What Design Principles Would You Choose For Cantr?

[Solfius]

Tiamo,

I think I understand what you're getting at. We're approaching this from different angles. My suggestions are focused towards making roleplaying an integral part of achieving any other goals you might set in the game (i.e., amassing wealth). But if the game explicitly exists to make roleplaying possible, then you can assume the opposite - people are playing the game in order to roleplay, and because the goal is to roleplay, there's no need to make roleplaying "necessary" in order to achieve ancillary goals.

I'm not sure that we can make that assumption - that everyone is here explicitly to roleplay - in a free, internet-based game that anyone can join. But whether we do make the assumption or not would radically affect the design of the game.

I'm going to reply to this post in the other thread: How would you explain Cantr to a potential player?

[formerly known as hf]

Surely we should realise, and capitalise, upon the experimental nature of Cantr.

I think the 'social simulation' aspect covers both the RP and the mechanics of the game, and acknowledges that both are central to the achievement of a society simulator.

(I don't think we need the 'G' in RPG - that comes with too much pre-conception of D&D style stats and CRPGs)

I would also like to repeat the cals for sustainability. I wrote at length about this early on when I joined, I think the Industrialist was in on it too at the time. The plug needs to be pulled. Resources should be finite and so do the lives of any built item.
However, maintenance of items should be quick and easy (I'm tempted to say that vehicle and building wear and repair be solely an inverse of times used - whilst slightl illogical, it allows for crumbling, underused items, and acknolwdges the maintenance that constitutes everyday use of these things), and resource sustainability easily envisaged and worked out (though it's up to players IG to enforce it as they see fit). Thus, items, buildings etc. which are in never in use will disappear over time, and resources which are over-extracted will decline.

So, as a punchy line, I think the one word
*sustainability*
sums that up. And is possible with the other princip[le I agree with which is the balance between RP and model, and allowing for people at either ends of the tether.

There are others I can think of, but I'll finish on the one most iomportant to me:

*Time spent playing should not directly relate to output in game
This is a slightly difficult one. Sure, peole who have the time to play 15 characters should be able to.
Ideally, there should be some form of relationship between time and productivity (in a game mechanics sense) which is not linear. i.e: as you spend more time per day, per character on Cantr, your productivity should decline.

This kinda works as it is. The first 10 minutes you play a character are the most important, then it declines from there. So, if you have more time, play more characters. However, there are still some major drawbacks for people, like myself, who log in once a day for a short time. Combat is the obvious one, short projects are another.
Whilst Combat shouldn;t be made non-realtime. I would appreciate some more thought being put (both by players IG and staff) into allowing less active players a chance to engage too.
Also, many players keep an eye on the time, for when projects end, to manage certain tricks etc. This is fine as it is, but never should it reach such a situation where that sort of attention gives far too much reward.

[HoH]

That's a lot bit exagerated, Tiamo.

Roleplaying is and/or should be the center of the game. It's the entire purpose of the game.

From the Cantr II homepage:

"Cantr II is an online role-playing game,"

The focus of the game should be on the character and on character development. The development of towns is a by-product of this. I guess what I was trying to get across and didn't do a very good job of is that roleplaying = character development = city development.

If you develop a character that is geared towards ruling a town, then they will probably end up politically in charge if you play it right. Or maybe you play a woman who just wants to bake bread her life. Roleplay it well, and you'll end up baking bread.

What's happening now is city development without the character development. All you have are players that want to make things, but not make their character realistic as well.

[Piscator]

What's happening now is city development without the character development. All you have are players that want to make things, but not make their character realistic as well.

I don't see why that is bad. If they enjoy just building stuff that should be OK.


And I disagree that resources should run out. At least not if they don't regenerate again. If there is only a limited amount of ore you can mine you will finally live in a world without iron. Iron can't be destroyed in real life, but in game a rotting tool just disappears.

[SekoETC]

Pretty funny that people can slowly mine for diamonds with their bare hands but they cannot break a lock without a crowbar, given infinite time. Locks are too final. Lock breaking should be different. Someone crashes against a door or twists a lock, it creates damage if there is enough force applied and the amount of damage is based on the hardness of the item and the strength of wielder(s). A village of 20 people should be able to crack down a door, at least by using a battering ram. 20 people should be able to kill a person with their bare fists no matter what kind of a shield the target has. Some things in Cantr are just too solid and cooperation doesn't matter. Missing a person has nothing to do with their health status or tiredness, it's a solid chance. And if 20 people attack one guy with their bare fists one after another, the defender doesn't gain any tiredness from blocking with his shield, the deterioration the shield suffers is insignificant and each person has equally poor chance of dealing damage unless some of the previous ones managed to deal damage. I'm not sure how to summarize this but there should be strength in numbers.

[Tiamo]

What's happening now is city development without the character development. All you have are players that want to make things, but not make their character realistic as well.

I think you are right about this. But why does this happen? Why this focus on economy? I think this is because the game mechanics themselves are so focussed on the economy, and do not support role play enough.

If you want to have a game that focusses on role play the game mechanics should focus on supporting role play, not distracting from it.
Handing leads for character building would be helpful, but they are absent. Cantr doesn't prevent character building, but also doesn't support it.
Supporting character interaction would be helpful, but the game mechanics make this rather difficult and lengthy.
Having to perform lengthy and tedious tasks is NOT helpful. Unfortunately Cantr currently excels at this type of game play: 90% of all game activity is focused on the production processes.

You may want Cantr to be an RPG, it may be promoted as such, but currently it isn't. Currently Cantr is a game in which you can also roleplay, among other things.
Turning Cantr into a game that really focusses on role play would drastically change the game. I tried to point that out in my earlier posts.

[HoH]

What's happening now is city development without the character development. All you have are players that want to make things, but not make their character realistic as well.

I don't see why that is bad. If they enjoy just building stuff that should be OK.


And I disagree that resources should run out. At least not if they don't regenerate again. If there is only a limited amount of ore you can mine you will finally live in a world without iron. Iron can't be destroyed in real life, but in game a rotting tool just disappears.

What's bad about that is that the game then loses its purpose. If it is indeed a society simulator, the development of a person is also part of that, not just building houses or vehicles.

If you want to have a character that likes to build things, by all means, go ahead. Play a boat builder, a blacksmith, a carpenter. Turn it into an enterprise, but make sure there is character there to support it. So the person has a passion for building, but they still need to be a person. Not a mindless bot that allows the player to fill up towns with useless buildings and vehicles that aren't utilized.

By all means, if you just want to build stuff, go put together a model airplane or car with your spare time instead.

And on a side note, iron does degrade in real life. Its called rust.

[SekoETC]

And I disagree that resources should run out. At least not if they don't regenerate again. If there is only a limited amount of ore you can mine you will finally live in a world without iron. Iron can't be destroyed in real life, but in game a rotting tool just disappears.

Even if crumbling tools would turn into heaps of resources, there would still be a problem of items being stashed away in buildings, indestructible buildings with indestructible locks (for a society with no crowbars). People have the tendency to stash things away so that people couldn't steal them, and then people die and someone picks up the key, never finding where it goes.

I agree with Tiamo that mechanics that support rp would most likely feed rp. I've never played WoW but I've seen animations where the characters dance and wave and such. You can't make a Cantr character do that without writing it. And this is a multi-language game. It would help if there was a selection of hard-coded emotes that could be used for non-verbal communication. People shouldn't be forced to use them but they should be available for international encounters and for people who are too tired to write emotes.

Also I'm missing a free form status message because lets face it, sometimes you need to tell them "We are having sex, you are disturbing". The common sign is to leave clothes on the floor but someone might steal them! Some people just rp stripping naked and never really take their clothes off, so when someone walks in on them, they see them fully dressed.

[HoH]

I think you are right about this. But why does this happen? Why this focus on economy? I think this is because the game mechanics themselves are so focussed on the economy, and do not support role play enough.

And as I've pointed out in my earlier posts, there is a focus on building due to over-development of the game and the complicating way things are produced.

And its not a focus on the economy. There isn't much trade happening that I've seen. It's just production.

You can also note from the homepage that Cantr is supposed to be about the characters and the society. Economy and production and trade are all by-products of people just trying to live amongst each other, hence society. By simplifying the game, role play would then become the main idea of the game again, not production. As of now there are too many thigns to produce. You have to make this tool to make another tool to make this machine that makes this one little part of this weapon that I can use to hunt this animal to gather this resource which is refined by another machine made from different tools that have to be produced as well.

Coupled with a slowed server, its no wonder that no one roleplays. But simultaneously, its a shame they don't. When people roleplay, you get those memorable characters that ultimately make the game worthwhile. When you roleplay, you get a whole new level of the society...you get alliances like the MacGregors, Tribe Black Rock. You get armies and wars and STORYLINES along with produced goods.

With production focused play, you get a new hammer and that's about it.

Which would you prefer?

[marginoferror]

We should be wary about setting unrealistic goals for roleplaying. Good roleplaying is extremely difficult to do for both the players and the game masters in the very best of circumstances.

That having been said, there is a lot we can do to engender roleplaying in Cantr.

1. Build a world sufficiently complex that characters can have a variety of interesting, unique, realistic goals.

2. Build a changing, realistic, challenging natural world that helps put players in their characters' shoes and gives characters something to talk about.

3. Make sure achieving most realistic goals in the world are not so challenging as to discourage players, but challenging enough to require interaction with other players.

4. Make communication and coordination as easy as possible within the confines of a nominally realistic simulation.

5. Make sure that taking the time to roleplay properly is never detrimental to achieving character goals (as it is now in almost all situations involving combat and dragging).

[HoH]

2. Build a changing, realistic, challenging natural world that helps put players in their characters' shoes and gives characters something to talk about.

And how do you propose going about this without using outside influence? The only option I can see is by character interaction, AKA roleplaying.

[marginoferror]

The "natural world" I was talking about includes terrain features, dynamic weather, flora and fauna, difficult-to-reach locations, varied resource availability, etc.

To extend on this, we could allow decoration inside and outside buildings, a varied town layout, etc., much like we allow some degree of personalization with clothing, etc. Physical features on characters like long or short hair, scars, body weight, height, etc. would go further. A little bit of detail goes a long way in facilitating roleplaying.

[Piscator]

And on a side note, iron does degrade in real life. Its called rust.

That's only true from a certain point of view. Chemically the iron is still there and can be recovered. I real life elements hardly ever get lost.

[Piscator]

Physical features on characters like long or short hair, scars, body weight, height, etc. would go further. A little bit of detail goes a long way in facilitating roleplaying.

Yes, a character description you could/have to fill out would definitely benefit roleplaying. It may be worth reconsidering the skill system too. The current genetical approach is quite interesting in a geeky kind of way, but it doesn't exactly facilitate playing a preconcieved role. Simply choosing skills wouldn't be against the core idea of the game and would definitely get rid of a lot of newspawns starving themselves to death.

[marginoferror]

I would prefer ditching the skill system as it currently exists altogether and instead making skills and physical attributes solely the result of play. If (IF) this is implemented correctly, it could let characters fill the roles they want to fill and still change their minds later, and also allow for specialization, without encouraging mindless "levelling up" activity.

One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of things you can do in the game just aren't really that hard, and you can achieve a reasonable level of efficiency just by having someone show you how to do it once. Other things you can do in the game are incredibly delicate procedures (i.e., constructing a blast furnace) and would benefit greatly from experience, reference materials and guidance from a mentor.