@saosmash Haha, Derovai and Aureth should meet sooner or later too, I think! He keeps a room at the Murder of Crows. But his outfit when I got the charbit was literally 'black, black, black.' His coat has gray checks in it, though!
The fashion system very likely would have nothing to do with the desc of the item too.. fancy descing not required if I'm reading what Apos has in mind correctly. If it's automated and just based on wearing the stuff? only takes a minute to craft a colorless "a seasilk dress" or "an umbra union suit with duskstone flap buttons". Just make the desc the same and call it good.
@wildbaboons Yeah, definitely not wanting to turn it into a "who can ASCII/color text the best" contest. It'll be about embracing theme, regional styles, etc.
@lithium said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
@sparks The reason so many find combat integral to plot fu, is because it is the one thing that doesn't seem impartial. Stats are on the sheet, dice are rolled, system is consulted, results are given. There are no vagaries to it. When a plot is more social, it is really easy to feel like someone doesn't matter at all.
I do agree. It's one reason I think any social combat system should be equally straightforward and clear, as much as possible. It's not an easy design to do, but I think it can be done right.
But what @Apos was proposing earlier in the thread wasn't even social combat between PCs right now, but giving a measurable, consistent system of social influence which can be used to influence NPCs on large-scale actions. Making social mavens useful to people, and making it worthwhile for families to let their social mavens spend money on being social mavens, because there's a measurable benefit to it.
If your pretty, popular princess cousin can use that popularity to sway the NPC masses to your cause when you need it, it's harder to begrudge her the money for that fashionable new dress before a big party!
It's these kind of situations that burn people on social plot fu, and it totally is a once bitten twice shy situation for many people because as we all know, people remember the bad much more easily than the good.
Sure, but I'd argue that just because a few people may react badly to something isn't necessarily a reason to get rid of it.
I mean, I think the same is true with some people when they lose a fight they think they should win in combat code. And then they get angry at the person they were sparring with ("clearly it's just because you have better gear!") or if there's no combat code they get angry at the GM who was arbiter of the fight ("clearly this is favoritism!") or otherwise obsess over why they lost their fight. I'm sure we've all seen that.
But that's not necessarily a reason to get rid of combat code and just do all combat or duels via consent and pre-arranged outcome.
Similarly, I think just going "some people will react badly to social stuff" is not a reason to write off an entire class of character from having a coded utility in the game. 
So I want to preface this by saying I love some of you guys (especially @Apos and @sparks) but I do kind of agree that the game has issues in terms of combat being 'the thing' compared to social (or maybe that should be, combat/investigation/snowflake magic being the stuff vs anything else). I've had the prestige system sold to me as a future patch to this.
But I'm just gonna say... looking at those lists, I can't help but get a really Firan feeling of 'some dudes just have a million SP and you'll never really catch up so why even try.' Which feels like it's going to get in the way of RP more than it helps, if that's all it is. Do we really need another system to tell us that the top houses and their leaders are on top? etc.
I have a supposed social-maven type char. Yet despite that, both her and her org are barely blips on that radar. She'd use a fashion system (heck, I've already had a major storyline hinge on her clothing choice!). But mostly I dread the idea of the Prestige stuff more than I look forward to it, because it just seems like another unassailable dino-fortress / grind / reminder that the Graysons are the best / etc.
@kitteh As I understand, Prestige will be reset when the social system goes in, based on org strength and social skills, so that list may look /very/ different when that happens.
But, honestly, I don't disagree, and I do think that at some point, Arx is going to need a character reset or XP wipe or /something/. By the time the final systems go in, if not before. Both to really push back against the massive XP that has been accrued by characters (including my own), but also so that people can rebuild their characters with the final systems created, instead of having to try and pivot builds as new systems come in, something that can really hurt new characters who come in at the wrong times.
Thing is, no matter what systems go in to offer more options and hopefully, maybe help balance the scales so to speak, unless those systems are mutually exclusive it'll only mean the same people who are already at the top (of whatever ladder) using the new systems as well and thus nothing changes.
@Pyrephox It would be good if they did, yeah, at least re: the reset. The system is a total black box as it is so it's unclear how to even get higher on the list.
Re overall character stuff, I don't even know. XP has very little impact for me, largely because I don't do combat. Both my characters have their primary skills at 5 and then sometimes even sit around accruing xp they don't use. But that's also, in turn, another thing that 'devalues' social (and other non-coded things). Anyone can have those stats while combat is this rare and special thing. And while I am sure staff doesn't consciosuly think of it this way, you do get the subconscious reaction that combat is 'honored' while asking to do something impactful with another skill often gets you side-eyed as overreaching.
@sparks I was never saying it should be gotten rid of, I was explaining why the mindset of social fu combat is less of a 'necessary' to plot fu as you had suggested that you didn't know why people thought physical combat had to be necessary for a plot to actually /be/ a plot.
@kitteh I'd be happy to include you in on stuff I do, even if my involved character is a horrible person who does not socialize well. While the stuff she looks into usually ends up combat so I am rarely deeply involved in the 'big ends' of the plots.. I try to do as much as I can before hand. It's usually just investigation stuff or 'make this stuff do a thing', though. I don't know how much, if at all it gives for impact on things.
@roz said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
@wildbaboons Yeah, definitely not wanting to turn it into a "who can ASCII/color text the best" contest. It'll be about embracing theme, regional styles, etc.
... But ...
In case anyone is considering joining arx! I have some vassal slots open under Farshaw / Westrock Reach! You'd need four players to app in together, and hopefully to be active! But I'd love to have more folks for the Reach!
@cobaltasaurus Let's meet at some point! Anyone else above too, if you want. I've got two scenes today that I'm hoping to get to, but I'll be at the Murder of Crows' darts tourney as well.
PS: totally course-prepping and not using this as a handy excuse to ignore it. Believe it. (I hate course prep. Burning fire, thousand nuns.)
@sincerely Everyone is still gonna want your gorgeous art always man.
@kitteh said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
And while I am sure staff doesn't consciosuly think of it this way, you do get the subconscious reaction that combat is 'honored' while asking to do something impactful with another skill often gets you side-eyed as overreaching.
This problem, and the way it devalues social-only or social-main characters, is the entire reason the system is being discussed. We want social characters to be able to have something impactful to them, that they enjoy, that has effects on the metaplot/game world.
Which is not to say we don't run social plots. As GMs, we believe social/diplomatic characters are not only important but are important enough to build plot around. We've created systems that tie players together for RP, I know we've run diplomatic and social plots that have a meaningful effect on the world. But we want MOAR for the social characters. Glory that people can refer to. Reasons for houses to stop being shitty about people wanting to buy pretty clothes and not armor, because there's "no coded benefit."
Reasons for combat characters to think - you know, maybe I could slaughter this person but in a social setting maybe I shouldn't be a douchebag because I have a sword and could do anything, because that person will get me laughed out of this party. Or shame my family. Or have some kind of meaningful impact.
I'm not saying all combat characters do this (#notallcombatbeasts) or that everyone is a dick to social characters, but we want our social characters to have shiny things to play with and reasons to feel badass with what they do, and not just "hey, we're just biding our time until the combat beasts take care of business." That's seriously uncool and it's not very inclusive.
@darinelle said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
Which is not to say we don't run social plots. As GMs, we believe social/diplomatic characters are not only important but are important enough to build plot around.
It's just significantly harder to set up a successful social plot.
To run a good social plot you generally need to know the PCs involved, you need to manufacture a situation they can leverage their particular which in politics can take some effort, you have to come up with interesting NPCs and assign them distinct personalities to leverage those social skills against. The cynic in me must point out you also need to deal with players who try to fake having social skills through their ranks and poses even if their dice don't support it; if my high-strength duelist happens to also be the Voice for a House he can hijack the spotlight in a diplomatic meeting, but your quirky artist can't be in the frontlines of a jousting tournament as easily.
To run a combat plot you need a 5 minute setup ("orcs are raiding the village! go save them!") and your players are off to the races.
The path of least resistance mandates that while that's true more combat plots will be ran than social ones. Which means more players will pick combat-oriented characters since it provides them with access to stuff they can do. It's just how it is, unless considerable effort is placed in to keep this from happening (which would involve combatants not finding it as easy to rise to positions of authority as others can, for example).
Well. I mean - yes, I think what we're saying here is that we're putting in considerable effort to keep this from happening, because it's weird to have Combat Joe Who Has No Social Skills And Does Not Afraid Of Anything in charge of diplomatic efforts.
And that even without code in place, we as GMs are willing to put in considerable effort to tell social stories.
Sidenote: I've never run a combat plot with 5 min setup, because if it's just "here go kill this thing" then I'm too bored to run it. I spend a lot of time figuring out character motivations, why they'd be there, and how it can turn into character development or further the metaplot, because combat characters are more than just their swords too.
@arkandel Spot on. And getting players engaged is harder. “Kill orc” is way simpler than following breadcrumbs in a mystery or figuring out a clever way to solve a social problem. It’s also astonishingly difficult to involve a whole bunch of people in a social plot as more than spectators. Whereas a battle can involve dozens easily.
@kitteh I'd be happy to include you in on stuff I do, even if my involved character is a horrible person who does not socialize well. While the stuff she looks into usually ends up combat so I am rarely deeply involved in the 'big ends' of the plots.. I try to do as much as I can before hand. It's usually just investigation stuff or 'make this stuff do a thing', though. I don't know how much, if at all it gives for impact on things.
