http://www.zalanthas.org/blogs/brideofson/archives/001413.html

Dear Domino,

Will you please give a basic rundown of the commonly known worldwide animals and plants, at least so far as they're decided upon thus far? Failing that, can you tell us which flora and fauna will likely make the transition to 2.arm from 1.arm, and give us a couple new highlights?

Tisiphone

Domino says:

This is a project that Vanth and I started to tear through a few months ago, but we put it on hold until the areas themselves are built. I'd estimate it as about 50% done, and I'm looking forward to a time when I can pick it back up.

Almost all of the herbs and plants that currently exist will be making the transition to Armageddon 2.0, with some alterations to the names and properties of some of them so that we can do away with any IP infringements. Most if not all of them will be fleshed out in regards to possible uses and the folklore surrounding them, and it's likely that they won't act the same way they did in Armageddon 1.0. There are literally hundreds of herb and plant items, and many more will be added as we make sure that each herb has a plant, and vice versa. I would also like to ensure that every plant has a way for PCs to reproduce it, whether by taking a cutting of it, planting seeds, or for the more exotic varieties, something else entirely. Purely "decorative" plant objects should be a thing of the past.

Since literacy will be far more common in Armageddon 2.0, I'm hoping to create IC documentation for players to pursue ingame. The most commonly well-known plants will probably be listed in the OOC documentation, but I want to include some extras for those who want to study the subject ICly, while leaving plenty of room for experimentation and further learning. Imagine reading some bit of folklore about a rare herb that only grows in the high mountains and is sacred to the fuzzy-wuzzies, then sending out an expedition to discover it and experiment with its properties, eventually finding out through trial and error that it's the only known cure to the deadly kankblotch plague - then writing your findings in a book and selling it, forever immortalized as the one who made the discovery. That kind of thing is what I want to make possible.

The same goes for animals, to a large extent. Just as the herbs, all of them have their own separate wiki page with a list of fields to fill out, detailing their habits and habitat. The most common ones will get a blurb in the OOC documentation, and the more detailed folklore and habits should be discoverable IC. I'm not alone in wanting to ensure that each animal type has a place in the overall food chain, and that the food chains for each areas make sense and can be observed and reported by PCs in the game.

More of the animals in 2.0 had to be dropped due to IP conflicts, but there is a slew of new ones, including a few rare creatures that existed in Armageddon 1.0's database but weren't brought into common play for one reason or another. Mounts in particular I'm really looking forward to fleshing out, as we have a host of new types, each of which will be ideal for certain situations and poor choices for others. There will be no "super-mount" like the kank was (may they rest in peace), but there will probably be a couple "average" mounts that can handle most terrain types and situations - just not as well as another more specialized mount might.

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/mudreading/~3/248081054/hiring-for-m

I’ve noticed that for the last person we hired for Armageddon and for the last person we hired at work, the process was nearly identical. In both cases it was for a developer position. Our process is to say that we are hiring, receive applications with a certain type of information, choose some people to come in for interviews, have interviews that ask the same questions, then send a few offers.

What are the differences, though? That is the part that I find interesting.

Supply and Demand

In the software world, startups and new, exciting companies usually get a lot of attention from job-seekers. There is the chance to learn new and exciting technologies, having a fully stocked soda fridge and expresso machine, and of course the possibility of stock options making you a quick fortune.

In the MUD world, new MUDs are the ones that have to try their damnedest to bring on new staff. MUD forums are always full of posts about the need for coders or builders for a fresh MUD. Why is this?

First, new MUDs have a low success rate. As a hobby, it is very possible that not enough volunteers will be rounded up. Even if the game gets off the ground, its very hard to reach the critical mass where you have enough players for the playerbase to not just disappear during a lull. For MUD administration talent, its a risky move to invest in such a MUD, and many talented folks are more interested in starting their own project.

Most MUDs that are already established hire from within. Players of a MUD are usually very interested in joining the staff of their favorite MUD, so the game staff can remain sufficient even with a fairly high churn.

What can we learn from this? If you are starting a new MUD, be ready to hire through networking rather than forum posts. However, you should take some lessons from the software industry. Make your MUD an appealing place to work. For coders, advertise what cool new technologies you employ. For builders, make sure you have some unique features that are of interest. The competition is fierce, so make sure you answer the question: “Why is it more fun to work on this MUD?”

For established MUDs: Be picky. You probably have a boatload of players who want to help out. Look at the entire pool of potential staff and take the time to really get to know people and their qualifications. We used to hire by invitation, but hiring by an application process has let us consider highly qualified potential staff that had been flying under our radar in the past.

Celebrity Founders

Every heard of Pownce? It is a Twitter like site. Why do I know about it? Only because one of the original founders was known for his involvement in Digg. The world of software entrepreneurship has celebrities. Companies started by such a person get a lot of attention, both by users and by potential employees.

This doesn’t seem to happen with MUDs. New MUDs are likely to come from an average Joe, or an established group making a new MUD that does not need to establish a new staff.

Why is this? First, there seems to be a stigma surrounding leaving your MUD to go make a new one. You would be seen as abandoning your friends there. In the business world, people coming and going is simply a way of life and (usually) no offense is taken. This is infinitely worse if you try to recruit some of your talented friends to get the new project going. Talent poaching is highly frowned upon in the MUD world, even on a small scale. Lastly, people have a strong sense of loyalty to their MUDs. Even if the previous problems didn’t exist, few people want to embark on such a project.

Further, the MUD world doesn’t seem to have celebrities in the community as a whole. MUD administrators are often seen as celebrities in their own game, but players from other games will likely never of heard of them.

One way I’d like to mitigate this is to promote a more far-reaching MUD community. More networking and awareness of what is going on in other MUDs would help anyone who is trying to hire.

I don’t think I’d want to promote higher staff churn. I think the comradery and loyalty that MUD staffs have is a good thing, overall.

When you are hiring for a MUD, make sure to ask what a person’s accomplishments are, in and out of the MUD community. They probably don’t have 4 or 5 MUDs under their belt, but what they say should be interesting.

Expectations

The last difference between real-job hiring and MUD hiring that I’ll discuss is expectations. On both sides of the table.

MUDs are usually a volunteer effort. A staff member’s value is related to how many hours they choose to volunteer. Its obvious that someone who can devote 20 hours a week to a MUD is a great potential helping hand. Someone who has no time to help, no matter how qualified, is probably not going to get hired.

If someone gets hired onto a MUD, then produces less work than is expected of them, this is usually not a big loss. They can linger on as an occasional helper. If they produce no work whatsoever, or completely disappear, they can be taken off the staff list quietly with no incident.

In the world of business there is no such notion. A hire who is not as effective as needed is a major problem. They’re still around every day and drain resources without giving back.

This difference leads to less sense of risk and lower expectations in MUD hiring.

This is a good thing. Staff can be hired with a risk that they won’t work out. Some of these people might turn out great, and if not, the loss is not unbearable. Hires that are an active problem can be dealt with quickly. Be ready to take risks (if there is some reason to think the person may turn out very good) and pay attention to newer staff to see how the risk is paying off.

On the other side of the table, MUD players often expect that working on a MUD will be far more fun than a real job would be. Well, this is probably true, but occasionally there are unenjoyable parts of the job. Any reasonable interviewee for a paid job is ready for this, but far fewer MUD players are. Set expectations early. If someone gets scared by the thought of building an item that someone else designed for them, or talking to a player who has been misbehaving, they probably aren’t a good resource overall.

That’s all for today. As always I’ll leave an open question on the table. What is your best and/or worst hiring experience? From the perspective of either a employer or interviewee. Doesn’t need to be MUD related, but if it isn’t, how might the situation have been different if it was a MUD hiring?