The 100: The Mush

[Lithium]

For me all the plots were scheduled at a time when I could not participate. All of them. So I could literally do nothing that had any impact on the story. I tried to make connections with people, but all I ran into was a bunch of fuck this fuck that fuck everything lets go fuck lets have an orgy lets fuck...er fight and if you don't agree with me I'll have you killed in your sleep.

At which point I was like: I'm not going to have any real effect here, and the RP is so antagonistic... that I lost interest and stopped logging in.

[Kestrel]

Whoa man. I'm sensing there's an undercurrent of drama here, but as I don't really know any of you, didn't play 5W and don't have a history of any kind (positive or negative) with the 100 MUSH's staff, I'm going to avoid stepping into that and just comment on my experiences, which have been overwhelmingly awesome.

It's now officially been two weeks since I joined. This is my first MUSH, and aside from @dev, who's as new to the style and community as I am, I've never (to my knowledge) played with anyone who plays this game before and have no OOC contact. I missed the important landing event and did not become involved until 3 IC days after it. Despite this, everyone has been immensely welcoming, I was readily involved in an ongoing social scene the second I was ready to venture IC from chargen, and I since feel like I have been warmly accepted as an equal part of the community and afforded all the respect and regard I could ask for. It took all of three days for people to start adding me to their relationship info on their wiki pages, plenty of people have sent me friendly pages indicating they like my character, and I received a flattering number of cookies in my first week. (They're kind of like anonymous little thumbs-up you can freely give to people you enjoy roleplaying with, which they see the tally of at the end of the week and help them earn 'luck' points to spend on rerolls and hero moments, etc.)

Are there cliques and characters with backstory tie-ins? Sure! But I have no problem with the way they handle themselves in this MU*. A prominent example would be the 'Tesla Three', which consists of Fiona, Martin and Lip, whose backstory tie-in is that they staged a social justice protest on the Ark by chaining themselves to the doors of the Tesla Station, resulting in them being incarcerated for treason. (Currently all characters in play must be juvenile delinquents, as it's part of the setting.) I find their backstory to be a compelling and interesting plot-hook, which I've regularly brought up IC when talking to/about them. I've interacted with all three characters, both as a group and individually, and though they definitely have a clique thing going, it is not exclusionary or detrimental to the setting, but quite the opposite.

Some players, though they are few and far between, can be a little standoffish and may require a scene or two before they start being friendly. I think this is normal, and it doesn't bother me; there were plenty of other people to interact with, and once I'd gotten my foot in the door (which didn't take long), they were as inclusive as anyone else has been. I would advise new players (on any game, not just this one) not to be discouraged just because a few people take some warming up to.

The game is packed full of excitement. Almost too much, as some people have pointed out, but I have to hand it to staff for how evidently they put their blood, sweat and tears into the stories they craft. The action moves fast, which suits me better than slow, dull social RP settings I've played in the past, and something new, intense and meaningful happens nearly every single day. The 'lack of threat' which @Admiral has pointed out, in the sense that characters are unlikely to die unless their players want them to, doesn't bother me. People have been captured, attacked, injured, threatened and run for their lives. The adrenaline factor is real, even if only NPCs die. That the emphasis is on how our stories develop around danger rather than just having a bloodbath and killing off PCs suits me fine.

I think it's a little disingenuous to say that you don't have to have watched the show to play this game. You probably don't have to be up to date with the entire series, but I do think that watching just the first episode provides a lot of background information for the setting which would help new players. I also think that whether you've seen the show or not, if you aren't apt to like it, you aren't going to like the MUSH either. The theme is survival in a post-apocalyptic world; it's gritty, intense, political, raw, occasionally violent and occasionally with smatterings of angst. There is moral complexity, and your character will eventually get blood on their hands, directly or indirectly, whether you like it or not. They will have to make tough choices. From an observation, I think the players who are having the best time on the MUSH so far are those who are embracing the theme fully and placing themselves at the midst of the action, at risk of such choices, rather than just faffing around camp. There's nothing wrong with faffing around, I just think that if that's you, you shouldn't be surprised if you don't have as much fun.

The staff know what they're doing on a level that intimidates me. Coming from a long line of MUDs with coders at the helm (and even staffing in one), I am now fully convinced that having storytellers at the helm is the only way it should be. They have the creative freedom to offer a lot, to everyone, and in processing my application, they were nothing short of helpful and patient in answering questions and asking me to make a few minor tweaks. I have thus far found them to be 100% transparent and open about how everything works, who they play, what powers they have as staff and what they don't. The system they employ to aid in action scenes, FS3, is good, clean, hassle-free, and very easy to learn and understand after ten minutes maximum of bleary-eyed confusion. I haven't used it before, but would again. I will also add, in staff's favour, that they seem to not be batshit crazy. I think this bears mentioning because it's a rarity in roleplaying communities, and I want to make it clear that when I say they're friendly and helpful, I don't mean that as a euphemism for 'overbearing and neurotic', which it very often is. A+ for staff sanity and approachability.

I'll touch briefly on the point about staff PCs stealing all the action: Yes, Grey (Orion/ @Seraphim73) is a central character. But I don't think he's more central than Cole, Quinn and Fiona, neither of whom are staff-played, to my knowledge. I'll admit that I sniffed a bit when I saw he'd had a bunch of scenes with the Grounder prisoner and then a lot went down before anyone could process, especially since it involved learning that the Grounders speak English and that Mountain Men exist. I would have preferred for that to be a lot more drawn out, and less centred on such a small group of characters interacting with the prisoner. I'm also sad that such major reveals were made before the moment of maximum tension (e.g. when the Mountain Men actually show up to abduct us). But I think they did a good job of rectifying it when they came back the next day, more action happened which they involved many more people in, and though he got the spotlight for one scene, I don't feel like I was excluded from the overall arc. It also just so happens that Grey is a terrific character by a terrific roleplayer. He's engaging, inclusive, writes well, has a thematic backstory which he plays to consistently, and he makes a point of acknowledging other people's backstories as well in his RP. I've enjoyed his involvement in every scene I've had with him, so it really doesn't bother me that he's a central character. With the exception of that one thing with the Grounder prisoner, his centralisation has been an organic result of his interaction with other players.

There is only one thing so far about the game that I really don't like: I think the senate is a silly idea. It doesn't fit the theme, will lead to plot marginalisation and will favour those playing mature and responsible characters. While I have no problem with mature and responsible characters existing, as they are necessary counterpoints, most of us are playing teenagers enjoying their first taste of freedom the way your average teenager would, and so the counterpoints are a little less thematic, even if it's necessary to have exceptions. Even Clarke and Bellamy aren't official leaders in the show, and they aren't universally liked. They just end up leading often because they raise good ideas, and I would prefer it if the 100 MUSH also just allowed leadership to organically flow towards whoever ends up having good ideas in the moment. We're teenagers, after all. And while it's been said this is the result of IC talks, they're IC talks that I wasn't privy to, and don't think the majority of NPCs would be privy to or support. The senate idea's also been given staff support for voting, so it's a little beyond that now.

Anyway. Play the 100 MUSH. Involve yourself in +events, they're a great way to get your foot in the door and be a part of the action. Wiki and +sheet-stalk people during your first scenes with them so you know which plot-hooks to raise, just like when you bring up the Summer they spent in France as a talking point with a Tinder date. And, uh... haters gonna hate, I guess. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

[ixokai]

@Kestrel said in The 100: The Mush:

There is only one thing so far about the game that I really don't like: I think the senate is a silly idea.

Note, staff's not pushing that exactly, players are. Among them, mine. Why? Because there's a big undercurrent of "everyone needs to get a say" and giving "everyone a say" is an absolute nightmare logistically and completely not fun.

Morgan, Max and Quinn tried to give everyone a say on Saturday and called a spontaneous meeting and it devolved almost immediately into a shouting match. Its kind of horrible.

[Kestrel]

@ixokai said in The 100: The Mush:

@Kestrel said in The 100: The Mush:

There is only one thing so far about the game that I really don't like: I think the senate is a silly idea.

Note, staff's not pushing that exactly, players are. Among them, mine. Why? Because there's a big undercurrent of "everyone needs to get a say" and giving "everyone a say" is an absolute nightmare logistically and completely not fun.

Morgan, Max and Quinn tried to give everyone a say on Saturday and called a spontaneous meeting and it devolved almost immediately into a shouting match. Its kind of horrible.

As a suggestion, be more sneaky. Have smaller meetings with fewer people, even if you make them public via +event with a participation cap. This would have been a perfect way to handle the Grounder prisoner thing, for example.

Show spoilers ahead:

Remember back when Bellamy was just a dick championing 'Whatever the hell we want', and what he wanted was to get Clarke and Wells' bracelets off? So first he, Murphy, and Nameless Goons #2 & #3 cornered Wells for a beating to pry it off by force, then he agreed to join Clarke on a group expedition so that he could be smarmy and wait for his opportune moment to pry it off of her.

Yeah, giving everyone a say is a nightmare. But you don't have to give them an IC say, nor to elect official leaders to involve them. There's a group going to the Grounder village soon, for example. Why don't others sneak off to do the same even though they aren't part of the official 'delegation'? That sort of happened in the show, too, when trigger-happy Jasper and Bellamy tailed Octavia and Clarke to make sure they stayed safe while trying to meet with Anya on the bridge, then fired shots and ruined everything.

[ixokai]

@Kestrel said in The 100: The Mush:

As a suggestion, be more sneaky. Have smaller meetings with fewer people, even if you make them public via +event with a participation cap. This would have been a perfect way to handle the Grounder prisoner thing, for example.

Then those who did not get as say are upset. This has already happened.

Yeah, giving everyone a say is a nightmare. But you don't have to give them an IC say

That's exactly what has caused rising discontent among many significant characters.

nor to elect official leaders to involve them. There's a group going to the Grounder village soon, for example. Why don't others sneak off to do the same even though they aren't part of the official 'delegation'? That sort of happened in the show, too, when trigger-happy Jasper and Bellamy tailed Octavia and Clarke to make sure they stayed safe while trying to meet with Anya on the bridge, then fired shots and ruined everything.

Note, there's nothing stopping anyone from going on their own despite the delegation. That doesn't change the fact that a lot of characters have expressed a preference for not just having a hand in selecting the delegation, but in respecting everyone's right to have a say.

Nothing binds anyone to this delegation vote. Its entirely possible someone will sneak off and ruin things. And possible they won't. That's up to individual IC action.

That said, taking things into their own hands is already something that's severely angering some characters.

Look at the crap Grey/Fiona/Faolan are getting for doing exactly that and releasing the grounders, and what I got for calling the ark.

I don't mind the crap-- they're consequences, and deserved ones. But as a direct result I now have multiple bitter enemies.

Is that fun? Sure! Hating Cassandra IC and having her hate Cam IC is kinda hilarious.(I loved the scene yesterday where she laid on him a 'takes one to know one' challenge with him insisting she's a sociopath) But many of characters want to unify and not just take things into their own hands. That's their characters IC desire (and its my characters, too! Even though he betrayed that ideal completely remorselessly).

A unity movement didn't happen on the show, but we aren't exactly following the show. We have our own characters and they are affecting how the story unveils based on the particular details of their desires, personalities, ambitions and execution.

[TNP]

@Kestrel The problem is that it's a Mu. Every player wants to have an OOC say. Many want their character to have an IC say. If they don't get one or the other, they either feel railroaded or ignored.

The Senate was an IC way to do this on both levels. It's very possibly a really bad way, doomed to failure, which is fine, if it's an IC failure. If it's an OOC failure, see previous posts in this thread. To a certain degree, it doesn't matter if the accusations are right or wrong if that was the perception at the time they were happening. (Obviously, it does matter but widespread incorrect perceptions can ruin a game quicker than a smaller accurate one.)

Given the setting, leadership can either be all NPC which would suck in its own way (see almost every WoD sphere with NPC leadership) or given to a small number of PCs which lead to cries of favoritism and cliquishness (see almost every WoD sphere with PC leadership as well as previous posts in this thread).

The idea of the Senate happened organically because obviously some kind of leadership is desperately needed but 100 teenage criminals and rabble-rousers who came from an arguably not so benevolent autocratic Council aren't going to want to be ordered around by another 'council' (which, yes, is what the Senate will be but elected by them so it's a compromise).

tl;dr Leadersip in a Mu setting is pretty much always a lose-lose situation. No matter what, a bunch of people are going to be unhappy.

[Kestrel]

@ixokai said in The 100: The Mush:

@Kestrel said in The 100: The Mush:

As a suggestion, be more sneaky. Have smaller meetings with fewer people, even if you make them public via +event with a participation cap. This would have been a perfect way to handle the Grounder prisoner thing, for example.

Then those who did not get as say are upset. This has already happened.

This would be a circumstance of where I just shrug and say 'haters gonna hate'. Like, with the spontaneous camp-wide meeting that Quinn and Morgan threw, I'm not really torn-up about those who missed out. Nor that events are on a first-come-first-serve basis and that inevitably, some are just not going to fit your schedule.

nor to elect official leaders to involve them. There's a group going to the Grounder village soon, for example. Why don't others sneak off to do the same even though they aren't part of the official 'delegation'? That sort of happened in the show, too, when trigger-happy Jasper and Bellamy tailed Octavia and Clarke to make sure they stayed safe while trying to meet with Anya on the bridge, then fired shots and ruined everything.

Look at the crap Grey/Fiona/Faolan are getting for doing exactly that and releasing the grounders

I don't think that's quite the same thing. I was watching the who list when three people randomly appeared to be having a scene in a private room. There wasn't an open invite or an opportunity for people to stop them, track them, etc. I don't know that I would have participated had there been an option, but I think having that option would have appeased many people who are now discontent.

[...] and what I got for calling the ark.

I don't mind the crap-- they're consequences, and deserved ones. But as a direct result I now have multiple bitter enemies.

As one of the people who ICly expressed disapproval of this, let me just say that I have a grand 0 problems with your character taking matters into his own hands and calling the Ark. My character does. But it was a necessary action that was going to cause conflict one way or the other, and the choice you made has given the story traction for a lot of people. Good job. The choice was different from what happened with Grey/Fiona/Faolan, because it happened in the midst of an +event which a lot of people were involved in and could react to and fight over.

A unity movement didn't happen on the show, but we aren't exactly following the show. We have our own characters and they are affecting how the story unveils based on the particular details of their desires, personalities, ambitions and execution.

I don't have a problem with this. Also let me state for the record that my criticisms are pretty minor and I don't actually care that much. I'm having oodles of fun on this MUSH, I don't expect that to change any time soon, and my regard of Grey, Faolan on Fiona hasn't changed from the positive first impression they created as characters/roleplayers.

[ThatGuyThere]

@Kestrel
Since this is your first MUSH I will do this as sort of a PSA, the big downside to the more OOCly open culture of a MUSH is that people will tend to know others from game to game and this can lead to grudges that get carried over as well. Like the example here where it seems some have from 5th world.
WoD and Superhero games definitely have some of this as well.
For the most part if you can keep your head down and let the drama flow around you you should be alright.

[GirlCalledBlu]

Because this is ultimately a place to advertise for the game:

GROUNDER APPLICATIONS ARE NOW OPEN: With a tentative ceasefire called between the delinquent camp and the nearest Grounder village of Coesbur, the two peoples are beginning to interact in ways that do not always include violence. With the Grounders no longer the anonymous enemy, the delinquents are starting to realize the intricate nature of the ground's long survivors, and just how different -- and how aggressive -- the world has transformed the human race.

But, a ceasefire with one village does not mean a ceasefire with all. Soon the delinquents will learn the exact expanse of the Trikru nation, and that -- no matter where they turn -- politics and law still follow them.

[Sunny]

I am very much enjoying this game. Two thumbs up.

[GangOfDolls]

I'm enjoying the game except for one thing.

And its a small thing but it's a thing that has been bugging me on the Delinquents side. I had a late entry into the game after the landing so much of the very early days scramble had already passed. I also came in by myself so I didn't have a group to experience the game with, which definitely helps.

I totally get that the theme by its nature is a bunch of badly behaved kids who were in SpaceJail are now turned free on earth. And I totally know that the show canon which probably influences this through season 1 was: NO RULES NO RULES I'M GOING TO FUCK AND FIGHT ALL THE TIME

But there are a number of PCs who are often not even passingly nice to solo PCs who aren't established/in a group/generally new players. It's one thing to be petulant teenager who is knows everything because there are some who do that will excellent, slouchy aplomb. But I seem to keep running into PCs who are kind of relentlessly horrible to other PCs just because they can.

The upside is that most players are very nice OOCly but I get the sense there isn't a lot of self-awareness in finding a balance between cooperative play and being overly exacting on their interpretation of their character of being a mouth foaming rabid dipshit. But early days, so I'm hoping most players who are doing this will wear themselves or see themselves out.

[ixokai]

@GangOfDolls said in The 100: The Mush:

But there are a number of PCs who are often not even passingly nice to solo PCs who aren't established/in a group/generally new players. It's one thing to be petulant teenager who is knows everything because there are some who do that will excellent, slouchy aplomb. But I seem to keep running into PCs who are kind of relentlessly horrible to other PCs just because they can.

Heh. I wonder if mine is one of these Cuz tonight my character was kinda horrible at someone who is fairly new. Not because she's new (she's been around forever, ICly), but just... he reacts to stress in a certain way and is not exactly a pleasant guy during such episodes. And watching a kid get her throat cut partly cuz he voted her guilty put him into a bad place, mentally. When he's in a bad place his emotions shut down and he turns into a cold prick.

That said:

The upside is that most players are very nice OOCly but I get the sense there isn't a lot of self-awareness in finding a balance between cooperative play and being overly exacting on their interpretation of their character of being a mouth foaming rabid dipshit. But early days, so I'm hoping most players who are doing this will wear themselves or see themselves out.

I'm not sure I find this a reasonable expectation to have. Not all characters are going to be kind to each-other, or like each-other, or get along. I don't know if it has anything to do with people being established or in a group or not -- I don't know that we've ever had a group app that I've seen, and have had some characters show up and immediately got along with mine, and some, and immediately didn't.

Its personality conflict and IMHO its a good thing on this game. One of the most fun things about the game to me is the ongoing fued between my character and @kestrel. I like it because there's not really an intrinsic reason why they have to hate each-other. They aren't the Hatfields and the McCoys. They have some differences politically, but they are not as far apart as they seem. But do they hate each-other.

Its great.

[GangOfDolls]

Oh, yeah, I do see your point. And it may just be a matter of play style. I've played some major dicks in my time (as have we all) but as I get older and crankier, I do find that sometimes its not always in the interest of a game or a character to lead with uncompromisingly aggressive behavior IC when the PC on the receiving end hasn't done much other than be there at the wrong place, wrong time. Like sensibly, even people who very traumatized and behaviorally stunted, do not as a whole walk up and emotionally roundhouse kick a total stranger for just sort of standing there.

Provoking that kind of reaction is another thing, totally.

There's a charisma and chemical alchemy in a way to playing a PC who goes out of their way to be mean to strangers usually because their approach is very nuanced and you see the humanity underneath this PC that makes them charming and ultimately relatable. And I think for some players, how they think their PC comes across and how they really come across, are very different and they don't see it.

TL;DR: Dealing with a jerk necessitates an upside to dealing with a jerk. No upside? People will avoid your jerk.

[Kestrel]

I honestly do see what you're saying, @GangOfDolls, and I play a totally terrible person. There has to be give and take. Playing a bad guy is not just about playing a bad guy, but about engaging the people you're 'bad' to, making them feel special, relevant, and offering them the chance for a solution, not just a problem.

If Harry Potter were a roleplaying game, for example, everyone would love to have a Voldemort. Voldemort is the villain who decries you for being the thorn in his side because you're the Chosen One, the one arch-rival whom he just can't seem to get past, who genuinely threatens him. Voldemort doesn't just antagonise Harry — he cares about him. Antagonists should always care about their 'victims' for scenes to be enjoyable.

Speaking personally, I like to think that I go out of my way to be nice to people OOC and to make it clear through both IC and OOC interactions that I value their RP and their character. But of course, I can't actually read minds and we all have blind spots, so it's equally likely that I lack self-awareness and come across worse than I believe.

I do wish people felt they could more freely and openly communicate any concerns they have about other people's RP and offer constructive criticism — but as someone who's been burned before (many times) trying to do just that, I understand why people rarely feel comfortable doing so.

My candid advice would be to avoid people you don't like dealing with. You should find your niche soon enough. I didn't roll in with anyone and the only person I talk to OOC who used to play is now inactive. Despite this, there are a large number of people whom I now interact with on a regular basis and feel very comfortable around. They were welcoming and helpful, it just took a scene or two to get there.

Do also bear in mind the theme of the show, which is survival and, as you say, a bunch of rough, post-apocalyptic post-pubescent criminals enjoying their first taste of freedom. I love the show and I love this theme, or I would not play.

[ixokai]

@GangOfDolls said in The 100: The Mush:

Oh, yeah, I do see your point. And it may just be a matter of play style. I've played some major dicks in my time (as have we all) but as I get older and crankier, I do find that sometimes its not always in the interest of a game or a character to lead with uncompromisingly aggressive behavior IC when the PC on the receiving end hasn't done much other than be there at the wrong place, wrong time. Like sensibly, even people who very traumatized and behaviorally stunted, do not as a whole walk up and emotionally roundhouse kick a total stranger for just sort of standing there.

Provoking that kind of reaction is another thing, totally.

There's a charisma and chemical alchemy in a way to playing a PC who goes out of their way to be mean to strangers usually because their approach is very nuanced and you see the humanity underneath this PC that makes them charming and ultimately relatable. And I think for some players, how they think their PC comes across and how they really come across, are very different and they don't see it.

TL;DR: Dealing with a jerk necessitates an upside to dealing with a jerk. No upside? People will avoid your jerk.

Hmm. One thing I notice you mentioned twice is -- stranger.

The thing with the 100 is... almost none of these people are strangers. Now they don't all know eachother great, but they aren't strangers. You're new to the game, but your character has been around for the last two weeks, everyone probably knows his or her name, some details. Depending on how long they were boxed, they might know more.

I tend to have my character assume a certain familiarity with new people, and just try to work them in as if we at least passingly know eachother. No one's a stranger here.

[Monogram]

While I've been on the game for quite some time(and I really do enjoy it much like others have already said), there is a sinking suspicion that I think some players are using the reasoning of 'well it's conflict' to mask questionable behavior. And while I won't sit here and sling names, there are a few people that are so antagonistic that there's just no dealing with them unless you yourself are an conflict-based character. I've had a few times where I had to sit back and wonder about that.

Likely it's simply because this game, more so than others I've played has been more conflict heavy than others. And it can be daunting, perhaps intimidating to the point where you don't want to deal with it. And overwhelming, a lot of stuff is being thrown at you all the same time that there barely seems to be time to breath. Ironically enough, playing my Grounder alt has been more refreshing, because I can only take so much angst and the "I'm out for only me" mentality.

That all being said, I think the game is great and has a good playerbase and players that don't seem to be absolute jerkwads. But playing a Delinquent can be mentally exhausting at times, especially being around particular alts that seem to just want screw just about everything up. But hey, what game doesn't have that aspect of things?

[faraday]

@Monogram said in The 100: The Mush:

there are a few people that are so antagonistic that there's just no dealing with them unless you yourself are an conflict-based character. I've had a few times where I had to sit back and wonder about that.

As an outsider who doesn't play there, I wonder though... as long as the behavior is IC, and they're willing to accept the consequences of people avoiding them because of it (IC and OOC)... what's the problem?

I think too many games suffer from an appalling lack of IC conflict. Not overt "I want to kill you" PvP aggression, but just the everyday drama of people not getting along.

[Monogram]

@faraday There isn't I would suppose, but I enjoy being able to RP with everyone if I can find a reason to do so. But there are also times where I just feel burnt out from constantly not agreeing on just about anything.

I'm not saying it's wrong, conflict is a great motivator, I simply wonder when it becomes too much, when it's all that there is. Guess I just like to find a good balance.

[Three-Eyed Crow]

@Monogram said in The 100: The Mush:

That all being said, I think the game is great and has a good playerbase and players that don't seem to be absolute jerkwads. But playing a Delinquent can be mentally exhausting at times, especially being around particular alts that seem to just want screw just about everything up. But hey, what game doesn't have that aspect of things?

I'll confess I'm less attracted - in general - to playing teenage characters and near-teenagers because...this is more or less what they are. It's an age where everything is emotionally heightened. You're a self-involved angst-bot. I'm enthused about Ground apps (and possibly other stuff in the future) because it can be something other than that.

[Kanye Qwest]

@ixokai said in The 100: The Mush:

The thing with the 100 is... almost none of these people are strangers. Now they don't all know eachother great, but they aren't strangers. You're new to the game, but your character has been around for the last two weeks, everyone probably knows his or her name, some details. Depending on how long they were boxed, they might know more.

I tend to have my character assume a certain familiarity with new people, and just try to work them in as if we at least passingly know eachother. No one's a stranger here.

So are you being extra nice OOC to make sure the players involved are ok with your antagonism?