A who list with no titles

[Davairus]

So get rid of race, class, title..name... might as well just log out and "play" real life.

[_Clifton_]

http://au.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/gamespotting/071103minusworld/1.html

[Slade]

...how did it get such a high review?

[Stiehl26]

I wouldn't say get rid of titles. I would say get rid of class specific titles. People love fluff. If you were to have some type of system where a player's actions become how they are known. If, for example, a player pked a lot (5 pks, 10 pks, etc), they would have the ability to go to a herald or maybe the tavern or wherever, and have earned the right to choose a title of the Slayer (or something), if they had 10 pks maybe they had a choice of a more cool sounding title. Also, this could be tied to general accomplishments, like Vanquisher of Gasteride or Cleanser of Winter. People would effectively unlock a large number of titles and have a choice in which they may want displayed. Perhaps attach a fee to the changing of titles. There are so many options that could be explored with this. Heal an elf over 10,000 hps and be an Elf Friend, get 10 death blows with your hand to hand attacks - Merciless Pummeler of Innocents or Wrong Doers. Just a moment of inspiration, though I am sure, many people will not see it. Oh...don't get rid of names either...that would be maybe a step to far.

[_Clifton_]

The really cool titles should be realm first only!

[Erlwith]

I'd like an additional wholist that gave just a name output.

WHO
5 players
Clifton, Slade, Pip, Groq, and Erlwith.

[Stiehl26]

This, unlike many of the things I post here, received some positive responses. Did the IMM staff have any interest in exploring this idea?

[Viggs]

no

[Resatimm]

Titles, race, names, etc, will always be included on the who list. We will never adopt a who list like the one proposed.

As for an "opting in" or something like that so a heavy RPer CAN change his who list to that, is completely up to Dav. It might be an option at some point, but it would be so far down the priority list, that the only thing that is less time sensitive is any change I have proposed for necromancers.

[Davairus]

key word there is "some". I didn't really want to post my own rebuke because generally I expect players to disagree with an idea like this anyways.

The central theme of the game is rp-pvp.... a marriage of the two. While its ok to have some "dirt" for colour (i.e. things that dont' strictly adhere to - or distract from - the games central theme), having too much is bad, it makes difficult to learn the game and to figure out what the game theme even is. This kinda idea is something which you would typically find already in a non-pk mud, like a mush. I mean sure, we could take out who pk, but then we'd have to take out level-restriction on pk, and just allow anyone to kill anyone else. That's realism too. So is evils grouping with goods to "use" them for exp, and kill them later - I dont know how fun you'd find that, but I remember one or two bad mudconnector reviews just from it happening to neutrals that grouped with evils. In other words, for various reasons (mainly the fact players can nuke each other) its better to have evil/good distinctly identifiable, and its the same with classes because of the preparation required for a fight.

The moral of the story is realism is a desirable quality but gameplay comes first.

[Thorgoth]

wait..so you are telling me there is a world outside of AR?


...geez, stick that in your pipe and smoke it