Multiple Characters

[Lusipher]

This isnt City of Arabel. Sorry.

[Dorn]

Fear is fear, and ALFA is paralyzed with fear. They fear that having more than one PC in ALFA will result in bad behavior. Well, considering all the bad behavior i can do with just one PC in ALFA, that won't show up in the 1984 reports, it seems rather silly to worry about all those things mentioned above that 'will' show up in the 1984 reports.

You are part of alfa WW. Don't forget that. It's 'we'.

This suggestion has come up numerous times over the last 5 odd years with different admin, different staff and diffrent sets of players and DMs. Each time it hasn't been supported widely enough to drive change.

The faceless 'they' referred to that are full of 'fear' is always changing so it is probably an unfair label.

That being said, i've always been on the fence in this matter.

On one hand, I want more than one char.

On the other, I've been an AR for a fair while some time ago and let me tell you...for all the stuff people actually SEE on the forums about misbehavious, there is a a HELL of a lot more work done by DMs/HDMs and ARs/PAs on players who are accross or very close to the line of gaming against the principles of ALFA.

So if there IS any move to review this, i suggest that the key 'vote' would probably be DMs rather than players. We have a limited pool of DMs and most do not want to be spending more time going through logs and 'regulating' to make sure abuse was limited instead of crafting intricate and fun stories. But with more than one char per player there would probably be more of this required (i'm no expert).

So i'd personally probably continue to support the one PC per player rule that we all know when we join ALFA.

But, OGRogue, I think honest and thought out suggestions should always be responded to. I'd almost like to see admin state a way forwards on all suggestions in this forum (ie Not this time but thanks and this is why/We'll hold a formal poll/Stirling idea old chap we're putting this one through!)

Having exodus to play a second char on made this easier for me.

[oldgrayrogue]

But, OGRogue, I think honest and thought out suggestions should always be responded to. I'd almost like to see admin state a way forwards on all suggestions in this forum (ie Not this time but thanks and this is why/We'll hold a formal poll/Stirling idea old chap we're putting this one through!).

Thank you Dorn. A system like this would be wonderful. I think members would be more inclined to contribute if they know their suggestions are considered by Admin and acted upon, either by acceptance or rejection. You make an excellent point here.

Having exodus to play a second char on made this easier for me.

To me, this is a huge problem with the rule. Every minute our members play on other servers to get around the rule is a lost opprtunity for RP by every other member here.

And as far as abuses, I still haven't seen anyone explain what they are, especially with a "no two characters on the same server ever" rule. Make violation of this rule a bannable offense and any perceived problem is solved. Players are given a choice: Play one character on a variety of servers, or more than one on much less of a variety. I frankly don't see the issue. Wish I could do a poll, because frankly I see more people commenting here who, as players, would want to see a change like this than not.

[psycho_leo]

Wish I could do a poll, because frankly I see more people commenting here who, as players, would want to see a change like this than not.

I think this might have more to do with the fact that this point has been raised and discussed so many times, that many people simply have no wish to go through it all again. I could be wrong though.

[Lusipher]

This idea comes up at least a few time a year by someone and each time the community says No to it. Its a dead horse. No offense to you Oldgreyrogue, its just the way it is. If Paazin wants to put up a poll then thats cool, but I imagine it wouldnt pass and if it did a lot of folks that were here because of the core rules or Pillars of ALFA wont stay.

[HATEFACE]

No.

[oldgrayrogue]

Last flog of the poor and beleagured horse then.

Has the issue ever been brought up in the past with the limitation on multiple characters I propose? Again, with that limitation I just don't see the danger. I really wish someone would explain what it is. If my specific proposal has been considered and rejected previously, I apologize for being stubborn and unoriginal. =D

However, the fact that I am the latest in a long list of members to bring this up suggests to me that it is a topic that merits revisiting and serious consideration as the membership continues to expand and evolve. At the very least taking the temperature of the community, as presently constituted, on the issue in a poll might be worth doing. Then Admin could decide if it is something that merits further consideration in the interests of the community at large.

I have sent FI a PM asking her to take a look at this thread and decide whether a poll can be set up.

[Brokenbone]

I'm not awfully supportive of multiple PCs. People constantly find ways to cheat, or find themselves thinking someone else is cheating, even in a single PC per player world.

Metagaming for instance is a basic concern. Difficult to catch "an abuse of knowledge" in a log. Joe Stealther determines the forest is safe to traverse, logs out, and back in with Petey the Mage, who zips across the dread forest knowing there's a window of opportunity, which he'd never have done without an escort before.

The much lesser problem is twinking/exploiting for gold, which is much easier to note in logs. PC A drops a bag of gold on Map X, where later his PC B picks it up... that's old hat, easy to catch, because unfortunately, we've got a lot of practice at it.

DMing does indeed let one try out dozens of different personalities. No, those NPCs you play do not "face challenges and advance in levels" as PCs would, but if the goal is "more stimulation/fun", it should fit the bill. It also gives back to the community in some sense, rather than having, say, TWO campaigns you require DMs for, like having a thief in an evil campaign, and a priest in some religious campaign. Kind of viewed as greedy, when everyone seems to lament the lack of available DMs.

[oldgrayrogue]

Brokenbone:

The issues you mention are only an issue if multiple characters are permitted on the same server.

What I am suggesting is that multiple characters be allowed only if those characters never play on the same server. It is no different in concept from having a character on a NWN1 server and another character on a NWN2 server IMO.

How can you meta information, mule items, twink etc between characters if they are never on the same server?

To state it again: What would be the problem with playing a drow on an underdark server and a cleric on TSM for instance on the condition that the two characters never be logged on to the same server ever. That should be easy to police no? And make a violation a bannable offense.

As far as being greedy, I really don't see it that way. As long as the characters are on separate servers the net effect on DM time is the same. Plus, this is not about trying to hog DM time. Its simply about allowing players to be creative in diverse ways while playing different character concepts. Obviously at least some of our members like to do this or they would not be playing on other servers instead of ALFA to fulfill that desire.

[Mick]

How can you meta information, mule items, twink etc between characters if they are never on the same server?

One example would be if you play separate PCs on separate servers but someone else plays the same PC on both servers. Player A's evil PC X might learn that Player B's PC is a Sharran while playing on one server. Player B takes his PC to a different server, where he meets Player A's good PC Y. Voila. Meta.

Now, good players have no trouble keeping these two sets of PC knowledge separate, but some players would and the question will always be there in the mind of the person playing the Sharran, regardless of how good a reputation the multi-PC player has.

[White Warlock]

I.e., there is, and always has been, a large group of members in ALFA that fear the MMORPG world will inevitably plunder ALFA. Every concern presented, except metagaming, is managed automatically with ALFA's 1984 script(s). Reports are available and red flags pop up in obvious cases.

As to metagaming, players chat via email, in the chat room, via forums, and otherwise. They obtain information just by reading the posts in this place. They pick up information by reading the pirated Forgotten Realms books available as PDFs online or, if they're so inclined, they can buy the books. They gain information by being a DM for a time, or a builder for that matter. Any DM, builder or admin can pickup all the modules from the FTP and peruse them at their leisure. Etc, etc, etc.

It doesn't matter whether you have 1 or a hundred PCs on a server, metagaming happens if people allow themselves to go there. Having more PCs doesn't inordinately increase type of situation.

The greater concern is about twinking oneself, by dropping items, logging on with your other pc, and picking up the same items. But, as i stated, 1984 scripts catch that behavior. The only real way to cheat around here nowadays is if you have a cadre of players who twink each other... and even that has limitations, since items now carry signatures.

To put it bluntly, the fears of today are actually the fears of yesterday. The threats have been largely blockaded, but many of the members don't know this. They assume everything is as it was 5 years ago. Things change, people spent an inordinate amount of time and energy into creating 'technical' means to protect against problem players that the rules we still have in place are no longer needed.

Problem is, how do you convince a community of that? How do you convince them that the rules in place are old rules, put there to protect this community when our defenses were not yet constructed? How do you bring to their attention just how good our defenses are now, and how so many of our existing rules, which were based mostly on fear, are truly no longer needed. In some cases, they were never needed.

That's the problem... resolve that one and things can change for the betterment of everyone in this community. Good luck.

[Mayhem]

WW, I may be mistaken but haven't you in the past slated the 1984 system with the statement that there are a dozen ways to abuse the system that would NOT show up in the 1984 logs?

To now do a U-turn and say we can relax our rules because the logs are so good seems somewhat disingenious.

*****

All personal opinion aside, at the end of the day, we have to look at the cost/benefit.

The benefit? Players potentially get to have more fun.

The cost? Dms have to do more work - including "admin" work, keeping up to date with a characters history etc.

****

I think it depends on the number of players per DM that we already have, the average party size, if you will.

Even though the two characters would not be online at the same time (or would they? - I'm sure some would manage it) this would be increasing the already stretched DM to PC ratio. If one player is able, thanks to multiple characters, to play with multiple DMs he is taking a share of quality DM time from those that only get to play with that 1 DM.

If average party size that the DM is handling is quite small, then having an extra PC appear on a server thanks to multiples will probably benefit the game. If, however, the party sizes are already approaching what the individual DMs consider to be optimum, then multiples will have an adverse effect.

They may be ways around that, of course. Perhaps players would have to designate one of the multiples as their "Primary" and DMs would have the right to give priority to primary characters when filling out a roster, only taking on secondaries if they feel that there is room in their adventure. That's all a bit meta, though...

*****

From a purely personal standpoint, I would like to see the option to play 2 characters - but only in a specific instance, that of a dedicated underdark server. The underdark server will, by its very nature, be hard to enter/leave without DM assistance and will ensure that the second character will never meet the first or (just as important and hardest to keep track of) associates of the first.

As it stands at the moment I would like to try out an UD character but would not like to give up the ability to go a-travelling and meet the rest of ALFAs denizens without each encounter being a default PVP situation. Having a seperate, "quarantined" UD server would allow the best of both worlds in that respect.

[Kest]

Metagaming for instance is a basic concern. Difficult to catch "an abuse of knowledge" in a log. Joe Stealther determines the forest is safe to traverse, logs out, and back in with Petey the Mage, who zips across the dread forest knowing there's a window of opportunity, which he'd never have done without an escort before.

If Petey had brain one in that huge melon on top of his neck he would be using his familiar to scout.

Even though the two characters would not be online at the same time (or would they? - I'm sure some would manage it)

There is still the rule against multiple GSIDs. Not sure why that would change.

Perhaps I am naively optimistic, but I actually trust my fellow players not to engage in the type of blatant cheating that seems to be the concern with this. And if they do cheat, well, in my experience cheaters eventually get caught, punished and ultimately banned from most PWs.

Pretty much this.

[oldgrayrogue]

From a purely personal standpoint, I would like to see the option to play 2 characters - but only in a specific instance, that of a dedicated underdark server. The underdark server will, by its very nature, be hard to enter/leave without DM assistance and will ensure that the second character will never meet the first or (just as important and hardest to keep track of) associates of the first.

As it stands at the moment I would like to try out an UD character but would not like to give up the ability to go a-travelling and meet the rest of ALFAs denizens without each encounter being a default PVP situation. Having a seperate, "quarantined" UD server would allow the best of both worlds in that respect.

I agree the resolution of this issue involves a cost benefit analysis. Keep in mind that, at least for me, the entire idea of an "alternate" character is to give the player a break from their "primary" character. The opportunity to play evil for instance when their primary is good, or to play a magic user when their primary is a melee type. The concept assumes that players will not be playing these characters simultaneously, because they won't want to. Perhaps I am naively optimistic, but I actually trust my fellow players not to engage in the type of blatant cheating that seems to be the concern with this. And if they do cheat, well, in my experience cheaters eventually get caught, punished and ultimately banned from most PWs.

That said, I agree that a UD server protects even more against the concerns raised by some. Perhaps Admin could consider allowing a second character on a UD server as a pilot program on a finite trial basis to see if any of the perceived problems actually materialize?

[HATEFACE]

Allow me to reiterate. No. Believe it or not people metagame, intentional or otherwise, in ALFA (I know shocking!) Having two characters would further complicate that and managing two characters in such a persistant world designed with low low magic and slow XP progression in mind, you would effectively be dividing your time, xp, & loot. Yet people complain about slow leveling and/or low loot? I would hate to see how they would react with two characters. If you want a break from your character you're free to play on Exodus or the OAS2 (if you're willing to take a back seat to the newbies, you all-stars of ALFA, you.). Ga ahed dn't b scrrd.