'State of the RP' feedback thread

[Green Ranger]

Malon, have you read my FAIL score proposal? I honestly can't recall, so apologies in advance, but It goes a long way to addressing fatigue and limits imho.

I think the concept of Force fatigue is fine in itself, except for...whatever reason, it's become utterly draconian this timeline and now you can barely use the Force at all - and I don't understand why. The rules aren't written to be that heavy handed. The admins don't want to be that heavy handed, and most of the member base doesn't like it, yet it's happening anyway somehow. It doesn't add up. Somewhere along the line, things got pushed to a point where everyone started accepting it as an unspoken rule for some reason, and even the admins and mods have gotten sucked into perpetuating this fallacy. It's...really bizarre.

Personally, I would really, really like to see the FAIL score introduced since I believe in it so strongly - however, if it's determined to be impractical, then at the very least admins and mods need to agree to loosen the restrictions on Force usage and fatigue and allow people to start using the Force again without fear of exhaustion. This is something we really need some staff input on at this point.

 

[Livgardist]

My 2 cents; Fact is, if you are prepared properly with tech as a non-FS, you can hold your own against a decent strengthed FS. You just have to know how, but it all boils down to a lot of things NOT related to the Force. The writer's skill, most notably, and the character's preparations, experience and knowledge of how to fight an FS.

Basically, in my opinion, the problem seems to be that characters that have no idea of how to fight an FS would not be able to fight an FS and win, if the Force wasn't as nerfed as it is right now. Which, in my opinion, is fair. Because if they don't know how to fight Force Sensitives, then they shouldn't be able to win over Force Sensitives.

My opinion only. :D

 

[Dakota]

Alright, I'm back. Having read through everything, I agree with both Cal and Boli, sort of. Force sensitives do have—and likely always will have—the advantage in the tech discussion because they do have access to their vaguely defined Space Magic(tm) and their technology. The argument from my end, though, is that Force sensitive characters shouldn't have to use technology; unless it serves either a personalized aesthetic purpose, makes sense in character (survival gear or a light set of armor), or is absolutely necessary for the character (see also armor or cybernetic enhancements for lost limbs or dark side corruption). Like Boli said, a lot of that hinges on how powerful the Force is. It would be a lot easier to say "Force sensitives should just not load themselves up like Republic commandos with tons of armor and frag grenades" if the Force had more of an effect in the long term than a piss in the wind. This is why I really like the FAIL proposal. It should become a part of the ruleset or otherwised proposed to the staff, because it helps makes the Force the way it should be and hopefully will allow us to bypass needless "no you're too tired because you lifted that pebble into the air and threw it at me" arguments.

As far as "leveling the playing field in PvP" goes, I'm of the belief that once the Force is given a more easily defined boundary provided by the FAIL system, Force sensitive characters should be prohibited from wearing anything more than a light set of armor and carrying around things like grenades or blasters. A lot of that could easily be explained in character by using religious or organizational reasons; Jedi/Sith don't carry (insert weapon) because (insert weapon) doesn't jive well with the (insert Jedi/Sith text here). Same logic applies to bulky soldier armor and other accessories. If the Force is improved, force sensitive characters wouldn't necessarily need armor or grenades or any excessive technology for defensive purposes. That's the Force and the Magic Glowstick's job. With that, non Force sensitive characters have an easier chance of getting hits on Sith or Jedi because they wouldn't be able to tank blaster damage, either through armor or by constantly deflecting laser fire. Killing a moderately experienced Jedi or Sith in single combat (or even with a squad of soldiers with blasters) should be difficult, it almost always is in canon, but it shouldn't be impossible.

tl;dr: get staff to make the fail system a part of the rules, make some kind of regulation that states force sensitive characters can't have (x) amount of technology/weapons/armor so the jedi and sith can act the way they're supposed to act in combat while still being vulnerable enough for non force sensitive characters to stand more than enough of a chance

 

[Green Ranger]

Okay, so....here's the list I made up of recommendations, based on what I found people suggesting in this thread for as long as my attention span lasted. I probably missed a couple in the process, so apologies, and some I didn't include because there wasn't enough detail to form a proper recommendation. All recommendations are posted in no particular order.

Recommendation 1: Implement the FAIL score for Force powers to replace the current arbitrary measurement of fatigue that currently exists. Moderators, admin and members alike must all be aware that the Force is not as exhausting as has become the case in the RP of late, and that patterns of extended overexertion are the only situations where exhaustion should be considered as opposed to the current system where even a single use is considered tiring. See here for more information: http://www.thestarwarsrp.com/forum/index.php?threads/force-powers.70907/page-2#post-1325676

Recommendation 1A: Based on the way the gameplay of the RP changed due to the above proposal, observe how the RP evolves and changes with respect to the 'balance of power' between Force and Tech users - particularly hybrid characters who utilize large amounts of both. From this analysis, determine whether or not equipment or weight limits should be of different values for Force and non-Force users for the sake of balance.​

Recommendation 2: Cater for both lethal and non-lethal combat in main battles by introducing non-lethal battles. The recommended procedure for this is that a battle is announced and both factions involved post sign-ups. In those sign-ups, members are asked to elect if they would prefer lethal or non-lethal combat. Once the sign-ups are concluded or have sufficient numbers, both FLs of the factions involved work together to discuss how many battle of both lethal and non-lethal combat there should be, based on a compromise between the needs of the two Factions. No member can be forced into a lethal battle unwillingly - a FL can request that a member join a lethal battle, but the member retains every right to refuse this request. Nonlethal battles can still include capture, injury etc. Additionally, per site rules, if a member or members are seen to be blatantly using the nonlethal rule to circumvent clear and obvious defeat and/or are seen to be effectively gaming the system, then an admin still retains the right to impose a mortal wound on the offending player.

Recommendation 3: Undergo a full review of the tech boards in terms of the state of technology being approved and the guidelines of the tech boards. Determine whether or not the guidelines are being adhered to, both by moderators and members, and determine whether the state of technology is acceptable. If it is deemed acceptable, then changes need to be made to the rules and guidelines of the technology board to reflect this. If technology is determined to be out of hand, a review of overpowered or excessive technology is recommended. How this is actually undertaken in practice is probably a matter for further discussion if the determination is made that such a review is necessary, but potential options include but are not limited to:

• Closing the tech boards temporarily to conduct a full review of technology
• Re-reviewing every piece of technology
• Invoking a community review of sorts - ask all members to report any technology they feel does not fit with site guidelines.
• Archiving the technology boards and starting fresh.

Recommendation 4: Encourage Faction Leaders to conduct space battles to occur more frequently, using the site rules and policy regarding space battles of 'strategy trumps technology' to determine the victor.

Recommendation 5: Allow NPCs to be used in battles for the purpose of world-building, as props for the setting. Essentially use the Stormtrooper rule for NPCs in battles in that they are there and they contribute, but they are not pivotal, nor can they be elite soldiers with custom equipment that will somehow trump the opposition PC. The primary goal of a battle must remain to be to be either objective based, or supremacy vs a player character.

Recommendation 6: Relax the duration limits on the Manaan/battle rules in order to reduce the amount of pressure on players in battles. The site RP is ultimately recreational in nature, so even an additional 24 hours between post requirements could significantly ease pressure. A standard 3 week time-out might also help threads have more substance to them as well, since I recall when I was a staff member that a lot of battles were difficult to rule on because nothing had actually happened yet >.>

Recommendation 7: Reports in battles need to have a limit to restrict arguments from dragging on endlessly. This could be handled as simply as a member announcing they want to report an issue in a thread, whereupon both members have a chance to plead their case within a set number of OOC posts (say, two posts each to allow for rebuttal) before the admin rules on the thread based on the IC information and the OOC points raised. This is proposed as a way to address/reduce the amount of bickering in OOC chats, but also to reduce the amount of resentment and ill will that rises from extended and heated arguments.

Recommendation 7A: Any rules on 'x number of reports and a battle is automatically concluded' should be revised and loosened. Particularly in a timeline where admins are hands off in the story, they should be more involved with handling thread disputes and acting as rules enforcers and shutting down threads for reporting too often is counter-intuitive to getting members to report disputes.
​

Recommendation 8: If there isn't one currently, then there needs to be a rule about intentionally misleading a player to lure their character to their death, simply because well...dick move. But at the same time there still needs to be some leeway for allowing these scenarios, provided they aren't directly, intentionally and blatantly misleading.

Recommendation 9: @Apollyon must always post his feedback on the final post of a page and it must always be immediately ignored as a result (seriously that happened like 3 times >.>)

​

 

[Apollyon]

Character progression? There is an ooc that I feel exemplifies how important a form of character training and progression SHOULD BE. There is an ongoing pvp thread where one writer utilized Lightsaber Throw and was controlling it's trajectory at high speeds to "chase" his target. While this is POSSIBLE, it isn't something seen in legends or canon without the character(s) having a DEEP understanding and mastery of the power. Simply because wookiee tells us what a power or an ability CAN do at the upper levels of mastery doesn't mean that is obtainable or feasible without YEARS of practice, training, and utilization of said ability. (I understand we are role playing so YEARS is not feasible but having a system that tracks where people use or "practice" an ability or skill isn't difficult to develop.) Essentially, unless your character has FOCUSED on certain aspects of combat (Force, Dueling, or Marksmanship) they shouldn't be able to utilize powers at the upper ends of the other "trees". That doesn't mean they COULDN'T say be a Master duelist and utilize practical powers such as Telekinesis, Augmentation, or Energy Manipulation; it would simply mean that their skill set inside of those areas would be far more limited.

This factors in "builds" into pvp again and allows for a form of growth/development that isn't reliant on rank. Essentially, it brings a focus back to role playing your character for them to improve and where you want them to improve at. If you want your character to be good at EVERYTHING, you will have to put more leg work in then someone who focused on dueling for example. It isn't IMPOSSIBLE to do, it would just take A LOT longer to accomplish. Using a simple system with decent thread counts (2-3 to learn a new "power" or skill, 3-5 to make it average level of knowledge, 5-6 to master said ability or skill) with simple mentioning, utilization in threads or pvp, or having your character study it allows for new members to catch up relatively quickly by simply role playing their character.

Finally, this will remove the focus of SQUARES and turn it back to individual characters and doing things to grow them, foster them, and make them better in their fields of expertise. Having everyone on the same level is GREAT in theory but in practice it doesn't make much sense (as far as role play goes) and no one wants ranks = power again. I just think the focus SHOULD return to individual characters and doing more with them then missions to take squares (which seems to be commonplace).

#makeroleplaygreatagain

 

[Green Ranger]

words

Ignored.

 

[Green Ranger]

In all seriousness though, I did see similar stuff amounting to what Apollyon said - the reason why I didn't add it to the list of recommendations is that a proposal like that needs to be fully detailed. You can't just say 'make character progression a thing again' without a huge amount of full detail, otherwise it's not really a recommendation, it's just an idea. Essentially, it still needs to answer how such an idea would be implemented.

 

[Korvo]

This might be kinda outta left field, but I noticed that one eternal different between tech and Force usage, even with the FAIL system, is that the Force has overusage drawbacks, whereas tech doesn't. Could there be a comparative system, say like "power/energy consumption" that limits some aspects of tech to prevent them from being similarly overused?

This was thought up on the fly, could be a terrible idea.

 

[Green Ranger]

Most tech does have limited ammunition or fuel or whatever, but threads aren't lasting long enough for it to be an issue atm.

 

[Malon]

Malon, have you read my FAIL score proposal? I honestly can't recall, so apologies in advance, but It goes a long way to addressing fatigue and limits imho.

I think the concept of Force fatigue is fine in itself, except for...whatever reason, it's become utterly draconian this timeline and now you can barely use the Force at all - and I don't understand why. The rules aren't written to be that heavy handed. The admins don't want to be that heavy handed, and most of the member base doesn't like it, yet it's happening anyway somehow. It doesn't add up. Somewhere along the line, things got pushed to a point where everyone started accepting it as an unspoken rule for some reason, and even the admins and mods have gotten sucked into perpetuating this fallacy. It's...really bizarre.

Personally, I would really, really like to see the FAIL score introduced since I believe in it so strongly - however, if it's determined to be impractical, then at the very least admins and mods need to agree to loosen the restrictions on Force usage and fatigue and allow people to start using the Force again without fear of exhaustion. This is something we really need some staff input on at this point.

@Green Ranger I actually haven't seen it. Send me a link? I'd like to check it out.

 

[Green Ranger]

@Green Ranger I actually haven't seen it. Send me a link? I'd like to check it out.

http://www.thestarwarsrp.com/forum/index.php?threads/force-powers.70907/page-2#post-1325676

 

[Valen Pelora]

I'm just going to toss my two cents in, although it looks like everyone is close to being on the same page. The Force can be misused and lead to people stupidly doing incredibly OP stuff. It makes sense to have limitations.

Force "exhaustion" and becoming tired from using the Force makes perfect sense. However, it shouldn't be such that a couple of uses of the Force completely exhaust a Force User. It should depend on the skill of the FS, the difficulty of what they are doing and how skilled they are in that area of the Force.

In my mind "normal" characters have tech and FS have the Force. To a certain degree they should equal out. A FS shouldn't need the Force and a bunch of tech. A "normal" citizen of the galaxy armed with the right "stuff" and proper training should be able to go blow for blow with a FS. Boba Fett in legends could go toe to toe with the Jedi (an extreme example but he's not the only one).

The cautionary tale is a FS who is great at everything. Just like there are non FS characters who aren't killing machines there are FS characters who aren't killing machines. Some FS are skilled at dueling and augmenting their physical skills but aren't skilled in telekinesis. The reverse is also true. There may be a FS strong in telekinetic abilities but struggles to augment their physical attributes.

It should be a balancing act and takes a certain level of maturity to accomplish, which can be difficult. But a few dumb dumbs who go overboard can be regulated and shouldn't ruin it for everyone else.

Also posted from my phone so forgive any spelling or clerical errors.

 

[Arcangel]

This might be kinda outta left field, but I noticed that one eternal different between tech and Force usage, even with the FAIL system, is that the Force has overusage drawbacks, whereas tech doesn't. Could there be a comparative system, say like "power/energy consumption" that limits some aspects of tech to prevent them from being similarly overused?

This was thought up on the fly, could be a terrible idea.

Proposal. Overexposure to blaster radiation causes cancer.

 

[Roen]

I see no recommendations concerning the min-maxing of tech and Force usage. Is it not up for debate, or did I miss it?

 

[Green Ranger]

I see no recommendations concerning the min-maxing of tech and Force usage. Is it not up for debate, or did I miss it?

Recommendation 1A: Based on the way the gameplay of the RP changed due to the above proposal, observe how the RP evolves and changes with respect to the 'balance of power' between Force and Tech users - particularly hybrid characters who utilize large amounts of both. From this analysis, determine whether or not equipment or weight limits should be of different values for Force and non-Force users for the sake of balance.

 

[Roen]

Oh, wunderbar. That sounds mightily tedious though, assigning weight to every piece of tech for the express purpose of curtailing mix-maxing through a ceiling that has not as of yet been clarified, unless I'm mistaken again, or arbitrary if we're going to just wing it and let the community self regulate.

Then the arms and armor race will have another factor, and the tech admins will be buggered with everyone jamming as much power and defense ratings as they can, into smaller, less weighty equipment. Really doesn't address the min-maxing problem at all, really. Just closing doors while window latches get tripped.

 

[SonOfFire]

Okay, so....here's the list I made up of recommendations, based on what I found people suggesting in this thread for as long as my attention span lasted. I probably missed a couple in the process, so apologies, and some I didn't include because there wasn't enough detail to form a proper recommendation. All recommendations are posted in no particular order.

Recommendation 1: Implement the FAIL score for Force powers to replace the current arbitrary measurement of fatigue that currently exists. Moderators, admin and members alike must all be aware that the Force is not as exhausting as has become the case in the RP of late, and that patterns of extended overexertion are the only situations where exhaustion should be considered as opposed to the current system where even a single use is considered tiring. See here for more information: http://www.thestarwarsrp.com/forum/index.php?threads/force-powers.70907/page-2#post-1325676

Recommendation 1A: Based on the way the gameplay of the RP changed due to the above proposal, observe how the RP evolves and changes with respect to the 'balance of power' between Force and Tech users - particularly hybrid characters who utilize large amounts of both. From this analysis, determine whether or not equipment or weight limits should be of different values for Force and non-Force users for the sake of balance.​

Recommendation 2: Cater for both lethal and non-lethal combat in main battles by introducing non-lethal battles. The recommended procedure for this is that a battle is announced and both factions involved post sign-ups. In those sign-ups, members are asked to elect if they would prefer lethal or non-lethal combat. Once the sign-ups are concluded or have sufficient numbers, both FLs of the factions involved work together to discuss how many battle of both lethal and non-lethal combat there should be, based on a compromise between the needs of the two Factions. No member can be forced into a lethal battle unwillingly - a FL can request that a member join a lethal battle, but the member retains every right to refuse this request. Nonlethal battles can still include capture, injury etc. Additionally, per site rules, if a member or members are seen to be blatantly using the nonlethal rule to circumvent clear and obvious defeat and/or are seen to be effectively gaming the system, then an admin still retains the right to impose a mortal wound on the offending player.

Recommendation 3: Undergo a full review of the tech boards in terms of the state of technology being approved and the guidelines of the tech boards. Determine whether or not the guidelines are being adhered to, both by moderators and members, and determine whether the state of technology is acceptable. If it is deemed acceptable, then changes need to be made to the rules and guidelines of the technology board to reflect this. If technology is determined to be out of hand, a review of overpowered or excessive technology is recommended. How this is actually undertaken in practice is probably a matter for further discussion if the determination is made that such a review is necessary, but potential options include but are not limited to:

• Closing the tech boards temporarily to conduct a full review of technology
• Re-reviewing every piece of technology
• Invoking a community review of sorts - ask all members to report any technology they feel does not fit with site guidelines.
• Archiving the technology boards and starting fresh.

Recommendation 4: Encourage Faction Leaders to conduct space battles to occur more frequently, using the site rules and policy regarding space battles of 'strategy trumps technology' to determine the victor.

Recommendation 5: Allow NPCs to be used in battles for the purpose of world-building, as props for the setting. Essentially use the Stormtrooper rule for NPCs in battles in that they are there and they contribute, but they are not pivotal, nor can they be elite soldiers with custom equipment that will somehow trump the opposition PC. The primary goal of a battle must remain to be to be either objective based, or supremacy vs a player character.

Recommendation 6: Relax the duration limits on the Manaan/battle rules in order to reduce the amount of pressure on players in battles. The site RP is ultimately recreational in nature, so even an additional 24 hours between post requirements could significantly ease pressure. A standard 3 week time-out might also help threads have more substance to them as well, since I recall when I was a staff member that a lot of battles were difficult to rule on because nothing had actually happened yet >.>

Recommendation 7: Reports in battles need to have a limit to restrict arguments from dragging on endlessly. This could be handled as simply as a member announcing they want to report an issue in a thread, whereupon both members have a chance to plead their case within a set number of OOC posts (say, two posts each to allow for rebuttal) before the admin rules on the thread based on the IC information and the OOC points raised. This is proposed as a way to address/reduce the amount of bickering in OOC chats, but also to reduce the amount of resentment and ill will that rises from extended and heated arguments.

Recommendation 7A: Any rules on 'x number of reports and a battle is automatically concluded' should be revised and loosened. Particularly in a timeline where admins are hands off in the story, they should be more involved with handling thread disputes and acting as rules enforcers and shutting down threads for reporting too often is counter-intuitive to getting members to report disputes.
​

Recommendation 8: If there isn't one currently, then there needs to be a rule about intentionally misleading a player to lure their character to their death, simply because well...dick move. But at the same time there still needs to be some leeway for allowing these scenarios, provided they aren't directly, intentionally and blatantly misleading.

Recommendation 9: @Apollyon must always post his feedback on the final post of a page and it must always be immediately ignored as a result (seriously that happened like 3 times >.>)

​

Everything here looks almost perfect except for 1A and 3, but that's just my 2 cents. 1A doesn't seem like a solution to me because you're basically saying "force users would be stronger/weaker than non force users" and vice versa. I might be interpreting what you're saying incorrectly and please correct me if I am but does 1A mean you'd want a blaster to way more for a FS than it would for a non FS?

As far as 3 goes I don't think the tech itself is the issue, it's the people using the tech. You could review the tech board and declare A tech, B tech, and C tech are OP and that they need to be more like D tech but that is gonna oppress those writing the tech similar to how the force powers are kinda oppressed right now(I hope that's the right word?).

 

[Green Ranger]

Everything here looks almost perfect except for 1A and 3, but that's just my 2 cents. 1A doesn't seem like a solution to me because you're basically saying "force users would be stronger/weaker than non force users" and vice versa. I might be interpreting what you're saying and please correct me if I am but does 1A mean you'd want a blaster to way more for a FS than it would for a non FS?

As far as 3 goes I don't think the tech itself is the issue, it's the people using the tech. You could review the tech board and declare A tech, B tech, and C tech are OP and that they need to be more like D tech but that is gonna oppress those writing the tech similar to how the force powers are kinda oppressed right now(I hope that's the right word?).

In regards to 1A, it's not that gear would weigh more, it's basically that, should the admins decide that there is an issue of balance, that they should look at restricting the amount of gear a character can have, and whether that amount should be different for force users and non-force users - ie a force user would have a weight restriction of x, but a non-force user would have a weight restriction of y. But ultimately this could take a number of different forms.

As for your point on 3? Given That the community at large more or less ignored the intended direction that tech was supposed to go down, and given that so many people raised the matter that current tech standards are...problematic to say the least, I don't see this is a problem. Ultimately it's based on what the staff determine, but I think if the end result is that the tech boards are held to the standards they were originally supposed to be held to then that's a good thing.

And if people feel restricted by that? Well, then maybe that's an indication that they've been part of the problem. *shrug*

 

[SonOfFire]

In regards to 1A, it's not that gear would weigh more, it's basically that, should the admins decide that there is an issue of balance, that they should look at restricting the amount of gear a character can have, and whether that amount should be different for force users and non-force users - ie a force user would have a weight restriction of x, but a non-force user would have a weight restriction of y. But ultimately this could take a number of different forms.

As for your point on 3? Given That the community at large more or less ignored the intended direction that tech was supposed to go down, and given that so many people raised the matter that current tech standards are...problematic to say the least, I don't see this is a problem. Ultimately it's based on what the staff determine, but I think if the end result is that the tech boards are held to the standards they were originally supposed to be held to then that's a good thing.

And if people feel restricted by that? Well, then maybe that's an indication that they've been part of the problem. *shrug*

I wasn't here last TL or for the beginning of this TL so I don't know exactly how tech got outta hand but I can see it. I've seen tech on other places with ridiculous amounts of tech that was more than overkill.

 

[Green Ranger]

Also keep in mind that the list isn't just a list of my suggestions, it's based on suggestions, recommendations and discussions that took place in this thread, so don't just all grill me directly about it. I just compiled the ones the community seemed to be most receptive to.