please don’t integrate karma! (addendum: at least not how exists in LD)
|
Posted 2021-10-01 18:24:20
It added so much unnecessary stress. I don't see why we need karma in animal games at all? To me it further throws human ideals onto animals. I'm here to roleplay as a wild wolf, I shouldn't have to think about morals or consequences of my actions that do not directly correlate with my packs survival.. As everyone else is saying, adding a karma system further pushes WD into a LD copy. I don't care how it's implemented, I do not believe karma systems of any kind should be in animal roleplay games. What's bad for a human to do could be basic survival instinct for a wolf. If I decide my wolf will be a "typical" wolf, I feel like that would force my play style into a "evil wolf" one because of my choices. For instance, will eating the raccoon babies in explore be considered a bad karma choice? Even when a wolf wouldn't have morals, even if they're starving? The only possible way I can see karma making even a little bit of sense, is if it *only* has to do with other wolves. But even then its muddy. If I'm protecting my territory form a strange wolf, will that always be considered an evil choice? An example: an explore encounter where a strange wolf is on your territory, and looks like it's starved and sickly. Do you: offer food and/or herbs, fight/hurt him, or ignore? Obviously a person would want to help the poor wolf. But in reality to another healthier wolf, he could infect you or your pack, attract other scavengers such as other rival wolves or bears, he could lash out at any moment, maybe he'll hide around your pack and pick your food clean when you're not around. I don't know, I just think a karma system is unnecessary when roleplaying as a wild animal. And of course, we all have a different idea of what is good or bad. So what the game considers to be an evil choice, I'll likely see it as much closer to neutral than anything. Mostly what I'm trying to get at, a lot of choices considered "bad" thus causing negative karma (assuming that's how it will work) will likely not be morally wrong in the eye of a wolf which is how we are all playing this game, through the eyes of our wolves. Please do not add the karma system. I think the "good" or "evil" aspects of game should be entirely up to the player (head canon, pack lore writings etc), and not in the game at all. |
 Redpineapple1 (hiatus) #1250 |
|
Posted 2021-10-01 18:28:55
|
 𓃢 Fox Aisha 𓃢 #45035 |
|
Posted 2021-10-01 18:52:55 (edited)
If karma does get implemented into the game, i'd like for there to be an option to toggle on/off the karma system! If that's not possible, though, balancing out the rewards you get from the karma encounters would be nice. I also thought about SC encounters and how they'd interfere with karma- if you were over the 5000sc explore cap, and let's say a "good" karma encounter gave just SC compared to an "evil" encounter that gave food or amusement, you wouldn't be able to get that SC. (I honestly hate the SC explore cap, but that's for another topic). |
 ·˖˚ Rainii ˚˖· #20486 |
|
Posted 2021-10-02 03:04:56
I dislike the notion of having to make your wolf 100% evil or good in order to get rewards. And like others have said, how do you even define good and evil from a wolfs perspective? Is a wolf evil for killing prey? I'm not completely oppossed to some sort of karma system, it could work within the game. However, I think it would be important to make it so that not only the "extremist" wolves (100% good or 100% bad) get rewarded. Wolves all over the karma spectrum should get rewarded, and players must not feel pushed to make their wolves "extremists". I don't want exploring to become a game of "guess which interaction is the correct one". There should be no correct or wrong actions when exploring. To me the charm of exploring is to be able to try all the different options of each encounter to see what the results are, and to be allowed to pick the interaction I feel in the mood for that very moment. Tieing the karma system to wolf personalities somehow could be a fun way to do things. Maybe the results of some encounter interactions could be different depending on the wolfs personality. Like, if an aggressive wolf picks an agressive option for an encounter, the result would be different compared to a friendly wolf picking an agressive option. Maybe karma could be based on how "true" you are to your personality? Like I said, I think a karma system could be quite fun to add to the game, however, it must be implemented very carefully, and must not make it so that there is only one or two correct ways to play the game. Note: english is not my native tongue, sorry about all the grammatical errors! |
Eelai #1355 |
|
Posted 2021-10-02 07:18:42
If there is to be a karma system on Wolvden, I would support it only if it is very different from the system used on Lioden. A system which provides more different states of 'good' and 'evil' and benefits all of them is far more desirable than a good/evil binary, as is mostly the case on Lioden. However, even then, all wolves tend to be opportunistic hunters and will get what they need to survive. Merely hunting a small rabbit rather than approaching it should not be a bad karma move - it is a pragmatic and natural act. Otherwise every battle we undertake in Explore should be considered a bad karma move - fighting and hurting something for the sake of it. When karma is used in this fashion, it becomes inconsistent. My wolf is not morally evil for essentially acting like any other wolf. Karma should instead be reserved for how your wolf interacts with pack members or specifically created wolf characters. This would kill two birds with one stone: Create a karma system which does not penalise players for actions which are natural wolf behaviour, and also fleshing out pack mechanics and interactions (something which has been more of a focus on Wolvden, and would let it set itself apart from its sister game). |
 Blue Pigeon #15038 |
|
Posted 2021-10-02 07:56:26
|
 TacticianLyra #2886 |
|
Posted 2021-10-04 12:55:51
I'd like to see karma system on Wolvden, but more balanced. Lioden system is... Very unbalanced, with many encounters giving items that are not exactly equal. For example - the good or bad lion you can find in explore both give amusement item, but for evil lions their specific encounter gives an amusement item that doubles as nesting material. What I would like to see on Wolvden with karma encounters is a different flavour text, maybe different npc, but same reward, aside from negative or positive karma. With example of the amusement items - in one you could get one as a gift from the npc for good karma interaction, while for bad karma you could be stealing that item. An interaction might be that you meet a raccoon with their wares somewhere in explore and you can either help them with moving/organizing the wares for the good karma, or decide to nab something from the pile, while they are not looking, for bad karma. |
 Khajiit #2754 |
|
Posted 2021-10-06 13:04:14
I would like a karma system, I find it interesting. but, I do dislike how it was implemented on Lioden. I played LD for a period of time & I found the karma system taxing. more often than not, the 'bad' choices were the better ones to make. you'd get food, toys, sometimes even rare items. the 'good' choice was usually always lesser in value, compared to what you could get. it kinda sucked in a way. I preferred the good choices, i felt 'mean' with the bad choices, & I preferred the outcome of becoming the max highest karma. but, esp when I was new to Lioden & struggling .. the bad choice was just the better option while, right now for me, Wolvden isn't a struggle, so I could afford to 'miss out' on better items, it *does* feel like you're put at a disadvantage for being the better person. I guess you could argue that's like real life in some cases. but still that's a pretty depressing thought to consider I'd love a karma system where the benefits are .. equal? like the stoat interaction. you can kill the stoat, or intimidate. either way, you get a 1 use carcass. if other karma actions could be similar to this, where its equal, not one side being better, I'd be all for it imo, at least when I last played, LD had some .. balance issues in terms of the karma system, & I'd love for that to be avoided here I find it interesting for my actions to shape how the world 'looks' for me, and how a good or bad karma can give very specific interactions depending on that (but once again .. keep it fair & equal) |
 ctrlkatt #14499 |
|
Posted 2021-10-09 12:41:53 (edited)
 Also, I think karma is hard to maintain (especially on Lioden) if your interactions are varied. There's no doubt in my mind killing the stoat will give you negative karma, but my wolf is only hunting for food. I don't see how that's bad, and frankly I don't want to deal with the whole karma guilt tripping system like on Lioden. "Oh boo hoo! You killed that rabbit, shame on you! Your karma has been lowered :((!!" Don't even get me started on the bad vs good karma rewards on Lioden. It's almost like that game forced you to pick one side, particularly bad karma since it gave much more carcasses and pelts. It added so much unnecessary stress. I don't see why we need karma in animal games at all? To me it further throws human ideals onto animals. I'm here to roleplay as a wild wolf, I shouldn't have to think about morals or consequences of my actions that do not directly correlate with my packs survival.. As everyone else is saying, adding a karma system further pushes WD into a LD copy. I don't care how it's implemented, I do not believe karma systems of any kind should be in animal roleplay games. What's bad for a human to do could be basic survival instinct for a wolf. If I decide my wolf will be a "typical" wolf, I feel like that would force my play style into a "evil wolf" one because of my choices. For instance, will eating the raccoon babies in explore be considered a bad karma choice? Even when a wolf wouldn't have morals, even if they're starving? My thoughts, exactly. I just want to play as a damn wolf and not get corralled into a finicky moral alignment system. It makes me sad how they're going to add it in anyway— but maybe I would support it if it's very very different from Lioden. |
 🌺 Compass Rose 🧭 #35845 |
|
Posted 2021-10-09 16:11:58
Why I am against Good vs BadI've been supporting this thread for a while now, but my opinion has slightly changed. I agree with the majority's resistance to integrating Karma in the same manner as Lioden. I absolutely hate the idea of forcing human morals onto wild animals, and I definitely do not like how hindering the good Karma route feels from a gameplay perspective. The goal of this game is clear: continue your bloodline and spread your genes. The goal aligns with nature; there is no good or bad. It is, simply, the survival of the fittest. Karma disrupts the goal of survival in exchange for morality. The personification of the NPCs does throw a loop into the "pure nature" of the game. Maybe their human qualities should give them human morals? But then again, maybe their "kindness" to the wolves is only for survival. The idea being: become useful to the wolves, or become a meal. From a gameplay perspective, acts of kindness are only committed because we gain an immediate benefit. The player will choose differently if an act of kindness becomes harmful or a better reward is presented. Alternative to GvBIt is clear that the devs plan on integrating Karma and probably won't be swayed at this point. So instead of a GvB system, maybe we could compromise with active or reactive. The idea is based on the concept of active and reactive protagonists. Active: someone who goes out of their way to "actively" change or shape their world (think of Legoshi from Beastars) Reactive: someone that passively reacts to the change around them (think of John Wick) Neither route is morally right or wrong. I think that this kind of system feels more aligned with the primal/ naturalistic sensation that many of us feel in this game. The only issue with my idea is figuring out what encounter options would classify as active or reactive. Example: eat kits or rummage stores? Would the active wolf eat the kits to cut down the competition, or spare them so they can fatten up later? Would the reactive wolf eat the kits because they are an immediate source of nutrition, or go for the fruits because it would be less of a hassle? I guess the dev team would have to figure that one out, but I would be satisfied with either outcome. Regardless, the player wouldn't be seen as a monster for taking either route. The titles should reflect how morally gray the routes are. Collecting points would be a byproduct of the pack's survival, not a goal/rule that drives playstyle (unless you want a specific title). You could argue the same for a classic Karma system, but many of us have expressed that we don't want to be guilt-tripped over "evil" activities needed for survival. Title ideas Active: Bold, Keen, Perky, Determined, Diligent, Resolute, Zealous...: Reactive: Passive, Precise, Irritable, Yielding, Idle, Apathetic, Enduring... TLDR: Support |
 Memer Bear #8777 |