Do you trust your campaign members?

Comments

  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    This is an open question to the community: Do you trust your campaign members to be able to edit everything?

    From the beginning, I put very few restrictions on campaign resources. Anyone in the campaign can edit the blog and wiki. For the future, I'm planning on extending this to PCs and NPCs. The main idea is to allow anyone to update the information with their particular view. For example, the GM might forget to add an NPC to the tracker, so one of the players goes and does it (possibly during the game). Of course the GM might want to edit that character in the future.

    My basic assumption is that if you're playing the game with these people, you find them trustworthy enough not to cheat by editing things maliciously. Am I wrong in this assumption? Do I need to plan a more complicated permissions model where you have to explicitly choose who can edit what and so forth?

    If it's not necessary, I would like to avoid this. It adds complexity to the code (and prevents me from working on more interesting stuff) and also adds complexity to the interface, making it harder for people to use the site. However, if this is a common problem, then I need to confront it somehow in the code.
  • deadshot
    deadshot
    Posts: 16
    I can only speak for my campaign and it certainly isn't a trust issue but it might be a matter of perception. For example, I have one NPC that I tagged as an enemy that the party is not too sure of at this point. I deliberately tagged him this way because they were viewing him as an enemy even though they didn't know for sure. If they had the ability to edit those sorts of things they will do so based on their assumptions of things. I would like to have some separation between player edited material and GM edits. Perhaps a separate field which is only available to GM's where they can put the real story of an NPC that might to be fully realized by the party. They might view at person as an ally but in the GM notes it clearly outlines who this person is and what they are up to. This information could be moved to more public field once it is revealed.

    So, to sum up my ramblings, I don't have trust issues with my party and don't believe they would deliberately edit stuff maliciously. I think they would do it based on what they know which might be wrong. As the GM I would like to have access to my private area for each NPC that would allow me to put in the 'real' info on the character that could be moved later as needed.
  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    The DM notes area for an NPC is something I could use as well. When I get the chance, I'll work on this. It shouldn't be too hard, and could possibly be a really great feature.
  • Kanis
    Kanis
    Posts: 5
    As a player I have to say 'trust' isn't a given thing to everyone. Yes there are groups that have been together for a while (forever) but some are just getting a feel for each other, and there might need to be some checks and balances for sensitive information.
    Yes this is probably opposed to what 'wiki' stands for, and its an adjustment of my own personal way of spreading data. The idea that someone can use my character for there own needs, freaked me out when it was pointed out to me. I'm ok with it now, but it was a little strange.
  • Skade
    Skade
    Posts: 7
    My group is a steady, regular group thats been together for 5 years. I trust them to edit a lot of this, except where as noted before they dont know the full story.
  • Randolpho
    Randolpho
    Posts: 27
    Regarding wiki edits... as a GM there are some things I would want the players to be able to see but not edit, there are some things I'd want them to be able to edit (particularly discussion pages), and there are some things I wouldn't want them to be able to see at all. The DM Wiki works for the latter, but the other two...

    Perhaps a compromise? By default, the Party Wiki is fully editable, but the GM can lock any page if necessary.
  • Pure
    Posts: 6
    I think an edit history would help a lot. That way even if a player cheats or deletes information, you can easily see who did it and when, and undo the damage if need be. Whether or not I trust my players, I think it's too easy to lose everything by intent or accident the way things are.
  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    Yes, we want to add an edit history. It's on the list, but below lots of other "cooler" things.
  • zero
    zero
    Posts: 13
    As for me and my house, trust is not an issue. I would find it useful to be able to edit PCs and NPCs created by my players to correct spelling (of names that are not phonetically obvious) and to allow them to post a blank NPC up that they would like to get more information on. Also, they don't necessarily have the time to be updating their characters when they level, and so I could do it for them.

    I look forward to the edit history, as well. : )
  • cauk
    cauk
    Posts: 4
    Definitely, that is the issue with my own and my girlfriend's campaigns. As far as I'm concerned, at this stage in OP's development, I won't build a wiki or NPC that I don't have a hard copy of already. If someone jacks with my wiki's it would be nice to have an edit history that I could track and correct.

    A recent example is that my players created NPC's in the tracker that they wanted to read more about. We realized that I couldn't edit NPC's that they had created so they deleted most of them. I deleted one and recreated it to write a moderately lengthy bio while I was at work, and when I returned to continue editing, that NPC had been deleted as well, presumably because my players probably thought it was one of the old ones that needed purging.

    It seems that if you trust someone enough to give them the ability to "remove" the NPC's from the tracker, then you trust them enough to add their two cents to the tracker. Like a section under the bio for "party perspectives" where each party member contributes a line or two about their PC's perception of the NPC.

    Hmm... I just came up with that as an example, but I think I'm falling in love with the idea. Yeah, *Party Perspectives* even has a nice ring to it. Nice!
  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    Group-editable PC/NPCs are definitely near the top of the list of priorities. We're working on adding some social networking basics right now (like private messages and user images), just to cover the basics. After that, I will be on PC/NPC group editing. It shouldn't be hard, I don't think.

    Edit history is a little trickier. I could easily add versioning to the wikis (and possibly characters), but exposing a good interface (with visual diffs and such) is much harder. So, edit history is in the list of "when I can devote enough time"
  • Micah
    Micah
    Posts: 894
    Group editable PC/NPCs are now live on the site. Let me know if there are any problems.
Sign In or Register to comment.

November 2022
Curse of the Crimson Throne

Read the feature post on the blog
Return to Obsidian Portal

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Discussions