Player Interactions

What follows is a brief explanation of how players predominantly of one type view those other players whom they perceive to be predominantly of one type. Warning: These notes concern stereotypical players and are not to be assumed to be true of any individual player who might otherwise exhibit the common traits of one or more of the player classes.

The effects of increasing and decreasing the various populations is also discussed, but this does not take into account physical limitations on the amount of players involved. Thus, for example, if the number of socializers is stated to have "no effect" on the number of achievers, that disregards the fact that there may be an absolute maximum number of players that the MUD can comfortably hold, and the socializers may be taking up slots that achievers could otherwise have filled. Also, the knock-on effects of other interactions are not discussed at this stage; a game with fewer socializers means the killers will seek out more achievers, for example, so there is a secondary effect of having fewer achievers even though there is no primary effect. This propagation of influences is, however, examined in detail afterwards, when the first-level dynamics have been laid bare.

Achievers Versus Achievers

Achievers regard other achievers as competition to be beaten (although this is typically friendly in nature, rather than cut-throat). Respect is given to those other achievers who obviously are extraordinarily good, but typically achievers will cite bad luck or lack of time as reasons for not being as far advanced in the game as their contemporaries.

That said, achievers do often cooperate with one another, usually to perform some difficult collective goal, and from these shared experiences can grow deep, enduring friendships that may surpass in intensity those commonly found among individuals in other groups. This is perhaps analogous to the difference between the bond that soldiers under fire share and the bond that friends in a bar share.

Achievers do not need the presence of any other type of player in order to be encouraged to join a MUD; they would be quite happy if the game were empty but for them, assuming it remained a challenge (although some do feel a need to describe their exploits to anyone who will listen). Because of this, a MUD can't have too many achievers, physical limitations excepted.

Achievers Versus Explorers

Achievers tend to regard explorers as losers ”people who have had to resort to tinkering with the game mechanics because they can't cut it as a player. Exceptionally good explorers may be elevated to the level of eccentric, in much the same way that certain individuals come to be regarded as gurus by users of large computer installations; what they do is pointless, but they're useful to have around when you need to know something obscure, fast. They can be irritating , and they rarely tell the whole truth (perhaps because they don't know it?), but they do have a place in the world.

The overall number of explorers has only a marginal effect on the population of achievers. In essence, more explorers will mean that fewer of the really powerful objects will be around for the achievers to use, the explorers having used their arcane skills to obtain them first so as to use them in their diabolical experiments. This can cause achievers to become frustrated and leave. More importantly, perhaps, the number of explorers affects the rate of advancement of achievers because it determines whether or not they have to work out all those tiresome puzzles themselves . Thus, more explorers will lead to a quicker rise through the ranks for achievers, which will tend to encourage them (if not overdone).

Achievers Versus Socializers

Achievers merely tolerate socializers. Although they are good sources of general hearsay on the comings and goings of competitors , they're nevertheless pretty much a waste of space as far as achievers are concerned . Typically, achievers will regard socializers with a mixture of contempt, disdain, irritation, and pity, and will speak to them in either a sharp or patronizing manner. Occasionally, flame wars between different cliques of socializers and achievers may break out, and these can be among the worst to stop. The achievers don't want to lose the argument, and the socializers don't want to stop talking!

Changing the number of socializers in a MUD has no effect on the number of achievers.

Achievers Versus Killers

Achievers don't particularly like killers. They realize that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). However, they don't personally like being attacked unless it's obvious from the outset that they'll win. They also object to being interrupted in the middle of some grand scheme to accumulate points, and they don't like having to arm themselves against surprise attacks every time they start to play. Achievers will, occasionally, resort to killing tactics themselves, in order to cause trouble for a rival or to reap whatever rewards the game itself offers for success; however, the risks are usually too high for them to pursue such options very often.

Increasing the number of killers will reduce the number of achievers; reducing the killer population will increase the achiever population. Note, however, that those general MUDs that nevertheless allow player-killing tend to do so in the belief that in small measure it is good for the game; it promotes camaraderie, excitement, and intensity of experience (and it's the only method that players will accept to ensure that complete idiots don't plod inexorably through the ranks to acquire a degree of power which they aren't really qualified to wield ). As a consequence, reducing the number of killers too much will be perceived as cheapening the game, making high achievement commonplace, and it will put off those achievers who are alarmed at the way any fool can "do well" just by playing poorly for long enough.

Explorers Versus Achievers

Explorers look on achievers as nascent explorers, who haven't yet figured out that there's more to life than pursuing meaningless goals. They are, therefore, willing to furnish them with information, although, like all experts, they will rarely tell the full story when they can legitimately give cryptic clues instead. Apart from the fact that they sometimes get in the way and won't usually hand over objects that are needed for experiments, achievers can live alongside explorers without much friction.

Explorers' numbers aren't affected by the presence of achievers.

Explorers Versus Explorers

Explorers hold good explorers in great respect but are merciless to bad ones. One of the worst things a fellow explorer can do is to give out incorrect information, believing it to be true. Other than that, explorers thrive on telling one another their latest discoveries and generally get along very well. Outwardly, they will usually claim to have the skill necessary to follow the achievement path to glory but have other reasons for not doing so (e.g., time, tedium, or having proven themselves already with a different persona). There are often suspicions, though, that explorers are too theoretical in most cases and wouldn't be able to put their ideas into practice on a day-to-day basis if they were to recast themselves in the achiever or killer mold.

Explorers enjoy the company of other explorers, and they will play more often if they have people around them to whom they can relate. Unfortunately, not many people have the type of personality that finds single-minded exploring a riveting subject, so numbers are notoriously difficult to increase. If you have explorers in a game, hold on to them!

Explorers Versus Socializers

Explorers consider socializers to be people whom they can impress, but who are otherwise pretty well unimportant. Unless they can appreciate the explorer's talents, they're not really worth spending time with. There are some explorers who treat conversation as their specialist explorer subject, but these are very rare indeed; most will be polite and attentive, but they'll find some diversion if the conversation isn't MUD- related or if their fellow interlocutor is clearly way below them in the game-understanding stakes.

The explorer population is not directly affected by the size of the socializer population.

Explorers Versus Killers

Explorers often have a grudging respect for killers, but they do find their behavior wearisome. It's just so annoying to be close to finishing setting up something when a killer comes along and attacks you. On the other hand, many killers do know their trade well and are quite prepared to discuss the finer details of it with explorers. Sometimes, an explorer may try attacking other players as an exercise, and they can be extremely effective at it. Explorers who are particularly riled by a killer may even decide to "do something about it" themselves. If they make such a decision, then it can be seriously bad news for the killer concerned; being jumped and trashed by a low-level (in terms of game rank) explorer can have a devastating effect on a killer's reputation and turn them into a laughingstock overnight. Explorers do not, however, tend to have the venom or malice that true killers possess, nor will they continue the practice to the extent that they acquire a reputation of their own for killing.

The effect of killers on the explorer population is fairly muted because most explorers don't particularly care if they get killed (or at least they profess not). However, if it happens too often, then they will become disgruntled and play less frequently.

Socializers Versus Achievers

Socializers like achievers because they provide the running soap opera about which the socializers can converse . Without such a framework, there is no uniting cause to bring socializers together (at least not initially). Note that socializers don't particularly enjoy talking to achievers (not unless they can get them to open up, which is very difficult); they do, however, enjoy talking about them. A cynic might suggest that the relationship between socializers and achievers is similar to that between women and men.

Increasing the achiever/socializer ratio has only a subtle effect; socializers may come to feel that the MUD is "all about" scoring points and killing mobiles, and some of them may therefore leave before matters "get worse ." Decreasing it has little effect unless the number of active achievers drops to near zero, in which case new socializers might find it difficult to break into established conversational groups, and thus decide to take their play elsewhere.

NOTE

Although earlier it was stated that this paper does not address people who play MUDs for meta-reasons, e.g., to learn how to program, I believe that their empirical behavior with regard to the actions of other players is sufficiently similar to that of socializers for the two groups to be safely bundled together when considering population dynamics.

Socializers Versus Explorers

Socializers generally consider explorers to be sad characters who are desperately in need of a life. Both groups like to talk, but rarely about the same things, and if they do get together, it's usually because the explorer wants to sound erudite and the socializer has nothing better to do at the time.

The number of explorers in a MUD has no effect on the number of socializers.

Socializers Versus Socializers

A case of positive feedback: Socializers can talk to one another on any subject for hours on end and come back later for more. The key factor is whether there is an open topic of conversation. In a game-like environment, the MUD itself provides the context for discussion, whether it be the goings-on of other players or the feeble attempts of a socializer to try playing it; in a non-game environment, some other subject is usually required to structure conversations, either within the software of the MUD itself (e.g., building) or without it (e.g., "This is a support MUD for the victims of cancer"). Note that this kind of subject-setting is only required as a form of ice-breaker; once socializers have acquired friends, they'll invariably find other things that they can talk about.

The more socializers there are in a game, the more new ones will be attracted to it.

Socializers Versus Killers

This is perhaps the most fractious relationship between player group types. The hatred that some socializers bear for killers admits no bounds. Partly, this is the killers' own fault: They go out of their way to rid MUDs of namby-pamby socializers who wouldn't know a weapon if one came up and hit them (an activity that killers are only too happy to demonstrate ), and they will generally hassle socializers at every opportunity simply because it's so easy to get them annoyed. However, the main reason that socializers tend to despise killers is that they have completely antisocial motives, whereas socializers have (or like to think they have) a much more friendly and helpful attitude to life. The fact that many socializers take attacks on their personae personally only compounds their distaste for killers.

It could be argued that killers do have a positive role to play from the point of view of socializers. There are generally two defenses made for their existence: 1) without killers, socializers would have little to talk about; 2) without evil as a contrast, there is no good. The former is patently untrue, as socializers will happily talk about anything and everything; it may be that it helps provide a catalyst for long conversations, but only if it isn't an everyday occurrence. The second argument is more difficult to defend against (being roughly equivalent to the reason why God allows the devil to exist); however, it presupposes that those who attack other players are the only example of nasty people in a MUD. In fact, there is plenty of opportunity for players of all persuasions to behave obnoxiously to one another; killers merely do it more openly, and (if allowed) in the context of the game world.

Increasing the number of killers will decrease the number of socializers by a much greater degree. Decreasing the number of killers will likewise greatly encourage (or, rather, fail to discourage) socializers to play the MUD.

Killers Versus Achievers

Killers regard achievers as their natural prey. Achievers are good fighters (because they've learned the necessary skills against mobiles), but they're not quite as good as killers, who are more specialized. This gives the "thrill of the chase" that many killers enjoy; an achiever may actually be able to escape, but will usually succumb at some stage, assuming they don't see sense and quit first. Achievers also dislike being attacked, which makes the experience of attacking them all the more fun; furthermore, it is unlikely that they will stop playing after being set back by a killer, and thus they can be "fed upon" again, later. The main disadvantage of pursuing achievers, however, is that an achiever can get so incensed at being attacked that they decide to take revenge . A killer may thus innocently enter a game only to find a heavily armed achiever lying in wait, which rather puts the boot on the other foot .

Note that there is a certain sub-class of killers, generally run by wiz-level players, who have a more ethical point to their actions. In particular, their aim is to "test" players for their "suitability" to advance to the higher levels themselves. In general, such personae should not be regarded as falling into the killer category, although in some instances the ethical aspect is merely an excuse to indulge in killing sprees without fear of sanction . Rather, these killers tend to be run by people in either the achievement category (protecting their own investment) or the explorer category (trying to teach their victims how to defend themselves against real killers).

Increasing the number of achievers will, over time, increase the number of killers in a typically Malthusian fashion.

Killers Versus Explorers

Killers tend to leave explorers alone. Not only can explorers be formidable fighters (with many obscure, unexpected tactics at their disposal), but they often don't fret about being attacked ”a fact that is very frustrating for killers. Sometimes, particularly annoying explorers will simply ignore a killer's attack and make no attempt whatsoever to defend against it; this is the ultimate in cruelty to killers. For more long- term effects, though, a killer's being beaten by an explorer has more impact on the game: the killer will feel shame, their reputation will suffer, and the explorer will pass on survival tactics to everyone else. In general, then, killers will steer well clear of even half-decent explorers, except when they have emptied a game of everyone else and are so desperate for a fix that even an explorer looks tempting.

Increasing the number of explorers will slightly decrease the number of killers.

Killers Versus Socializers

Killers regard socializers with undisguised glee. It's not that socializers are in any way a challenge, as usually they will be pushovers in combat; rather, socializers feel a dreadful hurt when attacked ( especially if it results in the loss of their persona), and it is this that killers enjoy about it. Besides, killers tend to like to have a bad reputation, and if there's one way to get people to talk about you, it's to attack a prominent socializer.

Increasing the number of socializers will increase the number of killers, although, of course, the number of socializers wouldn't remain increased for very long if that happened .

Killers Versus Killers

Killers try not to cross the paths of other killers, except in pre-organized challenge matches. Part of the psychology of killers seems to be that they wish to be viewed as somehow superior to other players; being killed by a killer in open play would undermine their reputation, and therefore they avoid risking it (compare "Killers Versus Explorers"). This means that nascent or wannabe killers are often put off their chosen particular career path because they themselves are attacked by more experienced killers and soundly thrashed. For this reason, it can take a very long time to increase the killer population in a MUD, even if all the conditions are right for them to thrive; killer numbers rise grindingly slowly, unless competent killers are imported from another MUD to swell the numbers artificially.

Killers will occasionally work in teams , but only as a short-term exercise; they will usually revert to stalking their victims solo in the next session they play.

There are two cases where killers might be attacked by players who, superficially, look like other killers. One of these is the "killer killer," usually run by wiz-level players, which has been discussed earlier. The other is in the true hack-and-slash type of MUD, where the whole aim of the game is to kill other personae, and no one particularly minds being killed because they weren't expecting to last very long anyway. This type of play does not appeal to "real" killers because it doesn't cause people emotional distress when their personae are deleted. (Indeed, socializers prefer it more than killers do.) However, it's better than nothing.

The only effect that killers have on other killers is in reducing the number of potential victims available. This, in theory, should keep the number of killers down; however, in practice, killers will simply attack less attractive victims instead. It takes a very drastic reduction in the number of players before established killers will decide to stop playing a MUD and move elsewhere, by which time it is usually too late to save the MUD concerned.