Retroactive Jobs

My last topic on the subject of jobs was pretty well received but got archived rather than taken seriously.


I'm presenting the same concept with a new light,  a new perspective.   The purpose and outcome are the same:  To encourage a free-flowing community of open topics and ideas without being trapped and bound up by the current job system without even having to make any major changes to the job system.


I don't think the concept of how little effort would be involved was clear in the last topic.   So I'm summarizing it right now with this:

Retroactive Jobs.


That gets this slightly tweaked version of the idea across best.


Simply allow jobs to be applied for after a topic has already taken place,  including custom jobs.

There is no reason not to,  practically the only things that matter right now regarding jobs is that you meet a word requirement and are of an appropriate rank for the rank of job you wish to do.

All you have to do with this,  is look at the topic in question,  gauge the ranks involved,  who is in it,  and if they would have been approved to do such a job.    If they would have,  there's no reason not to permit it.

This allows something that currently isn't allowed to thrive:  Spontaneity.   The number one cause of death for ideas is control and waiting time.   The wait just to get approved to do a job with someone rather than jumping right in to posting kills the drive and motivation for a lot of people.

With that in mind people should even be able to retroactively write up Custom Jobs that they can apply their topics to,  allowing anyone to get credit for any open topic they do.



From there you can optionally take it a step further and give staggered rewards to individuals within the topic.  So if person A and person B met the requirements for a Rank A job,  they might get Rank A credit as though they were on an A-rank job.   Person C joined the topic later or had to leave earlier,  they only contributed a little to the topic and resulted in the value equivalent to a C-rank job due to word count and actions. 

It would be the players job to summarize the topic and the actions of the individuals, not the staff's job.  But the staff would then verify the topic or not and Approve rewards. 


This is incredibly easy to do,  as all Word Counts and Rewards are standardized.   There's little variation, so topics of this or that level of quality and length could be easily labeled with a matching Job Rank.


It's only hard if you make it hard and overcomplicate  things,  otherwise this can be as simple or as deep as you make it out to be but ultimately it would be hugely beneficial to everyone and the community at large, as it would allow anyone to casually make a topic with anyone and have it have some value.   It would also allow anyone to make a topic Open and anyone might join that topic and share in the value of the job, by getting lesser rewards or the same rewards if they performed / matched / exceeded the same basic requirements (Boiling down to Word Count and loosely on Accomplishments)


The only benefit to having such a cookie cutter job system as we have now (Meaning with flat requirements and rewards) would be to easily allow a system such as this to exist.

I have two questions for this presently:
How would your retroactive jobs idea apply as far as the guild scoreboard go?
How does your idea take into account the restriction on players not to undertake jobs 2 ranks or above themselves?

King Zenshin wrote:I have two questions for this presently:
How would your retroactive jobs idea apply as far as the guild scoreboard go?
How does your idea take into account the restriction on players not to undertake jobs 2 ranks or above themselves?

Jobs a job, no need to complicate it.    But if complication is necessary,  then do whatever.  Make them count as a job a rank less,  or two ranks less,  or half it rounded up,  either way.  But imo that is nit picking and there isn't a significant reason to do so.

That's irrelevant if using the second half of the suggestion in which rewards are staggered to a baseline rank equivalency where players A and B might get A-rank value out of the topic but player C got C-rank value due to joining later and not doing as much / not writing as much.     If player C didn't meet the requirements or was too low in rank,  they'd get the staggered reward. 

If purely just doing retroactive jobs where a single job gets paired to the single topic and its participants as a whole,  they'd not meet the requirements and it wouldn't pass as that job.   Though for fairness and openness,  they might count as a blank slate job of that lowest applicable rank ie; it'd count as a generic C-rank job using the already currently standardized job requirements and rewards.