It feels like quests fill up too fast

[lackofimagination]

Sept 18, 2022 17:35:47 GMT -5 Ianira said:

What if, when signing up for a quest, players are asked to post the names/dates of the last 3 quests they participated in. Or ask players not to sign up for a new quest if they have done one within a certain time frame?  Both of these suggestions would help the DMs to know who on the sign-up list has done a quest recently without having to do a lot of research and give players that haven't been involved in many quests a chance to get priority on a quest roster.

I also know of several cases of PCs who participated in a quest or quest chain, found themselves denied entry in an serie of events that were follow-ups (or will be follow ups) and where it feels completely illogical and leads some players to wondering if said PCs are still worth playing at all.

How would you feel if you did all the investigation on a villain, successfully, leveling up in the process, and then got told "nope, you won't get in to off them. It's going to be this group of people who had absolutely no idea and no interest in the tracking"?

As someone who have stepped down from quests, who have been barred from a few "due to previous involvement", I have personally never been told "we're not taking you because you've been on too many quests recently", but the whole thing isn't as simple and straightforward as "lets give everyone a quest in turn".

Again, the better solution to what's being discussed here, would probably be in more people finding the time and the courage to apply as aDMs, thus offering more quests in more quest ranges.

[Tarostar]

I would like to point out Ladybug sneaked in a 9th spot on the Spoofine quest to include someone and that's:

1) Awesomely nice of her.
2) Shows the team really cares about including players.

[comet]

Sept 19, 2022 7:20:54 GMT -5 Tarostar said:

I would like to point out Ladybug sneaked in a 9th spot on the Spoofine quest to include someone and that's:

1) Awesomely nice of her.
2) Shows the team really cares about including players.

That appears to have been me, actually, that got included.
Although it didn't appear to be completely full when I was typing my post out.

I did have *other* hesitations about joining that quest (mostly I have no idea what its about) but on urging from friends I signed up.

[Nymera]

Sept 20, 2022 16:02:47 GMT -5 comet said:

Sept 19, 2022 7:20:54 GMT -5 Tarostar said:

I would like to point out Ladybug sneaked in a 9th spot on the Spoofine quest to include someone and that's:

1) Awesomely nice of her.
2) Shows the team really cares about including players.

That appears to have been me, actually, that got included.
Although it didn't appear to be completely full when I was typing my post out.

I did have *other* hesitations about joining that quest (mostly I have no idea what its about) but on urging from friends I signed up.

What is Spoofini about?  It's about 90% candy puns. 

[ladybug]

Sept 20, 2022 16:02:47 GMT -5 comet said:

Sept 19, 2022 7:20:54 GMT -5 Tarostar said:

I would like to point out Ladybug sneaked in a 9th spot on the Spoofine quest to include someone and that's:

1) Awesomely nice of her.
2) Shows the team really cares about including players.

That appears to have been me, actually, that got included.
Although it didn't appear to be completely full when I was typing my post out.

I did have *other* hesitations about joining that quest (mostly I have no idea what its about) but on urging from friends I signed up.

Yes, when I went to update that roster, there had been about three posts right after each other, and I'd missed one. Since they all signed up at about the same time, and I'd tagged one extra in error, I didn't want to boot anyone for my mistake.

To clarify: Spoofini is an eccentric gnome mage who uses his arcane talents to create candies. Effectively, Willy Wonka on gnomish drugs. They're light-hearted and silly events that are, yes, mostly an excuse to make stupid candy puns.

[comet]

Well I do enjoy me some puns.

[Jonathan Bonathan Jovial]

I've legitimately never been able to get into a quest outside of the chapter ones which are organized in a different matter save for one that wasn't a forum sign-up but instead spawned via a one-shot that turned into a full-fledged plot line. Every single quest on the forums fills up well before I can get in and it feels awful to be locked out of things because I didn't hit refresh on the forums every fifteen minutes. It's more like trying to get tickets that sell out very, very quickly than anything else.

Even if there's a drought, it feels exacerbated by the way things are handled overall as opposed to individually.

[straylight]

I too see this repeatedly happen and is one of the reasons I decided to move on from the server. Its not only the matter of how quickly the slots fill up, but how -consistently- those slots fill up with the -same- people. Hyperbole and good intentions aside, the stated goals and aims and the functional product and process are too far apart for this to "not be an issue". I think occum's razor here really speaks better than platitude.

[Jazzmyra]

So, as a player who's here since three years with not a lot of breaks, I'll repeat what Fox already said: Right now, basically since about March, there's a bunch of long, ongoing plots. It's literally the timing of joining. And I think it's quite unfair to blame the DMs who already do consult lists as to who is in many quests and do their best to make it fair - but, as others have said, if you don't sign up, how are the DMs to know you want to participate? The roster size refers to how many will be on the roster in the end, not when signups are supposed to end.

[Jonathan Bonathan Jovial]

There's a difference between blaming and giving feedback. And rosters are often locked by the time more people get around to noticing. Again, having to refresh frequently on a forum is not going to be people's preferred daily activity. I personally appreciate the effort going into things and that there's ongoing stuff that's more frequent than fresh stuff. Still, what people have noted is true; that there's a consistent set of people who are used to the system getting into things far more often before roster locks happen. I feel that what happens is that people see slots being filled and going into reserves, then don't bother saying they'd like in. Personally, I almost never see a quest roster that isn't full very, very quickly. Is that on me for not checking more often? Yeah, it is. Does that make it not an issue? That's not my call.

[Tarostar]

I personally think few people refresh the forum every fifteen minutes.
I am pretty sure it's the quests announced on discord that fill up the quickest and some people are on discord a lot more than others.

[Sir Ven]

Good morning,

I've held off responding here for a while, while I feel like some of the points I want to make may seem obvious -  I worry that some of them may be controversial.    So will start confidently with the obvious and move warily towards the more controversial.

Supply of events is clearly being dwarfed by demand, clearly this isn't great  but it's indicative of a healthy, growing and engaged community who want to take part, get involved and be part of the story.      As a Euro player, with a day job it's a little bit harder for me than most, but I can also say as a veteran player of several years that there are DMs who actively go out of their way to host and run events in Euro-friendly time zones, regardless of them being a Euro themselves. 

So, point 1 - as much as there's an issue here (and obviously, there is).   I think it's worth reflecting on the positive, growing state of CD.
Point 2 -   The DMs really are trying.    They're not just gliding along blindly, ignoring your pleas or your frustrations.     - The ones I know and have become friends with, they're good people.  They care, they won't be reading this discussion, sitting back and going "lol, not my problem".     They'll be doing what they can, but... On to... 

Point 3  - DMs are here to have fun.   It's a game, we not only want our DMs to have fun we Need them to have fun.   DMs that are having fun, run events!  DMs that turn DMing into a job, into a chore to try and quest everyone and keep everyone happy at the expense of their own free time and sanity burn out.   That only serves to make things worse for everyone, because now there's even less supply of quest time. 

This leads me onto my first controversial point, DMs have friends.   They hear these frustrations and complaints from their friends in private conversations too - so, naturally, when a DM is posting a new event for the first time in a while, if they know their friend is desperate to get into a quest, they're going to give them a little nudge.   "Hey buddy, I'm just about to post an event, I remembered you said you've been struggling to get into one lately, so if you're interested and the time works, feel free to join mine".  
 -  Now, obviously, I can't prove it happens.  Those are Private conversations, but I'm pretty sure it does.   Leaning more into the controversial side, anecdotally I can think of probably 1 or 2 DMs that I never remember seeing run a quest which doesn't have 1 or 2 of their closest 4 friends in every time. 

Point Number 4 -  While this can be frustrating for an observer who may just see "Oh DM x is running an event for their friends again" - I feel like that's a very negative interpretation, unnecessarily so.   The DM is trying to do a nice thing, for a nice person - and of course they want to run events with their friends in them!  Who doesn't like playing games with their friends?  The DMs are generally speaking good people, trying to make fun for themselves, for their friends and for the server as a whole. 

Point number 5 - a lot of these posts tend to make comparisons.   It's not just a case of "I'd like some more events please", but rather "I'd like some more events please and it's not fair because that guy over there is getting more than me".     While I can understand this, and I understand the reason for wanting to call out when something doesn't seem entirely fair I'm not honestly sure the second part is really that helpful  - either to the person complaining, or to the staff.     Because, ultimately, what you're really saying is "I want as many events as they've got now".    To which the solution is not to try and limit quest attendance by those perceived as the lucky, or greedy, few but to try and find mechanisms for increase quest availability so that supply can keep up with demand.     Reducing someone else's questing opportunities to increase your own won't make the server a happier place, it will just move around the frustration to someone else. 


So Point 6 -  I mentioned earlier that no one person can fix this problem, I've mentioned a few times that this comes down to a simple case of demand outstripping supply.   I have, tried at least, to humanise the all parties in this equation a little bit more.   We're all just people, here to play a game and try and have fun - none of us are the villain.    So, I would propose that rather than introducing controls and processes and monitoring to ensure that everyone is quested equally  - a task that would reduce the number of events, as it would consume hours of staff time every month instead I echo LackOfImagination...   We have more active players than we did before, therefore we need more active DMs.    So the server needs not just the DMs which are old-hands at this now to "Do more" (Yikes, I felt bad just saying that) -  we need the newer influx of players to really join in with the server community and take up the mantle of story-telling DM themselves. 


Thanks,

 - Ven

[Arya]

Speaking as a former DM, who may or may not re-apply in the future, and after seeing everyone's thoughts in the conversation for a while...

I completely empathize with people's concerns in this thread. And at a time I was trying to help as many as possible, but here is another thing, and something Sir Ven                   does well with acknowledging...

Individual DMs are human. When I tried to put out more than I should have, I ended up having less quality in my events and the end result was burnout, which also can and does contribute to players not having as much fun. I disappointed people as much if not more than if I had just done less events. There were judgment calls made that in hindsight I would not do because I was trying to do something different using niches of lore that may or may not in retrospect needed admin input or refined. To this day I second guess a lot of my time as a DM, and now have that haunting me, because I was just that burnt out trying to do that and it did no good for anyone - at the very least me. Putting the blame and pressure on individual DMs leads to that burnout over time because we also receive more negative feedback than positive in addition to all of this (for those unhappy will send feedback in usually, happy folks often continue with business as usual). Thus, some are going to take breaks. Telling them they are not doing enough, whether by players or staff, is a lot of weight when it is a repeated pressure.

I do understand there is a lull in the number of events right now compared to demand, and I hear that. However, this is still a volunteer position. If anyone does have ideas for stories, as Fox²                   said, there is an application process for new DMs, especially for the less-represented time zones (Euro, Australia, Asiatic, etc). That was one thing that was actually a very serious concern when I was DM last round and I am so glad to see so many more DMs now. Granted, there are more players now too (a good thing), which also means the demand is higher than it was than when I was about before.

You can be part of the change you want to see in this case and I would, in honesty? I would love seeing more activity by more DMs with more ideas, and a variety of events. You do not even need to be perfect with lore, as even those who pride themselves on being experts are not perfect with it, either. Just be willing to put in good faith effort, improve, and make the server a fun, wonderful place for the community. 

I can say being on the other side we do (at least did when I was topside) try to keep track of who might be getting more DM attention, less to not include people who get a lot in the future but to keep in mind when DMs are trying to do as much as possible. As an awareness thing more than a point of 'this needs done or else.' I know of many examples who are trying to accommodate a variety of folks. I know Lady just made a big sign-up for Spoofini stuff. With some others trying to do similar, the only solution right now to make things better is having more people who can DM to back those who need a break, who need to limit their activity due to IRL (it's a legitimate thing), and so forth. Again, because there are only so many and as this is a voluntary position, it is something that needs not just a little more time, but the community to help take part in making better. Otherwise, we need to consider our expectations that we set for ourselves as well as the community.

Just my own thoughts for having been on both sides of the issue, as it were. I know for myself, I have been trying not to sign up for too many open sign-ups for I know I have been around a long time and am trying to space out my participation. I have a sign up in the server plot already and I know when time comes, there will be other opportunities for me. 

Best,
Arya

[straylight]

Since this server prides itself on transparency and we all seem to agree we all have the same desire, why don't we make that spreadsheet of who has done what how often public? Its not a matter of comparison for personal jealousy, its because its the most empirical way to be flat honest about what is going on. You could even make the names anonymous and just show independent ids to involvement incidents, since reportedly that information is being kept. We are all here to have fun but when you take something like this, which is something done in many closed communities that are kept closed for these very reasons, and advertise a publically open server then you are presenting the notion that if -characters- involve themselves they will get some sort of interaction down the line. I get we are all human and there are constraints, but I also know that same humanity makes us blind to our own biases. People do want to play with their friends but to be utterly straight forward (honesty is trust, not negativity) you shouldn't have to become ooc friends to get IC involvement and underlying all thats going on that seems to be the true requirement of involvement, at least on a deeper level, in my experience. We come to this community as a game about the characters, some people are less social then others, others like it just about the game, making a shadow requirement of doing something in a shared fantasy world where the price tag is me having to make an emotional connection with the staff can be problematic for more than a few reasons. And has shown itself to have already created problems in the past. I don't want to have to feel like I have to establish a deep ooc relationship with someone to advance a plotline. Especially given the very abuses reported in the ban forums of staff misdeeds, its just not a safe place to force players to be, and frankly its not an ultimately healthy mindset to take if you want a big public world.

[morena]

To be honest, I'd be very uncomfortable with a rigid numerical solution like those that have been proposed. Number of quests / month. Public spreadsheets. That kind of stuff. It feels like that would involve a ton of risks and potential for toxic behaviour and constant whataboutism. I'd much rather trust that the staff know what they're doing with their non-public spreadsheets.

For one, players don't always have the ability to see how many quests/month they'll be in. It can be weeks or months between a quest being announced and it actually happening.

And with public spreadsheets, we'd inevitably get into horrible, horrible arguments between people debating, angrily, if "two small quests are the same as one big quest" and "how many ad-hocs are equivalent to a personal quest". It sounds... not so great.

And I say this as a person who didn't even get close to being in a quest for many months after joining this server.

Yes, of course it would be nice to have more quests. But I really, really don't think it's helpful to see quests as something we're somehow owed to as players. Certainly not this way.