New Comic/Superhero Themed MU*

surreality

@Entropy You seem to either not be grasping what's being said, or... something else is going on. Considering how you presented the contents of this thread in the BNW thread, I'm not terribly optimistic about your level of understanding or comprehension, since I haven't seen a single instance of anyone in this thread stating that 'being fair' is impossible, unrealistic, or even an uncommon goal.

In fact, every example you've provided as your methods of ensuring fairness is already standard practice on most games. And you've been informed of this by multiple people at this point.

What seems to be sailing over your head is that even with that being the case, things will not necessarily go smoothly because people may, for whatever reason, not perceive that to be the case, and you'll have to be prepared to contend with this situation when it arises.

That you, yourself, seem to perceive that 'most games are totally unfair due to staff malice and corruption' and whatnot, well, think about it a moment. Again, the things you talk about implementing to ensure fairness are already in place on most games... and you still perceive that the majority of games are unfair.

You, yourself, are an example of the perception problem most of us have been trying to explain to you as something you need to be prepared for, because no matter what you do, you will be on the receiving end of it.

I'm going to steal @Coin's line here, because I agree with it wholeheartedly: "More games is better." DO IT. Just be prepared for the reality of the situation, which is going to include a lot of people insisting you're unreasonable, malicious, corrupt, etc. no matter how ethical or fair or reasonable you actually are.

Entropy

@surreality said:

@Entropy You seem to either not be grasping what's being said, or... something else is going on. Considering how you presented the contents of this thread in the BNW thread, I'm not terribly optimistic about your level of understanding or comprehension, since I haven't seen a single instance of anyone in this thread stating that 'being fair' is impossible, unrealistic, or even an uncommon goal.

In fact, every example you've provided as your methods of ensuring fairness is already standard practice on most games. And you've been informed of this by multiple people at this point.

What seems to be sailing over your head is that even with that being the case, things will not necessarily go smoothly because people may, for whatever reason, not perceive that to be the case, and you'll have to be prepared to contend with this situation when it arises.

That you, yourself, seem to perceive that 'most games are totally unfair due to staff malice and corruption' and whatnot, well, think about it a moment. Again, the things you talk about implementing to ensure fairness are already in place on most games... and you still perceive that the majority of games are unfair.

You, yourself, are an example of the perception problem most of us have been trying to explain to you as something you need to be prepared for, because no matter what you do, you will be on the receiving end of it.

I'm going to steal @Coin's line here, because I agree with it wholeheartedly: "More games is better." DO IT. Just be prepared for the reality of the situation, which is going to include a lot of people insisting you're unreasonable, malicious, corrupt, etc. no matter how ethical or fair or reasonable you actually are.

I've already stated, a couple of times, that I get that. I understand that there will always be players who think that I'm shit, and the game is shit. Again, it comes down to one thing being said and taken to a context that far outweighs what it originally started as. The conversation has focused on the staff side of things because it's focused on the staff side of things. Not because I disregard the player side of things. The main reason for that is because I am here to talk about expectations for potential staff.

I also never said that I perceive that "most" games are unfair, due to this... I've just said that I have seen it a lot. I've seen games where staffer characters are the only characters that have any meaning in the game. I've seen comic based games where people get to squat on high-demand characters just because they're buddies with such and such staff member. One game has a staffer who sits on three iconic, high-demand characters, and doesn't really play them outside of TSing in private. I've seen another game where two staffers essentially rule the game simply by having more alts than the rest of the playerbase altogether. I've seen WoD games where staff pets get all the cool toys and positions, and others are actively shut down. I've seen people get actions taken against them by staff that were clearly unwarranted and disproven by logs, but still went through just because they were initiated by a staff friend.

I feel it's also important to note that most of these things I have seen happen to people that are not me. I've only ever had one issue with staff on a game, personally. I'm not a person with a victim complex. I know there are a lot of people out there like that. I'm just an other-oriented person who doesn't like seeing people get treated like crap. And while I'm fully on board with the statement that most problems with staff and players are the result of oversight or miscommunication, and not from willful and malicious intent.... these examples I've seen are still enough for me to want to provide a game where I can ensure that kind of thing doesn't happen. So... I guess, in that regard, consider me the benevolent dictator.

That actually brings me to the next thing I guess needs clarification. I really just want to make sure that these very extreme things don't happen. The common complaint about not getting this or that is one thing. The common railing against staff unfairness is going to be present. I do understand all of that. I've said this from the get go. But man... I've seen some really just super unjust things go down on games, and I've seen really great players leave as a result of them. If I can be in a position to mitigate even a little of that, then that's where I want to be.

Is that kind of behavior the norm? I can't say, as I don't play a TON of games. I tend to stick with a few genres, and don't really venture outside of those. But I know that this does happen from time to time, and, in the case of the comic games operating right now, there's a certain level of dissatisfaction from the playerbase on a whole across the three biggest ones I know. I just want to provide an alternative.

Can I make everyone happy? Of course not. Can I make everything run smoothly? Nope. Can I say that if one of my staff ever blatantly shows gross favoritism to certain players over others, just because of personal taste, I'll alleviate that person from staff duty? Absolutely.

Sunny

Awesome.

I'll put it a little more bluntly here, I think.

You're not doing anything special. This is pretty much every game ever. It's so not special that it's just showing your inexperience to be talking about it like it's something special. You're echoing BigBad, of all people. You go and you do it right. We'll all be here waiting to hear how it goes.

ETA: My first suggestion, if you're actually going to do this, would be to shut the fuck up about your superiority (nobody is buying it except the cheap seats) and start talking about what your game is going to look like, what policies you'll be putting in place to ensure that this 'I am going to be fair' is more than blowing smoke up someone's ass, what ideas you actually have for the developing of it, the creation of it, SOMETHING that shows you have an actual concept of a game to run beyond 'its gunna be fare guyz!!!oneone!'.

Entropy

Uh. Yeah. I'm not trying to make it out like it's something special. I'm just saying that it's what I'm trying to do. I've never, again, stated that this was something that was out of the ordinary, or any different than most other games start out as. I mean, in all seriousness, I just made a post saying "Hey, this is what I'm looking to do, and here are the expectations of it" and it spun into this whole thing of people blowing up those expectations to seemingly wild proportions, and me just trying to bring those perceptions back down to reasonable levels. But if that means I'm trying to say I'm special, or that what I'm trying to do is special, then... hey, whatever. Great sarcasm, though. Kudos, I guess?

Also, I have no clue who BigBad is.

Edit: Also... I'm not sure when or where I have given the impression that I'm superior to anyone or anything. I've just said that I'm just trying to make a game for people who are dissatisfied with the ones they have at the moment.

Coin

Someone get Entropy set up so s/he can live and die by the sword like the rest of us.

WHAT IS BEST IN LIFE?

To crush your players, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their butt-buddies!

Arkandel

@Entropy said:

I've just said that I'm just trying to make a game for people who are dissatisfied with the ones they have at the moment.

Alright, yes, fine. How?

What will you do to achieve this? How will your game prevent staff from being corrupt or hogging all the things?

What are your ideas? Not your goals or aspirations, what is your system to achieve them?

Apos

@Entropy "Hey guys I'm going to make a new superhero game because the current ones are run by loons and I want a non-toxic environment. Anyone interested?" Just go with that, I know that's what you're saying but it didn't really come off that way.

And in all sincerity, best of luck and I also hope you succeed.

Ghost

@Entropy don't let these grizzled bastards discourage you. As we learned in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, the internet is a 20th century tool for people to make dick and fart jokes and critique everything.

I think it's cool you're trying to do something positive that is an escape from the slightly abusive trend of selfish staffers we've become so accustomed to.

SO. Now that I've said that, what are your thoughts for system and staff guidelines for this? I'd be curious to hear. My MAIN bit of advice is to do as much as you can to draw in staff whose interest is in PROVIDING roleplay to others. All too often games are started by staff who have a primary interest of entertaining themselves, and very quickly it becomes obvious that the game never really was intended for other players, but other players were needed so that the four people who wanted the game for themselves weren't playing alone.

Make sure it is a game for your players first, and not a game where people are applying to have a character to act as supporting cast for staffbits.

Ganymede

@Arkandel said:

What are your ideas? Not your goals or aspirations, what is your system to achieve them?

Again, this.

Entropy

Cool. This is a direction that I would like to explore more. I'd be grateful for more ideas about policy that people think actually works on a game.

Right now, my ideas are fairly basic. Like I said, I'm an other-oriented person. I get more enjoyment from other people having fun than I do myself. I want to make the game reflect that. So yeah, I'm looking to make a game for people, not just myself and my circle of friends, but rather an inclusive environment. I know that cliques form and are inevitable and all that, and that's fine. It's another issue altogether. I'm just looking at making a game that allows people to have a good time telling stories together.

So, the primary things I have in mind are that the majority of staff will be required to run things. I've thought about setting perimeters on this, but I'm not sure what would be considered reasonable, so suggestions would be awesome. I would like for the people who want to staff to be people that enjoy running things. This is pretty much a common factor in all the people that I've talked to about this already, so I think that's a good thing.

Another policy would be to create a list of high-profile characters that people would want to play and limit them. Basically, taking the characters like Batman and Captain America and restricting people to only one such character. No one running around with Batman, Cap, Wolverine and Superman all at once. Spread out the love, so to speak.

For those major characters, I was also thinking that a minimum activity requirement should be maintained, so as to ensure people aren't just squatting on them. This would be a bit more strict than the requirements for holding less in-demand alts.

As far as the world goes, I'm looking at creating an integrated universe, and currently working on the ways that I can make those puzzle pieces fit. This means that it's not just DC comics stuff slapped in with Marvel stuff, but rather a cohesive whole. I want to fold things in to make them actually a part of one another. Establish the relationships and differences between ARGUS and SHIELD, for example. Or explain how Aquaman and Namor can both be rulers of Atlantis. I have some ideas about these things, and have been talking to others about it, as well.

As far as system goes, I'm looking at primarily consent based as the primary, since this is how most of the comic based games I've encountered are set up, anyway. I do want to include a trait/sheet system to help regulate the drawbacks of that, and maybe a minimal optional rolling system if an agreement can't be reached.

Coming from a primarily tabletop RPG background, I've also been thinking a lot about the idea of experience and growth, which is something that comic based games don't really deal with very much. I personally enjoy the aspect of a game where I earn things and have the ability to improve or change aspects of my character. I'd ask if others would be interested enough in something like that for me to consider developing an XP system to help their characters develop their powers and abilities.

As far as staff rules go, I've outlined the basic jist of what I'm looking for. Don't be a jerk. If you have a problem with a player, for whatever reason, let another staffer interact with them. I would be looking at creating the means for accountability in such instances.

As far as approving or denying sheets, and providing suggestions, any staffer would be allowed to do so. If something is denied, for whatever reason, the player should have a chance to explain why they think it should be allowed. If the staff member still feels that it's unallowable or too much, then, and only then, should it be brought to other members of staff to have a discussion about it. It doesn't need to be all staff that agrees with one side or another, but there should be some consensus. Really, as long as the issue is given serious consideration, instead of just being dismissed outright, then I'm happy. If the result is that staff agrees that something should be denied, we should also take the time to outline the full reasoning behind the denial. And yes, I know that this is standard.

A lot of what I'm looking for, really, is just kind of standard, common sense stuff. I just want to be able to find ways to target and mitigate, if not eliminate, toxic patterns of behavior that make the game less inclusive for everyone. This would require quite a bit of transparency for the staff, and a lot of communal effort on the part of the player base. That being said, my observations of the established playerbase for comic based MU*s has given me the impression that they are, generally speaking, a bit more communal and cooperative than what I have observed on the WoD and Cyberpunk/Shadowrun games that I've played on. I think it's a fairly positive community on the whole. It has it's cray cray, and it's dark spots, but the general feel I've seen has been fairly decent.

I'm also totally down for suggestions. I know I likely haven't covered nearly everything that should be talked about, but I'm currently dealing with a pretty intense headache, making it more difficult for my thoughts to come out cohesively. I just wanted to get a response out there.

Thenomain

@Entropy

I just want to play mirror-universe Superman. With a goatee. Is this okay? He'd be bitter and sulky and therefore not evil per se, just amoral.

Shield is the one with the giant floating base, right?

tragedyjones

As a massive comics guy and two and a half time MU creator I would love to help with world building and integration.

Miss Demeanor

@Thenomain S.H.I.E.L.D. has a helicarrier, yes.

Thenomain

@Miss-Demeanor Cool, and that's where the Justice League meets, right? Or is that Cleveland?

Miss Demeanor

@Thenomain I dunno... Justice League, Young Avengers, New Avengers, Teen Every Superhero Ever... I lose track of all the different groups. But the helicarrier is pimp.

Thenomain

I understand we're going to get a movie where Batman and Superman do some stupid, dick-waving shit entirely as a vehicle to introduce Wonder Woman. Probably also in Cleveland.

Miss Demeanor

@Thenomain I dunno, I haven't looked any further than the Deadpool movie next month. And frankly.. yeah, not particularly interested in watching the "Man of Steel" and the "Dark Knight" dickwaving at each other. Never particularly cared for Wonder Woman either, truth be told.

Bobotron

@Miss-Demeanor
At least X-Men: Apocalypse will be good.

Miss Demeanor

@Bobotron X-Men lost me at Origins. >.> I sat through that horrible Phoenix/Jean Grey die and Scott is even more of a whiny shit than usual POS. Once they fucked up Deadpool, I stopped watching. Just wasn't worth the aggravation.

Bobotron

@Miss-Demeanor
Go watch X-Men: First Class and go from there; it's essentially resetting the horrible shit that was the first bunch of X-Men movies. First Class, Days of Future Past (despite the Wolverine focus) and Apocalypse are the 'rebooting' of the X-Men franchise. Apocalypse will be cool. It's set in the 80's and will have young Scott and Jean, Storm, Nightcrawler, Psylocke, Jubilee and other young mutants. And not a Wolverine to be seen.