Forced duplicate last names and reputation per account.

Some clarification from the devs on this topic would be great of course, but I'd expect for the most part that this aspect of the game is still probably at the drawing-table stage.

Personally I don't find anything wrong with linking aspects like reputation between alts from an RP standpoint; you're replaying the game right? Sure we could pretend that an alternate character is coming in with a fresh start, and just happens to have a lot of intuitive knowledge of the land... or we can face the reality of the shared bank space and land rights and knowledge from their earlier play-through and RP a character that has some tie to your first one. I don't have a problem with one character's actions affecting the other; you are literally RPing two characters with a link to each to other at the same time after all.


I don't mind if the devs try to put a bit of depth into using alts, but it's also too early to tell if they're gonna stretch themselves too far on the design aspect of them. What's reputation even used for in this game anyway?

 

From a role playing perspective, different reputation and last names, etc. for different characters makes total sense.

From a grief management perspective, keeping the reputation and last name the same across multiple characters makes sense to reveal the behavior of the player, not the character.

If both perspectives logically make sense (good goals for the game to achieve), then those concepts are not broken. The game is broken if it can only deliver one and not the other when it needs to deliver both.

This leads to the question: Are we trying to shoehorn too many things into one game system? Does the game need separate systems for character alignment/role playing from player account owner behavior ratings?

 

I would think and hope that it is in its early stages. I honestly don't recall seeing the "multiple personality disorder" anywhere written as lore or as a hard truth, but I know it was used as an example by RG to explain the initial theory as to how they planned to explain shared reputation over the whole account.

I don't think it means this idea is set in stone and hopefully with this thread, they recognize the concerns and come up with a mutually agreeable solution for all of us.

 

Yes, they absolutely should be separate and I don't think it would be difficult to achieve. I provided some very simple solutions for player account owner behavior tracking that would be easily implemented, easily trackable by other players and would not require the use of forced reputation/virtues or Surnames on an account wide basis.

 

I just want to state, that again, Richard only wanted one char per account. Then feature creep ensued. He finally caved and allowed more character's for each account. The agreement for having extra characters was that they share the same reputation and family name. Now people want further feature creep and want more added to the customization of the character names excluding the family and reputation. Again, I say lets go back to one character per account and then they can buy more accounts if needed for alts.

 

For me it's only roleplaying if it's consensual - all the people involved are aware that it's a roleplaying session and participate as such. Otherwise, you're bothering other people without their consent - I don't think this case merits an exception to the linked alt rule. In the former case it's questionable if the linked alt is a problem at all IMHO.

 

i dont like at all the idea behind the same last name
Having multiple character slots would give us the opportunity to create rollplay charterers like the Memorial Caretaker i created for the ashhaven memorial.

When iam forced to use allways newgate or eberstamm this isnt possible anymore.

 

I do not believe that multiple characters on the same account (where bank account, etc. are all shared) has any relevance to role playing.

The main advantage from same account multiple characters, as I see it, comes from being able to develop different, complementary skill sets for each character. For example, one character could be a skilled adventurer and resource gatherer, while a second could be a skilled craftsman.

If one desires different characters for roleplaying purposes, then separate accounts make more sense, since there is no shared ownership of possessions.

On the subject of last names, I don't have a last name. Nor do I want a last name. Due to Portalarium's insistence that all characters have the same last name, my same account characters will all have no last name. The result will be that their system for indicating relationships between characters will, in my case, break down completely. They could of course force me to have a last name. I would prefer that they didn't do that simply because they can't think of a better way to indicate characters with a shared account.

Perhaps they should ask me. I can think of several.

 

The separate accounts argument needs to be put to rest here. We have to pledge up to $110.00 and $275.00 respectively to attain the second and third character slots which I feel is a perfectly reasonable trade-off. This decision was based on the overwhelming number of players who asked for the change and had nothing to do with my position in this particular thread.

I feel that the inability to individually roleplay unique characters after your first is an unintended side effect of the account wide reputation and last name decision and while I know forum polls are not a good representation of the player base' consensus, at almost 50% agreement, it shows there is a significant enough desire for this side effect to be fixed, especially considering there are other ways to handle player identification without causing the issue I have identified here.

 

I'm not sure I see how consentuality has anything to do with the topic at hand. Roleplay and multiplayer are not mutually exclusive as previously stated, no matter how much you want them to be. People were roleplaying in single player long before UO was released as the first major MMORPG and in my opinion, to think that roleplay is only a multiplayer endeavor lacks imagination. I agree that it is more fun with friends, and although I will primarily be a multiplayer online avatar, multiplayer interaction is certainly not a prerequisite.

 

RPing offline is similar to the analogy, "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear, did it really fall?" While it is possible to RP in single player, to bring it up as part of your argument is kind of strange to me. I think most of us get what you'd like to happen at this point. We just don't think it will be as you'd like it to be. You have 3 options as I see it. RP your 1 account as you want, Buy another account or more accounts and RP how you want or do not play. I'm not a big fan of beating a dead horse.

 

This I agree with. If you want an alt to play a role with (actual role playing, not advancing through the story), I can see the last name thing being annoying. I'd support removal of that so you can name your characters as you wish.

But this doesn't change the shared virtue and reputation.

 

Something people are ignoring is to get to play online with a different play style then the main is you have to buy another account. You want to play with your friends and follow do the same story online? Yep another account. You want to explore the world online or relax and look around or just doing odd quests and not worrying about your virtues and rep? Yep another account. How will online play be fun if you joking take some quest and decided to finish it in a crazy way? Well if it messes up your rep you won't want to do that with your main or might not be inclined to do side quests cause you don't know if you can do them correct for your characters virtues because your drunk. Actions have risks and rewards yes and those shouldn't be changed easily or at all. But in this type of world if I can't explore its no "fun" to play online cause I would be worried about messing up my virtues and rep all the time. I would only play offline to have fun and then I can't enjoy myself with my friends. Why should having a second account be required to enjoy playing with my friend to have fun? Your also forgetting that mob mentality also plays a role when playing with friends and chatting. People do things differently when other people are around.

 

Captain Jack wonders if other players would be able to influence the Virtue/Reputaton system against you... he could still be creative, log in as someone and ask for delivery go goods to this place at that time, and then log in as Captain Jack to, relieve, the other party of said goods!

If the other players cannot influence the system, then Captain Jack wins again!

 

I posted the issues I see with this plan and I think they are valid, affecting a significantly sized player base. I welcome folks to post and provide their thoughts and specific reasons why they oppose my view. The interesting thing here is that no one has provided any kind of logical reasoning as to why a separate bio listing the character names of the account would not work to identify the player and eliminate the need for account wide reputation and last names. The identification of the player has been the number one opposing view and I've repeatedly proven it unnecessary in the form its currently planned to take. Since no real arguments can be made, its obviously a non issue, so you nor anyone else should care whatsoever, how I RP my characters whether it be in single or multiplayer. This does not in any way eliminate or diminish the fact that the way its setup inhibits roleplay which is a valid playstyle.... just like pvp which Portalarium has bent over backward to accommodate.

I'm thinking the majority of the opposition posts are due to the an unwavering faith in Portalarium (which is good) or just because they think common last names "would be cool", but none of that opposition has acknowledged the impact it has on the playstyle of RPers.

I'm still looking for logical reasoning to the opposition to my recommendation other than "its RGs vision, just accept it". People make mistakes and oversights and I think this is one of them. If you have a reason you think I'm wrong please provide it, but to post just to say "We just don't think it will be as you'd like it to be." is unproductive.

 

This can happen in any current MMO that all of the folks in this thread played in the past. The solution to this is simply to know who you do business with. It's not Portalarium's job to screen your business partners or make game decisions for you.

 

I second this vote!

 

Dude. We all are doing this too.

The compromise to more than one CHARACTER per account by the devs is shared reputation.

 

Totally understand this, but what good are additional character slots if I cant play them the way I want because they are forced into the same path, virtues and last name as my original? The fact that additional slots were allowed, as I said, was due to an overwhelming outreach by players, but it is now a fact none the less. This was not a decision I made or that was made based on what I'm now requesting, but a byproduct of that plan was that the ability to RP is limited on the consecutively created characters and it needs to be resolved.



If RG had said "Ok, Ill give you 2 additional characters, but you cant flag Pvp on them and you cant go into pvp zones", you can bet your bank that there would have been a HUGE stink made about it. This is NO different.

 

Want a totally separate character...buy another account. Everyone is happy, devs do not have to change things, arguing just for noise is solved, and you can then ambush Captain Jack on your trade routes.