The OOC Masquerade ?
-
Back in the days of yore, it was something that we took very seriously. Staff was to code everything to keep the masquerade as secret as possible. But the trend toward openness has started -- we'll call it transparency. Is this something to even consider when starting a new project, or is it just something that is ok to break now-a-days. To some degree, I am in the camp of why bother with it anymore, but something, and I really don't know what, keeps me from just nuking it all together.
So what are the hive mind thoughts on this?
Pay no attention to me. I'm old, jaded and generally unfriendly. I am prone to fits of stupidity, but I am still unique, just like everyone else. ~~ Current President of the Anti-Faraday fan club.
-
I started my MU* career back in those days of yore. I took about a 10 year hiatus, and when I came back the OOC Masq was a thing of the past, character wikis were now a thing and people were free with everything.
At first I hated that it no longer existed. I thought that it spoiled the game, that any element of surprise was taken away. That no longer would someone be in a bar and pick a fight with the wrong person since they could just look up what that person was and go 'Oh, shit..he is a insert thing here and I am just a lowly mortal. Maybe I should edge back so I don't end up dead!'.
But, after a bit I noticed that people (at least most people) didn't use the OOC knowledge they had and actually played their characters ICly, and that the prospect of being open actually enhanced some of the RP because you could add some prose to a pose that you otherwise wouldn't have been able to because of the OOC masq.
That being said, I wouldn't mind seeing an 'Old School' game with the OOC Masq pop up, just because I did like the element of mystery that went along with it, but I also know that I am in the minority and people tend to find the OOC Masq a horrific thing.
-
Yeah I kinda like the idea of a game that still uses character wikis but tells people not to spoil things, so you find our for yourself what everyone is.
Like I would even wanna go so far as to not have many channels...
-
@Seamus said in The OOC Masquerade ?:
So what are the hive mind thoughts on this?
I don't believe in the OOC masquerade.
For starters I don't think it exists; somehow things leak, be it by players finding out through various means (observing +who or +where, recognizing posting patterns, reading between the lines, etc) then telling each other 'confidentially' afterwards or leaked by staff. That doesn't mean it's impossible of course, just that there's no real way to enforce it.
For another I don't think it does anything that useful. Many open sheet games have had great success so it's not like we don't have examples where things worked out without dedicating resources to ensuring things stay hidden, and the very act can actually make them worse. The combination of people assuming the worst, not wanting to 'lose' and being distrustful of staff is a particularly nasty one; at least if you can see for yourself a staff alt's sheet doesn't have any special numbers on it is an easy way to mitigate that.
I think it's a relic of games copying each other without truly examining the reason. It's unnecessary.
-
@Seamus said in The OOC Masquerade ?:
Back in the days of yore, it was something that we took very seriously. Staff was to code everything to keep the masquerade as secret as possible. But the trend toward openness has started -- we'll call it transparency. Is this something to even consider when starting a new project, or is it just something that is ok to break now-a-days. To some degree, I am in the camp of why bother with it anymore, but something, and I really don't know what, keeps me from just nuking it all together.
So what are the hive mind thoughts on this?
I may not be a part of the hive mind, but I can opine on this.
IMO, wikis and PBs have done more damage to mushing than good; doubly so wikis when it comes to WoD, as I think they've normalized some bad habits.
WIKIS: I think they're decent for coordination, listing of rules and policies, and character information for games without secretive masquerade-type elements. I think they're amazing for game logs. Having said that, I think they've also normalized some aspects metagaming and wiki-stalking. In terms of the masquerade, I think wikis have made it so that people can choose to avoid players based on what their wiki says ("His wiki says he's a cop, and my character is a crime boss, so even though his character is just hanging out during the scene, I'm going to leave it") or the opposite (The infamous quasi-OOC bang list).
PB: I won't proselytize on PBs all that much, other than to gripe that thanks to PBs, some people won't role play with frickin Milla Jovovich because of some bad experience from 2009, and apparently the same 100 faces exist in every game thanks to PBs. It's a writing hobby. Create faces and personalities. Dont just play ChrisPrattStarLordWerewolf, and for the love of god please stop dangling "hot/interesting PB" as bait to encourage role play. Far too many people draw to PCs by who their PB is, and I think it's garbage.
If I had my way, wikis would be for game logs and game information, but would nix character pages and PBs altogether. It's a writing hobby. Wanna see what a character is like? Write it. Wanna describe what a character looks like? Write it. Wanna know what clan Lucretia or Donovan are in? Get the fuck on the grid and find out.
-
I think it might help to prevent siloing and the fracturing of the playerbase, but I'm not convinced that it will and I think there are better ways to accomplish the same purpose, so I'm not sold on the idea.
@Ghost Maybe someone should try a game that has a wiki, but not player pages. I dunno if it would be successful, but I'd like to see what effect it has.
-
@Lisse24 said in The OOC Masquerade ?:
@Ghost Maybe someone should try a game that has a wiki, but not player pages. I dunno if it would be successful, but I'd like to see what effect it has
I'd be curious, too. I'd like to see a game that stands more on writing than sticking pictures on a web page. In fact, I think it might actually clear out some of the crappy players because the level of effort required would lift a bit.
-
I think the whole OOC masq kind of... didn't work. As soon as anyone were to say something like 'oh sure, but I have to RP here (which happens to be a night zone)' or whatever their cover was blown. You'd instantly know they play a vampire. And as soon as they make it obvious via RP or whatever, the masq would be blown as well.
"Just leave me alone. I'm not myself. I'm falling apart, and I don't want you here." - ― Daniel Keyes, Flowers for Algernon
-
It depends on what type of game you're trying to run.
If you're going for OOC Competition or a MUD-like feel where it's more about immersion and putting blinders on to seeing only what your character sees, then I can understand wanting to limit the share of OOC information. Some MUDs as I understand take this to extremes of not even allowing OOC communication at all.
But I much prefer a community storytelling game, and the transparency of logs, wikis, profiles, etc. is invaluable there in making RP happen, keeping up with things your character would logically know (which you, the player, might otherwise not know), telling better stories and just generally sharing the experience as a community.
Sure, there are occasionally abuses - but anyone who thinks that the OOC Masq back in the day wasn't abused is deluding themselves. For every wiki-stalker coloring their RP in a shady fashion, I've seen literally dozens of good cases of transparency. Even if it's something as simple as "Wow that char has a cool hook; I need to go play with them" or "Oh that's a neat story; I want to get in on that" or "What can we RP about? Oh I see our chars are both into surfing. Let's meet on the beach."
I would never play on a secretive game. I also love PBs, but Ghost and I have argued about that before so there's no need to rehash it for the umpteenth time
-
@TiredEwok said in The OOC Masquerade ?:
As soon as anyone were to say something like 'oh sure, but I have to RP here (which happens to be a night zone)' or whatever their cover was blown.
Which is metagaming. One could assume they work a day shift.
If these games were being played correctly and in the spirit of the game itself, then if Mr. Billy Badass Biker were inclined to pick a barfight, it wouldn't matter if the player Oocly knew the person he was picking a fight with was a vampire. Billy doesn't know. Billy does what Billy does and if Billy lives? Great. If not? That's how information works. Sometimes you don't know the person has potency 4.
Likewise, if people Oocly spread IC information Oocly, that's also supporting metagaming. Each player should simply keep a notepad doc of what their character knows and what their character's mentality is. Those two things alone should drive character decisions.
The moment you start choosing to avoid scenes and players because it presents too much risk based on your OOC information, or because your game experience is more important than the story, you're metagaming.
This has been a problem in mushing since the first WoD mush/online RPG ever. It's never going to be solved. The only fix is to target fair players who don't metagame as your core players.
Delete the Hog Pit. It'll be fun.
I really don't understand He-Man -
@faraday said in The OOC Masquerade ?:
I would never play on a secretive game. I also love PBs, but Ghost and I have argued about that before so there's no need to rehash it for the umpteenth time
For sure. I like you more than I like my stance on PBs. Do your thing, Fara. I can scowl like a grumpy old man in my corner.
I will also note that despite my GOD DAMN KIDS AND THEIR METAGAMING WIKI PBS OMG EVERYTHING IS METAGAMING (Furiously raps cane against wall) WE NEED A MASONIC TEMPLE WHERE ONLY NOT METAGAMING KIDS GET TO PLAY is not some stance I go onto games and harass people with. I have an opinion. I let people do their thing. I will offer my opinions on discussions here and privately if asked, but despite these opinions I don't complain in <ooc> about it and fuck with people's fun.
-
@Ghost said in The OOC Masquerade ?:
This has been a problem in mushing since the first WoD mush/online RPG ever. It's never going to be solved. The only fix is to target fair players who don't metagame as your core players.
Or you accept that metagaming is not a problem but a natural part of the gaming experience, and as long as it's not being used unfairly (which is in the eye of the beholder of course) does no harm at all. Again, it comes down to what kind of game you're trying to run.
For a corollary - look at video games. There are those who would cry foul that anybody utilizing internet resources to look up Minecraft strategies is a cheating metagamer and should just play the game with blinders on and get-off-my-lawn already. But I would argue that view is in the decided minority these days. As long as everyone has access to the same information, using that info to enhance your playing experience isn't inherently bad. It is a game, after all.
-
@faraday said in The OOC Masquerade ?:
Or you accept that metagaming is not a problem but a natural part of the gaming experience, and as long as it's not being used unfairly (which is in the eye of the beholder of course) does no harm at all. Again, it comes down to what kind of game you're trying to run
Aaaaaaabsolutely. Everyone from the GMs to the players needs to be in sync not only with the theme, but with what kind of show it is.
I use this analogy a lot when it comes to WoD: Some people play The Strain. Some play True Blood. Some play Buffy.
For as long as I've played games with other players that involve choices and ambitions (so, excluding most D&D/Warhammer Quest dungeon crawls) I have always had moments where players act on OOC information. There may be an invisible guy in the corner of the room and said metagamer's PC will suddenly feel the need to climb over garbage to wave a stick around that corner of the room. I may ask "why is your character doing this, because YOU know Oocly there's an invisible guy there, but your character doesn't," and they'll say something like "Oh, my PC does this to other people so they're always paranoid about shoppers."
"But just that corner?"
"Yes...just that corner."
"Ooooooookay."Sometimes it's a fight that isn't worth it, but it's a fight I think is important to keep things fair for everyone. For someone to win, someone else may have to fail.
This is very much so a WoD problem, as WoD highly involves secrets between PCs and powers that leverage social rolls and espionage that require players to relent agency over their PCs due to results, which is not popular in mushing.
Delete the Hog Pit. It'll be fun.
I really don't understand He-Man -
I don't care if people know my character is a vampire. I do care if people know his stats at a whim. I like some secrets, and don't care about others. Goodness knows why.
-
Wait, no. I know why. I love being able to surprise, and be surprised in turn. Surprise players, that is.
What sphere someone played was never a surprise, not after a while. We'd pick up on it. But being able to pull a clutch super duper power out at the right moment that nobody knew I had? Perfect, every time.
-
This post is deleted! -
@Ghost said in The OOC Masquerade ?:
Sometimes it's a fight that isn't worth it, but it's a fight I think is important to keep things fair for everyone. For someone to win, someone else may have to fail.
Also absolutely. Even as much of a metagaming proponent as I am, I recognize that there are times when staff needs to step in to keep things fair.
If your character has been established in several scenes making a habit of sweeping the room for bugs prior to starting a meeting, or it's mentioned in their bio or whatever, that's one thing. But if you suddenly out of the blue decide to sweep for bugs because you read a log in which Joe was talking about bugging your office? I call BS, as a player and as a game admin.
I don't think that it's uniquely a WoD problem, though, or even a MUSH problem. In Storium for instance, all scenes are essentially public, so scheming happens out in the open and you have to trust the narrator to call people out if they're unfairly using OOC information ICly.
-
I like both, but I think they suit very different games.
If a game relies on intrigue, mystery, or discovery, where it's assumed that characters will have hidden qualities or factional alliances, then I personally prefer some level of OOC Masq. I like that 'ah ha' moment, or 'wow' moment when something unknown is discovered. That feeling when your PC's best bud turns out to be working for your dire enemies the whole time? Beautiful, and I love that shock to be OOC as much as IC.
On the other hand, you can have a LOT of fun on games where everything is on the table and it's less about reacting to the unexpected than it is about seeking out exciting possibilities. You can still absolutely play out the plot of your PC's best friend being a mole for the bad guys, and it's just as affecting, to me, but it's a different sort of feeling.
I don't really think there's a "right" answer - just a "right for this game and/or this player" answer.
-
I love the tension of characters not knowing. I will be honest though, I have experienced more and richer storytelling both officially and inter personally about the juggling/balacing of keeping secrets and conflicts of living a life while having to hide what you are in the ABSENCE of an ooc mask. Superior and more enjoyable storytelling. In the ooc masque it did not encourage risk taking storytelling and challenge at all, quite the opposite, with discovery stuff being focused on the ooc.
That being said, I dont think there is anything inherently wrong with ooc masque. It just has not been my experience that it serves the purpose people want from it.
-
@mietze There's this, too. My experience with OOC Masq in WoD games is that people then get too obsessed about how it was broken, and if it was broken, and how someone plans to screw them over using it. It sort of engenders paranoia that I, at least, find unpleasant to try to game through.
