@Wolfs I suspected as much, I don't know if Halo is a military group, or a corporation in the video game, so I can't compare the apples and oranges.
Just a quick add, I don't think staff are favoring friends or whatever, I think a page chat with them might clear things up on both sides. My speculations of why I might have hesitation has nothing to do with what staff actually decided.
Heck of a way to show staff that after approval you're gonna be one of the chill ones. 
Should probably just reconsider playing before/after taking it to the mats on MSB.
There's nothing wrong with venting one's frustration over a situation, which it sounds like what Shelbeast is doing. Better to do it here and get it off one's chest than blow up on the game after things come to a head.
Well, yeah, its the right idea in theory.
But we all know that staff remembers. Taking issues to the faux-BetterBusinessBureau or the hobby's version of a proxy YELP! is great in theory. I'm not judging Shel, I'm just saying that taking the issue to MSB and suggesting staff favoritism, it's a creature that's once it's out of the bottle is hard to put back in.
Delete the Hog Pit. It'll be fun.
I really don't understand He-Man
@Ghost I'm aware. Again, I'm not here for a Hog Pit thrashing. I felt that bringing it here was a good way to keep it where it belongs. Constructive Criticism. At this point, what is the worst that is going to happen? They might nitpick my apps to death? Part of the issue is that it was already a thing. I still have three alts on the game, as is. Obviously I'm not moving forward with the application for Grifter. It just is what it is. I may attempt another app in the future, but for now, I'll just keep an eye out to see if the general attitude has changed.
Edit: My posting here also serves the purpose of inviting conversation in a medium that may be easier for some of the said staff, where they might have time to deliberate and form their thoughts in a manner that is not in the moment and needlessly aggressive and defensive.
For starters, there was some failure here in communicating the exact nature of the issue, as it only became obvious in the later pages.
Allowing Wayne Enterprises and not a dozen other corporate clones is one thing, because there's something to be said for keeping your setting focused. But if your'e specifically banning DC lore references because its a Marvel game, this particular application of that 'rule' does seem very arbitrary. It seems like they were willing to compromise for Batman (Wayne business, but no Gotham) but not for people with similar asks (with arguably even smaller lore impact). I don't know what they may or may not have offered @ShelBeast, but if you're going to accommodate some players you should at least make an effort with others.
Along with this - There seems to be a disconnect on what power levels are allowed in apped characters, perhaps Staff need to have more discussion and agreement between them? It really does seem to vary wildly depending on which staffer is in charge of an app.
It's a little like a game of Mao. There's a solid rule list somewhere, but it's hidden, and the players find out what's what only after they trip up on whatever standards they were supposed to be feeling out in the first place.
There definitely needs to be a revision and statement of what is allowed for powered characters. The staff will state that it is a lower powered game, and will make people revise characters downward multiple times. Then they will turn around, and grant someone a rather overpowered version of a feature character. There does not seem to be a reliable rhyme or reason, but the fact that they are giving staff an overpowered character, will create rumors and foment ill feelings.
I also ran into this issue back when I looked into apping here, and ultimately just passed the game up.
Limiting power levels is one thing, limiting power levels and then having exceptions where a special few are designated as 'the most powerful' is not great. When many games manage to be chill about this and not really care if you don't try and run over anyone else's fun, it seems telling of certain negative motivations when staff is visibly concerned about setting particular characters explicitly on top.
One of the things that stood out for me was how they didn't allow Doctor Fate because he was too much on the same level of power as Doctor Strange.
I just... don't get that. Even if you limit actual sorcerers to power levels below Strange's, Fate is a god powering a mortal magician. It's... not the same.
All that stuff is kind of hinky to me, but oh well.
I fell off the game radar when the metaplot introduction of the Kree got taken over by one of the X-Men, while in the meantime the Inhumans had been plotting and planning and basically this was their moment...to have the rug swiped out from under them.
"If you stand for nothing Burr, what will you fall for?"
-- Hamilton: An American Musical
I’m still lost as to why any of the above matters, regarding power levels.
On a game which seems to be based on traits and consent, how are power levels material in everyday RP?
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
@Ganymede said in Empire State Heroes Mush:
I’m still lost as to why any of the above matters, regarding power levels.
On a game which seems to be based on traits and consent, how are power levels material in everyday RP?
I did apps on cape games for a few years, total, and I found less and less of a reason to sweat this stuff overmuch as time went on. There's definite value to characters having limits, and weaknesses, and (in the case of OCs) capabilities that aren't too wildly expansive relative to what else is in the world, but past that...?
It's all consent. It's all driven by collaboration; it's a bit baffling to me.
When I was developing Heroes and Villains MU the initial idea was much broader and was going to be powered by FATE Accelerated. The idea was a game where nearly any multi-media character could exist. It was a sort of post-apocalyptic fantasy game, Rifts meets Thundarr sort of thing. I played in a tabletop game that used the same theme and FATE Accelerated worked wonderfully for it.
Well, during the building phase I had actual conversations that went like this...
Player: I'm planning on playing Hulk Hogan who has a +4 in Forceful just like Superman! So that means I can smack people with cars, right?
Me: No, Superman has a narrative reason to be able to throw cars that takes the form of his Last son of Krypton aspect. Hulk Hogan doesn't have anything on his sheet that shows he should be able to throw cars. But, narratively, his primary focus is his strength so he has the same impact as Superman when using it he just has to use it in different ways.
Player: Uh, they're both +4 in Forceful so they're just as strong as each other. I don't see why, if Superman can throw cars, Hulk Hogan can't either.
So I revised the theme and decided to use a system where limits and levels needed to be defined. I've found that when they aren't defined people will literally do whatever they want and then hold up the game/scene/whatever as they argue about how they're right no matter what you or other s say.
I'll admit that I'm new to this genre, and I don't have all the answers.
My first superhero that I got any mileage out of was Dr. Freeze on @RizBunz's game. I constructed him as a super-intelligent bio-technologist and physician who froze her wife to find a cure for her. He had the usual powers and the robotic suit that he needed to live, and it took a little bit of time to twist the system that the game used to the character's concept.
I ended up falling back on the system precisely zero times because I knew the character well-enough to know his weaknesses and strengths. And none of the GMs I had plots with ever quibbled with his power set because we all knew what it was. Anything that wasn't unclear from my stats and descriptions was discussed and resolved shortly.
Now I'm playing on Empire State, and I haven't run into any problems yet. Maybe I will? I don't know, but I don't think so. I'm pretty sure I know my PC's power levels, if such exist, and what she can and can't do. And I'm pretty sure anyone who GMs a scene I'm in will know the same, or can figure it out.
@Ganymede I hope you continue to have such a great experience. I truly do. The pessimist inside me, however, doesn't think it'll last forever. Even when having a system that defined levels on H&V I was having weird conversations with people right up to the day I closed the door on the game where people were trying to justify things like Roy Harper being smarter than Tony Stark and Reed Richards.
That's how that player envisioned Roy Harper, as a super technological genius that outshined Tony Stark and Reed Richards in that area. That was his perception of the character. If we had no system in place that codified what he could do imagine that player in a scene with Tony Stark whose player has a very different take on just how smart Roy Harper is. Roy Harper corrects Tony Stark on some advanced technological thing, Tony's player starts going OOCly 'Huh?', and the debate begins about whose vision of the character should take precedent.
The problem with comic books games is at some point in time some writer somewhere wrote the phrase "It's been said (this character) is the best in the world..." and those are the issues players of those characters focus on. These were actual things people tried to get approved on H&V: Harley Quinn being as invulnerable as Superman because he hit her in one comic and she didn't die, the Joker having telepathy better than Charles Xavier because "it only makes sense given what he's able to make people do in the comics", Wonder Woman being stronger than Superman, faster than the Flash, smarter than Batman, and a better fighter than Thor or Hercules simply because "it only makes sense".
Anyway, I'm rambling. It's just been my experience that even with hard limits and levels things get messy and argumentative. I can't imagine NOT having them at this point as a result. In a more freeform system you have your vision of a character and someone else may have a different vision and the problems tend to come from the "figuring it out" phase. At least when certain player types(not all for sure but there is a shocking number of the mout there).
@ZombieGenesis said in Empire State Heroes Mush:
justify things like Roy Harper being smarter than Tony Stark and Reed Richards.
Red Arrow? Arsenal? That Roy Harper?
Smarter than Richards or Stark?
Have I really been out of comics that long that this is even a question that has to be addressed in the first place?
People have a history of asking for super weird shizz on games. I think it boils down to 'I want to be this character, but I also want a little of THAT character over there so instead of making an OC, I'mma try to convince Staff.........'
Well, yeah, its the right idea in theory.
But we all know that staff remembers. Taking issues to the faux-BetterBusinessBureau or the hobby's version of a proxy YELP! is great in theory. I'm not judging Shel, I'm just saying that taking the issue to MSB and suggesting staff favoritism, it's a creature that's once it's out of the bottle is hard to put back in.
