult in BG or the Sharran splinter group on TSM or some PC's minor temple complex to a good deity worth hunting when the region is filled with hordes of undead, necromancers and the like? When the flaming fist advances the cause of law and order with an iron err flaming fist...squashing the hopes and dreams of thieves everywhere?

Wombat it's people being competitive who is more uber that is the root cause of 90% of CvC issues.