Ivorak

Methinks if a cat is so valuable, kitties would be desired as well. This is a male cat though, and I assume that ownership of kittens would go to the owner of the mother cat under common law?

I'm not so fond of the idea of giving out wishpoints for Christmas, I feel like wishpoints should remain in the domain of special reward for quests and special effortful actions. (Though I will note there is the precedent of wishpoints for cumulative and consecutive active days.) If wishpoints are given out, I don't think it should be random. Make it for all players who show up for Christmas (and perhaps meet other requirements, be it active days, MP level, or some other measure of past and present activity), but please don't make wishpoints a lottery. Other than that I like all of the suggestions above.

I think it would make sense to remove the locate spell from the wish shop going forward, at least until the two evolve to be more different as Mur hinted at. Us vets probably don't need a refund, but if I was a newbie spending my first wishpoint and hadn't learned about /seen yet, I think I would be a bit annoyed.

Sounds fun! I'll be around next weekend!

Some assorted observations/thoughts: Once upon a time it was considered the case that MP6 Protectors had "life and death power" over their worshippers. I think we should make concrete these life and death powers, and also make it clear that worshipping a Protector has tradeoffs. Some players are using their Protector abilities for general aid to newbies. I think this (#2) should likely be a separate function, and Protectors should more "factional", e.g., a group of players aligned on a mission should raise up their own Protector and that Protector should serve their faction before all others. If #3, then I think it likely makes sense to restrict Protector spells to these Protectors (no spell stones). If #4, then I think it also makes sense to give Protectors more powerful spells. If #5, then we should also have ways for opposing factions to hurt/disable Protectors.

Not a meme, but for the lighthouse enthusiasts among us: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/lighthouses-give-away-free-180982261/

I'll take the 3 gold coins

Additional feedback and ideas (cross-post from https://miscellaneum.wordpress.com/2023/03/19/popular-≠-interesting/😞 Some were upset with the notion of ranking (or being ranked by) other players. Others simply found the interstitial screen on log in disruptive and annoying. Personally, I’m not upset with the notion of a reputational system nor the interstitial screen on log in (especially now that the frequency seems to have been reduced), but I’m confused by the feature launch announcement. Are we voting on how much we like/dislike someone or how interesting they are? I struggle to see how one can be used as a proxy for the other, and I also am concerned that if I dislike someone too frequently, that it’s an implied vote for their interestingness and that they may receive some of these “god-like power tools” alluded to in the announcement. Often my dislike for a player stems from their lack of responsibility or common sense behavior, rather than a in-character grudge. In the spirit of constructive criticism, here’s a few other ways to get a sense of a player’s interestingness: Nominations – An ongoing quest where any player can nominate another player, with a short writeup of why they think they’re interesting. Keep the accepted nominations secret and let them accumulate over time until there’s enough cause for a reward to the nominated player. Perhaps a gold coin to the person nominating, for every accepted nomination, or keep whether a nomination has been accepted/rejected secret as well, and have a more substantial “finder’s fee” for each nominator once the nominee is selected for a reward. Called shots – It could be interesting to track what a player sets out to accomplish (ambition) and what they achieve (follow through). A good way to do this is to have a place for a player to record “called shots”, goals that are recorded in advance of tackling them. Two possible ways to implement this are: Called shots are obscured/encrypted in a new log and (at a later date) marked as completed by the player. This way we could measure the duration from idea to implementation (longer time indicates long term planning / forethought). Alternatively the player selects an unveil time when entering the goal, e.g., “I will achieve this within X days/months”, and “I was successful/unsuccessful” upon reveal (with less time indicating ability to follow through on plans quickly, assuming goal was sufficiently ambitious). Personal Change Log – Similar to called shots, but simpler. Players don’t have to pre-commit to a path of action, but are simply encouraged to write up their accomplishments every quarter or year or so. Returning, for a moment, to reputation systems, I think that could be done better than forced voting on an interval as well. Here are some ideas there: Karmic spell system – Each active player gets 3 blessings and 3 hexes a week that they can cast on other players. Maybe they also need to specify a category and write a short reason as to why they’re casting each blessing/hex. These blessings/hexes need not do anything at the time they are cast, besides entering the reason for the use of this cantrip in a log for later perusal in the Log Review Room. Main differences between this and current system, is that each karmic cantrip is a reaction to a particular action and that caster shares a note on why they’re blessing/cursing the other player.

I'll take the mirrorritual stone

Oops.. I was taking screenshots of the decorations per the initial instructions, but this makes me think I should have been taking screenshots of the entire scene and annotating them?

---92--- 95

I'll take one of each of: Item 1: Anni creature 2022. Price: 25 plushies (limit: 1 p.p.) Item 5: 1 Wiiya. Price 5 plushies Item 11: Lock in chaos stone. Price 25 plushies

Thanks for clarifying, @Chewett Looking over the formula you provided, it makes sense that I'm not gaining any temp winertia because restored_wi would be 0 in the case I'm presenting since current_wi and wi_max are equal when I first log in. But if this is how we want the formula to be, then we should perhaps rename the bonus so that it indicates that it's only restoring up to max value, and also display the value that is actually being restored (or hide it if it's zero). When it instead indicates a bonus value greater than the the max winertia but the actual change is 0, that seems misleading. P.S. But maybe it should allow at least some increase over max winertia instead. Action points, for instance, do behave this way and that is in line with the idea of a temporary bonus I think.

I'd like one of these creatures (I've already received one but it says as the killer I can receive a second).

Item 4 – 13th Anni creature - 155 plushies