Your opinion on other players

[Dalvyn]

Alright. Things derailed a bit, and perhaps I was not as clear as I should have been in my first post.

The rating would indicate how well the player plays this character. Let me try to give some example.

Example A. Character barges into the square, does not mind that a bard is currently performing and immediately asks, 'I need a fly spell.' Or 'Anyone wanna go kill stuff?'. This kind of thing would deserve a negative rating.

Example B. The character roleplays consistently. As an elf-hating dwarf, or as a very unwise half-orc fighter, or as a know-it-all mage, ... After roleplaying with them several times, you think something like "This player really brings his character to existence. That's a fully 3D character." and you give a positive rating.

Example C. The character makes a joke or says a witty answer. I have seen people use "reward" in this case... The roleplay rating would not intervene in this case, unless perhaps if the joker or witty answer is very in-character for that person.

[c]Example D.[/b] You and your opponent roleplay a pkill. You have a fair OOC discussion to agree on whether the fight should be stun or spar or whatever, you and your opponent exchange good words and you think that the whole fight was well roleplayed and OOCly fair. You choose to rate positively your opponent.

The goal here is to offer a better indication as to the roleplay quality of players than kismet. In the end, this rating could be used to unlock access to various advantages (increased experience/skill gain, access to races that are harder to roleplay, ...) as well as an indication to help imms decide whether your application should be accepted or not for example. The hope is that we would be taking a step further towards objectivity (and away from subjectivity/favouritism) by enabling all players to give their opinion.

Obviously, if/when something like this rating system comes into the game, it will be made so that cliques can't gain any advantage out of it. A trivial solution would be to keep a backlog of all the ratings you have already given and reduce the meaning of a new rating if it is given to someone you have already rated recently. And there are many other possible protections.

[Selveem]

If you were given the opportunity to rate the roleplay of other characters (at no cost to your character or you, except the time it would take to make the rating), would you do it?

Yes.

Would you prefer the rating to be anonymous, private (only seen by you and the character you rate), or public (visible to all the people in the room)?

I don't think it really should be in the room.. Perhaps like on the forums or something of that nature. Public voting like that, IMO, would take away from RP.

If you had the opportunity to rate someone else's roleplay positively, or negatively, would you use both options? Or would you only rate positively when it is deserved, and simply not rate rather than rate negatively?

I would rate both positive or negative. It depends. I would rather vote than not be heard and give the person an opportunity to set up an RP with me to have my character learn more about them (and for my benefit OOC to understand the character more).

If you were given the opportunity to rate someone else's roleplay, would you prefer to be given the option to give a comment explaining the positive (or negative) rating? Do you think that such a comment should be mandatory?

I do think a comment should be mandatory. I think it would be rather unfair to just give someone a bad rating without giving them the opportunity to respond to the person's concerns. Further, I see this as an opportunity to promote more RP.

-----Sidenote-----

As an individual, I'm pretty up front about who I am and the like. But, at the same time I do try to be diplomatic. There have been people, in the past, I simply just avoided RPing with because I disagreed with their ability to stay in character without attempting to use OOC info to their advantage against my characters ICly and the like. Personally, I just don't enjoy something like that.

Now, while this may have been a very long time ago, it leaves a sour taste in your mouth. In a game where there are maybe 20 players, if that, on at my playing times, it leaves your options rather limited. It is no fun for me to RP alone.

There was a player recently who asked me about his character and how I felt about him. I gave him both the positive and the negative and I pointed something out in a specific RP that I didn't agree with OOCly because of his faith and positions. I think, while the feedback was negative, that he appreciated this information and will make something positive through it.

To me, that is what this game is about. Sure, there are cliques! But, if you really think about it, why are there cliques? These cliques are not just formed by like minds. Many of the people I enjoy RPing with most have very different opinions from mine. Some of them even hate some of my characters! The reason said people grow close is because on an RP MUD we enjoy each other's RP. Time is valuable to all of us. Many of us are adults and spend a lotof time at work or other like events and have limited time on the game. If we enjoy each other's roleplay more, perhaps that clique can evolve into even more a community?

That being said, I think slamming and the like should not be permitted. Non-diplomatic feedback such as 'You suck at playing a Sunite' or the like should not be tolerated and should require a response from an immortal/NC member. These are not condusive towards a productive MUD or RPs.

[Tavik]

I guess I don't quite understand where people see this as becoming a contest? The way I am viewing it, it is simply a coded measure to incite more RP feedback. I love the reward system and I won't say anything bad about what is already in place. What gets to me sometimes is that I don't get hardly any negative feedback. Personally, I want that. It gives me a reason to push myself and make myself better. I understand that others may not share my views on this. But as things are now, it seems like most people are shy about offering RP advice. I understand that. Having this coded system, I think, would help alleviate some of that shyness, though. From what I am reading of others posts here it seems like everyone, despite their position on this topic, seems to be very sensitive to the feelings of others which means that most can deal with the constructive criticism in a civilized manner.

The other thing I was going to bring up was the fear of OOC abuse and cliques. It is possible, yes. But does everyone stay with their clique ALL the time? Doubtful. This option would be available to everyone to comment. That means that even though you may be getting baised marks from your friends, you are still getting the opinions of others and everything should even out to a reasonably accurate average in the end. One way to make sure this isn't abused too much would be to limit the number of times you can rate a character. Perhaps, limiting rating a particular player only once per month? You'd still get those good marks from your friends and such, but it also allows for time in which others can comment as well.

[Amalia]

I have to say, I like this idea, and there's one primary reason for it-- I'm sure a lot of us have run into this-- if someone doesn't like your RP style, and they're huffy enough to be a jerk about it, they don't need a rating system to let you know (usually in an inflamatory manner) that they think you suck.

I would MUCH rather get feedback from people with some semblance of manners if I'm doing something that gets a more widespread bad reaction. I would, of course, like to know how people react to my RP. This system might encourage such feedback, and I'd like that.

That said, from the other side of things, I couldn't see myself using the negative side of the system very often-- most RP I don't like, I merely don't get into because I find it either droll or melodramatic. Everyone's idea of a good in-between state there differs, and I'd feel like an ass telling someone else that their ideal state isn't acceptable. When it comes to concretely troubling things like someone turning into a giant creature in a tiny space, I generally make a note of it to the person through an osay or otell, but the vast majority of the time when something like that happens it's due to some variety of player 'oops' and I wouldn't want to punish someone for something they're not doing intentionally.

It seems like a lot of people think it's a good idea but wouldn't use it too terribly often-- as such, I think the idea of logging it all is a brilliant one, because then any abuse of it would be caught, and if it doesn't get a ton of use the IMMs won't get flooded.

[Nedylene]

Yes I would take the time to rate other's rps.

I would like it to be completely anonymous. (no I cannot spell today)

Now, (this is taking me a long time to type out as I am at work and answering phone calls. So if this has been addressed between the time I started typing this and the time I post this.. I'm sorry)

But, now, unless this is used for Imm/staff use ONLY this is a BAD BAD idea. Even if noone knows where those comments come from it only takes one bad comment or one helpful suggestion to cause discent. Some people can get touchy on that subject and all it takes is the thought of 'someone out there thinks this of me' to make them start to look at EVERYONE they roleplay with suspicion. It also gives those who can sometimes make rash decisions an outlet when they are temporarily pissed at someone.

Many will find any reason to lash out or be pissy to others and I think this will just fuel some egos and personalities.

[Ekina]

I think there could be both a positive and a negative side to rating the roleplay of others.

As a person who is pretty new to the whole roleplaying thing, I can't see myself doing much rating of others. Though I think that I could possibly benefit from input given by other people.

However, other than immortals and some very experienced players, I don't see where anyone has the right to judge roleplay. There are obvious examples of poor roleplay, as well as good ones. But not everyone will have the same opinion. It is much like how not every person in life is going to like you, because they see the world from a different point of view.

I can see a lot of conflict forming around rating each other... Even if the raters were to remain anonymous, the player being rated might get upset. Not everyone will take criticism as well as positive feedback, even if they were to volunteer themselves to be rated.

The reward system we already have in place is a good idea, though I have only seen one player ever use it. But the reward system doesn't really leave any room for discussion, does it? I think I would like to know specifically what the other person liked, or what the other person thinks I should do differently.

To answer the questions more specifically...
I think that the best way to rate each other would to be to have everyone be able to see what is being said, so that discussion might be generated. People might be more inclined to explain themselves than just attack poor roleplay in order to avoid arguements. However, this could generate a lot of negative relationships between players.

If I were to rate someone, I would rate both positive and negative roleplay. Though as I said, I'm sort of new and don't feel that I am in any position to tell someone if they're doing a great job or not.

I think the option to give a comment explaining the rating is really the best idea. What is the point of critcism or praise without good reason? The comment should definitely be mandatory, if indeed a rating system were to be put in place. It would keep a sense of order.

Hmm... After I have finished typing all this I have come to the following conclusion! I think that a rating system won't really help more experienced players. If you've been playing for five years, you will be less inclined to regard anyone's comments seriously. However, I think that newbie players could benefit from this greatly. I think I probably could, especially with my evil character since I'm not very familar with evil roleplay.

[Tavik]

I've been RPing for 6+ years and I would definitely welcome comments even from a relatively new player. That new player may offer some insight that the more experienced may never see.

As for the difference in viewing RP, I don't think Dalvyn's intentions (correct me if I'm wrong) are to herd people into a set style and form of RP. I think he is just trying to provide a method by which people can help guide and hone each other's RPing in the interest of furthering the quality of the game. PLUS, it gives more incentive to RP with others than to solo raze an area. Of course people will see RP differently from others. However, the end result should (theoretically) be the same. The sum of everyone's rating will result in an average (as I've said before) that should pretty much reflect how that player's RP fits into the commonly accepted view of good RP. Basically, I'm saying that: Yes, you may get one angry person giving you a low grade, but if you are a good RPer, most people will recognize that and therefore most of your ratings will be high and so the average will end up being high.

Please do correct me if I'm wrong or have missed something.

[Nedylene]

I think this is a good idea in concept, bad idea in practicality.

I have some experience on 'muds gone wild' in this regard. A certain mud I have played on and off about as long as this mud has a nice forum section entitled ooc comments on ic plots. It was a place meant to post 'wide known info' that should be available ic even if you can't find the person. IE something that was a rumor etc to help people along who wanted to get into the rps. It was also a place to give creative critism, kudos and general shout outs for good/bad rps. Most of the time this functioned as it was suppose to.... The times it didn't it was bad. And I mean BAD. One person would not take a comment well and be genuinely upset by what someone was trying to be suggestive over. Through the grapevine everyone on the mud soon learnt who said what and who it hurt. In turn the mud split down the middle.. half of the people defending the person who made the comment trying to push across that it was not meant as hurtful and it shouldn't be taken that way followed by the other half of the mud standing behind the one that was hurt and calling the other cruel and that it was uncalled for etc. When you open up the opportunity for people to rate on rp it is opening up a can of worms that I, personally, would like to remain closed. I like the environment on this mud. I have been on and off it for six years running now. That means this mud has something. It has a great player base, good staff, a great newbie council/player council. I do not want it seen torn assunder and see cliques developing because of one comment that someone took the wrong way.

edited to add : Also what defines good/bad rp. Say you have a character who's real allegiances are not known. Example... this girl has been well known under waterdeep and has been an image of purity, befriending every dick and jane she can find and getting a name for herself. Then suddenly... she flips and turns all of her friends over to the Zhentarim. All the ones she befriended are suddenly up in arms saying 'bad rp, not in your character' etc etc.... when in actuality they never knew the character. So how can you say that they had bad rp? That was just an example.

But this is just my opinion. I have had bad experience with this sort of thing, obviously.

~Bonnie

[Solaghar]

This is a very good idea and I think it should definitely be implemented. There should be several protections on it however, which would ensure that people aren't rated simply out of spite.

1. Complete anonymity. There should be no messages when someone rates your roleplay. No indication that anything has been done. In fact, I would say that this information shouldn't even be accessible to someone while their character is logged in. It should be something you have to log out to see, as an option on accounts. This would ensure that people can't simply keep typing 'roleplay' or whatever during an RP to see if their RP rating has changed during or directly after a roleplay.

2. No roleplay rating from afar. I think this will help to prevent some of the cliquishness of roleplay ratings. People sitting in Zhentil Keep's square who hear that Bob the Ranger has just turned someone they know over to the City Watch won't be able to say amongst themselves, "God, why is Bob always supporting the City? I've never met him myself, but I know that Rangers are supposed to be chaotic and dislike the cities, he obviously isn't playing a ranger correctly."

3. Allow limited roleplay ratings from character-to-character. This is a bit complex, so allow me to explain. This could easily be done using the mySQL system we have. Each time you're rated by someone during a roleplay, that rating goes into a category consisting of ratings simply given by that person. The game stores only the last say, 5 or 10 ratings per-character. This will remove the incentive people will have to keep rating their friends positively every time they see them. Once you've rated your friend the best you can 5 times, there won't be anymore point to it and the benefit from being part of some clique will be mitigated. Similarly, the damage caused by being disliked by someone else or some other group will be lessened, as they can only rate you negatively so many times before it becomes superfluous. But this system would still allow people to change their opinion over time. If David the Dwarf starts off as a pretty poor character, he'll have a negative rating. Over time however, as he learns what it is to be a dwarf and how to play the part, then people can start rating his RP more positively. if someone becomes a better RPer, then they shouldn't have the albatross of a poor initial start hanging around their neck forever. So over time, while David may have had 5 "horrible" ratings from James the cleric, over a period of months the oldest horribles may be knocked off for "mediocres" and then "fairs" and maybe in the end some "goods" and "excellents". This also keeps in mind that the rating should be a reflection of someone's current opinion of your overall roleplay, not just a score sheet reflecting how they think each individual roleplay which has happened with you since the beginning of time has been.

4. The weight of another person's roleplay rating should indeed be taken into account when factoring in your own roleplay. Again, mySQL makes this very simple. Say you end up with 5 generic categories, from horrible to excellent. Assign a simple multiplication factor to each person's overall rating. So say you've been rated by Jim 5 times, each time as horrible. Just because Jim is horrible doesn't mean he can't recognize horrible roleplaying himself, so he might be correct, but when all things are equal, he hasn't done enough to prove he knows enough about the subtleties of roleplaying as much as someone who is rated excellent. I would say that the multiplication factors should be somewhat muted, so than an excellent roleplayer's opinion might be worth at maximum 150% of normal and a horrible roleplayer's opinion worth at least 50% of normal. Mostly I think this should be the case because as in everything else in life, it really is a lot easier to criticize other people than it is to do a good job yourself. I might be a terrible baseball player myself, but it doesn't mean I can't recognize that someone else is also a terrible baseball player. But on the other hand, my opinion shouldn't count as much as someone who is generally agreed to be a good baseball player, even if he ends up agreeing with me.

In the end, my opinion is that this would be a very helpful tool, but because of the nature of the world should be kept completely anonymous and in fact, not even available to your character while they're logged in. You shouldn't be able to be rated by people you obviously haven't roleplayed with because you've never met them. And of course, there should be several disclaimers before rating is done. One should be criticizing as though one were watching a movie and the characters were actors in the movie. Do their actions feel forced? Is the character they portray consistent, even if they're consistently unreliable or chaotic? . This isn't a system that would be designed to determine Carlos the cleric of Mystra's opinion of Darmon the cleric of Cyric. If they're actively roleplaying with one-another, then it should be obvious what they think of each other IC'ly. It's a matter of one player criticizing another player's ability to portray a character. In the end, the person who plays the character will always know best how they think it should be played. After all, I can't look at another person and simply know their alignment, their character's personal history, their plans at the moment. But if they present something that is inconsistent, doesn't seem to be interested in anything long-term, if they constantly break character at inappropriate times, or other things that we generally recognize as bad roleplaying, then it should be fairly obvious. Again, try to think of other people as actors portraying characters and you see how you can properly judge another person's roleplaying.

But also in the end, I think this should merely be a tool to help people who are interested to improve their own roleplaying. No one should force you to look at your rating. You shouldn't be reminded of it every time you type 'score'. It definitely shouldn't affect things like training rate or skill acquisition or other such things, but it could definitely be used to gauge whether a person should be accepted into an immortal-run roleplay. If you're consistently rated good to excellent, then you know you're doing a good job. If you're consistently rated horrible to mediocre, then you know that numerous people on the game think that you could be doing a better job. Take that information and use it if you like, but I don't think it should go any further than that in terms of affecting game mechanics for now. Otherwise you'll see people avoiding roleplay with those they know might negatively rate them, choosing only to roleplay with people they know will give them a positive rating that isn't necessarily based on their roleplay but OOC factors, and other such things. No system is twink-proof as much as we'd like it to be.

[Shabanna]

I think this idea is open to all sorts of abuse. The fact that there are "cliques" is very real. If you belong you will be treated well , if you do not and you are disliked... for any reason OOCly it will adversely effect your ratings regardless of your ability to RP.

Sorry... I think it will open up a HUGE can of worms

In all honesty.. I pray this system is not seriously being considered. I think there are enough problems already...with OOC cliques.

Just my opinion.
Banna

[Jaenoic]

I really don't see a need for a system like this. If you think someone's RP is good and want to give them a comment on it, you can(And I do) with the reward command and an otell/osay. If you think someone is doing something wrong you cannot punish them(only imms can I believe) but you can still give them constructive criticism through OOC channels. Introducing a system like this wouldn't offer any benefits, in my opinion. If a player really feels strongly one way or another about another's RP, they will let them know through existing channels. This kind of system just encourages a lot of grief, in my opinion.

The goal here is to offer a better indication as to the roleplay quality of players than kismet. In the end, this rating could be used to unlock access to various advantages (increased experience/skill gain, access to races that are harder to roleplay, ...) as well as an indication to help imms decide whether your application should be accepted or not for example. The hope is that we would be taking a step further towards objectivity (and away from subjectivity/favouritism) by enabling all players to give their opinion.

I think this is a bad bad idea. I know Dalvyn wants to prevent clique abuse but I still see it happening. Abusers always find a way around the system to get what they want, it seems. And, it is a sad but true reality that there are players that simply don't like other players. They would jump on a chance to denounce their disliked fellow player's RP, and sometimes they deserve it, but sometimes they don't.

A system like this is impossible to be objective. It will always be subjective because what people consider 'good' is relative to each person. I might find someone RPing a Helmite as a bit of a happy-go-lucky person as a daring RP, but another might find it wrong as it deviates away from the norm of a strict, sterile faithful.

So in my opinion, it's like others have said. This is like communism, a good idea in theory, but not in practice. It relies too much on the goodwill of your fellow players and doesn't take into account that in the real world... We have evils too.

[Aliatris]

Sincerally I think that if you want to improve your RP, it's better to ask to a player you know well and discuss aspects of RP outside the mud with those you only want. As I see in theory the idea is good but some people could react bad or get frustrated at unwanted negative comments.

My perception is that the mud is healthy in OOC terms, at least since I started playing (November 2006) I haven't witnessed any OOC discussion or problem between players, everything that could change that should be carefully thought about.

I agree that those who RP well and *specially* those who involve others with their RP should get some benefit, and those who disrupt RP suffer some kind of penalization, but making possible judging other negatively or knowing that you RP is considered bad or horrible could be also dangerous.

Maybe having a historical where is recorded when other characters reward you and reason of it and in the same historical recording also "warnings" and the reason of it, only checkable for inms and impossible to be seen by the player and the rest of players combined with a hidden kismet system where you know the races/classes/alignments that you can play but you don't have a numeric value of your kismet (and other benefits, if any) and removing the echo each time you are rewarded or is rewarded someone could be a solution. All of this checking possible abuses.

[Amalia]

One more related note just occurred to me: whatever system we do instill to provide feedback to our fellow players, if we do continue to have one, I'd like to beg the ability to do it to different people as much as one wants. I've always been bummed at the end of a good group roleplay when I can only reward one other member of the group, much as I'd like to reward all of them-- and playing in a variety of different groups, it becomes nearly impossible to keep track of who you rewarded "last time" to try and make things equitable that way. I fully understand the notion of not wanting player A to keep rewarding player B over and over, and even that limiting "reward" keeps it special, but perhaps there could be a way to "store up" reward abilities (or whatever it turns into) so that one can at least give kudos to all the members of a reasonably-sized group after an involved RP.

[Meekir]

I would appreciate feedback, ESPECIALLY negative. I would much rather try to resolve an issue than have someone leave an RP in a huff, as Amalia said. An OOC "tell" conversation is the best we have, but a more formal system sounds better.

I would also like a way to more often reward people for contributing good RP to the game! A no-detriment RP reward, even if it's a nice note on their record, would be appreciated.

Here's how I envision the "RP rating" (agreeing with many people here):

* positive only, and/or private comments only, logged. Require comments for any "negative" feedback, and log it.

* IMMs can easily see ratings for good players or note any negative comments (and how the player responded).

* So, either just send a public positive rating / "Reward", or send a private note, positive or negative.

* Log them all for review when the player applies for special permissions.

* I hope IMMs could use this system to reward good RPers somehow, but that requires more thought to be fair and balanced.

* Log who sent what comments and how the player responded. (this way we don't punish groups of friends for rating their friends - we just note it. I think positive and negative records will speak for themselves.)

Overall I think RP notes and rewards are a good idea. I'd shy away from calling it an RP "rating". Encourage feedback, and a positive atmosphere.


Llewis

[Gwain]

If you were given the opportunity to rate the roleplay of other characters (at no cost to your character or you, except the time it would take to make the rating), would you do it?

I would.

Would you prefer the rating to be anonymous, private (only seen by you and the character you rate), or public (visible to all the people in the room)?

I would prefer it be kept secret from the player of the character and all other pc's unless I chose to reveal it to the pc. Not everyone can take criticsm or praise well. Some players suffer because of ooc language barriers or other situations. Some do not play for rewards or praise and are spartan or cold when it is related to them.

If you had the opportunity to rate someone else's roleplay positively, or negatively, would you use both options? Or would you only rate positively when it is deserved, and simply not rate rather than rate negatively?

I've always felt it is not for pc's to rate other players rp's oocly. That ic actions as a result to rp is good enough. If pc A kills someone and wonders why pc B is cold to them as never before this could be seen as an ooc response to pc A's behaviour. But that is from a rp in character perspective. I do not think I would feel comfortable deciding the punishment for poor rp as a player. However I like the chance to reward good rp I have witnessed.

If you were given the opportunity to rate someone else's roleplay, would you prefer to be given the option to give a comment explaining the positive (or negative) rating? Do you think that such a comment should be mandatory?

I think that explanations should be mandatory to explain the reasons behind a negative review. I reiterate that such reviews should still be private but explanations would allow administration to understand the reasons for the choice if possible. Also it may allow for some thinking before the reward or negative response is given, to justify such a response.

[Selveem]

Well, see all the comments about leaving them private kind of disturbs me. At least from the player it is about.

Okay, sure, some people get all fussy and pissy, but when it comes down to it, shouldn't they have a right to know why they were accused of poorly RPing?

And, on that same note, I think other players feedback should be just as important as Imm feedback. I have been involved in plenty of situations where IC I should be doing something (and would) and then was scolded for doing it OOCly by an Imm.

When I get something bad (feedback-wise), I feel there should be feedback involved and not just one-sided. When it becomes one-sided, that is most often when I get pissed about something in-game. Oftentimes, unfortunately, it is an Imm that I am most annoyed with simply because there is no two-way. If it is a player, I can discuss things with them OOC so I can see their side of things too. Thus, the likelyhood of my holding a 'grudge' is far less a possibility (unless they're just being a complete.. nevermind).

Shouldn't we be entitled to field concerns regarding our character's RPs?

[Mele]

No, I wouldn't rate anyone's roleplay. It is a game, not a contest.
Even though, an option for to comment on someone's roleplay would be cool. You can write in anonymous or, with your PC name that you liked bla bla roleplay and bla bla roleplay is not suitable for that race/faith/event etc.

I am agreeing with Ninde here. If someone is REALLY poorly rping, there's no reason you can't send them an otell ant talk maturely. I think making a rating system would only ruin that. It, in my opinion, would be easier to take something offensively when it's a simple use of a code 'rate down' rather than a friendly otell. Also, giving people the option to easily tell someone their rp is 'poor' will kind of make it more likely people will do so for even small things.

Sorry, thinking while typing still.

[Tretch]

No, I wouldn't rate anyone's roleplay. It is a game, not a contest.
Even though, an option for to comment on someone's roleplay would be cool. You can write in anonymous or, with your PC name that you liked bla bla roleplay and bla bla roleplay is not suitable for that race/faith/event etc.

I am agreeing with Ninde here. If someone is REALLY poorly rping, there's no reason you can't send them an otell ant talk maturely. I think making a rating system would only ruin that. It, in my opinion, would be easier to take something offensively when it's a simple use of a code 'rate down' rather than a friendly otell. Also, giving people the option to easily tell someone their rp is 'poor' will kind of make it more likely people will do so for even small things.

Sorry, thinking while typing still.

I agree with both sets of comments here completely.

Also, I am VERY opposed to this system "unlocking areas/rewards" as I think that really brings in the abuse card and clique issues.

If it does come into the game, please dont have it actually give rewards If it is used for pointers etc, thats great, but when it turns to otherwise... it could quickly turn into a joke.

[Taerom]

I do support roleplay ratings. I would strongly prefer anonymous and private ratings, for the same reasons as the others. I am, however, opposed to roleplay ratings opening areas and granting rewards. I think this is too open for abuse, not to mention the fact that I think it could potentially punish the inexperienced.

[Lathlain]

My input here is mostly an echo of previous comments.

Essentially I'm not in favour of a roleplay rating as such, be it for rewards or otherwise. I don't particularly want to know how my roleplaying is seen, despite the fact that I've no reason to suspect that people view it negatively, and I certainly don't want to know who has been rated better or worse. Roleplay's not that metric.

Feedback and comments are another matter entirely however. Provided they have no impact on the game's dynamics, and are invisible to all bar the player in question (and the immortals for review purposes), they can only be a positive thing! New players will benefit from this sort of a system, and I know I would have appreciated something like this when I first started!