Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?

[faraday]

@ganymede Treat is a one-time thing. There's also the heal command which augments healing, but works differently than you'd expect for a healing potion/spell. It wouldn't be hard to add but you would have to do something custom.

[Three-Eyed Crow]

@ganymede
Admittedly, my brain goes to 'a little bit of immediate healing' as comparable to what a healing potion does. You do only get one shot with a particular wound during combat, though (if I'm dimly recalling how it works), so it might not be suited to your needs if you want to try and reapply it several times (there's +healing the doctor-types do outside combat that speeds healing but that might not also be quite what you'd want).

[Ganymede]

@three-eyed-crow @faraday

In the Final Fantasy world, being healed from near death to full status is a regular thing, actually.

Not that I really mind it the way it is, though. On Fifth Kingdom, my PC was near-legendary for his ability to continually being KO'd in combat, only to be healed by a healer and back in the action a moment later. I think in one combat I was KO'd 4 times.

Good times.

Anyhow, yeah. FS3 could work. Needs tweaking. But could work.

[faraday]

@Ganymede @Three-Eyed-Crow Yeah, 'treat' represents first aid. It's a one-time thing (you can't bandage a wound three times and expect to get better results) and it only gives you 1 healing point (negligible in terms of how fast you heal, but important in combat because it reduces damage modifiers). But all you really need is to either modify that command's behavior or make a different command that could be used multiple times and/or gave you more healing points each time.

[DariRyu]

I apologize for expressing that unpopular opinion. I didn't realize consent-based roleplay was so incredibly universally hated and reviled here. I have deleted the post in question, and I will refrain from expressing any other such views.

I would like to express more personal apologies to @Admiral since I seem to have personally offended him/her with my opinion; for this person to "not" attack me on such a personal level indicates that what I said was deeply upsetting. For this I extend my deepest apologies.

Once again, I apologize for bringing up a subject that was uncomfortable for so many people.

[Auspice]

@dariryu said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

I apologize for expressing that unpopular opinion. I didn't realize consent-based roleplay was so incredibly universally hated and reviled here. I have deleted the post in question, and I will refrain from expressing any other such views.

Once again, I apologize for bringing up a subject that was uncomfortable for so many people.

It was just two people and one was... rather unreasonable in their response. There's actually a lot of folks around here who don't mind consent-based roleplay at all.

It may be that people have trouble imagining it working well, long-term, for Final Fantasy (I admit to be one of them), but the concept in general is not reviled.

[Ganymede]

@dariryu said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

I apologize for expressing that unpopular opinion. I didn't realize consent-based roleplay was so incredibly universally hated and reviled here. I have deleted the post in question, and I will refrain from expressing any other such views.

I would prefer that you express your views because they are legitimate. My response was merely to point out that proposed FS3 system isn't a PvP system, and that not all systems are PvP systems.

I like consent-based games, and have played on several. That said, everyone that I know who plays on FS3 games like the fact that most of it is by consent. What FS3 is really good at is large-scale PvE where you have a large volume of people and do not want the predictability that comes with consent-games.

So, to repeat: please keep posting! Differing perspectives and perceptions are important here.

[faraday]

@auspice said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

It was just two people and one was... rather unreasonable in their response. There's actually a lot of folks around here who don't mind consent-based roleplay at all.

Yeah, I'd dare anyone to find a single post on MSB favoring consent-based games that wasn't immediately met with snark, disdain, cries of "wrongfun" and/or insults about "wusses who just can't stand to lose".

@DariRyu you're not alone. I personally prefer consent games too. But yes, it is a distinctly minority opinion around here.

[Ganymede]

@faraday said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

Yeah, I'd dare anyone to find a single post on MSB favoring consent-based games that wasn't immediately met with snark, disdain, cries of "wrongfun" and/or insults about "wusses who just can't stand to lose".

Sure. Here's a good thread: http://musoapbox.net/topic/1713/naruto-mush-legacy/20

In addition, there's even a post in there about how the proposed system isn't really consent-based, and that it really should be.

But, that's just one thread. Everything else you said is mostly true.

(I just wanted to look.)

[Three-Eyed Crow]

@DariRyu
I started on consent-based games. Some were good! Some were terrible! It is a mixed bag, as with all things in life. I'll still play them if I find one that appeals to me, though I prefer games with some sort of conflict resolution system even if it's minimal and loosely used.

[Lithium]

I prefer systems. Consent based is to much like cowboys and indians, or cops and robbers for me. Most of the time.

There are a few genre's where /mostly/ consent based works fine.

I just don't see Final Fantasy as one of them.

[Tempest]

@dariryu I'd just ignore Admiral. His apparent burning need to have systems to beat other players with should say all you need to know.

@Lithium Of all the settings there are, I have to say, I really don't get what it is about Final Fantasy of all things that makes you think it particularly shouldn't be consent based. "Gritty, hardcore player vs player mechanical combat with consequences" isn't really what comes to mind when I think "Final Fantasy MUSH". I mean, we've all seen FF and Disney in the same universe.

On another note, somebody give me something besides a trainwreck multiverse-trashcan type game where I can play Agrias, and I'll be your BFF.

[Lithium]

@tempest Final Fantasy is a level based grinder, most of the time, it is more akin to D&D in many of the iterations than anything else. Even so far as having prestige classes for some of them.

There are versions which are different of course but in the end I am not a fan of pure consent anything. Not even comic book games, I always prefer an actual dice system with a more codified means of character advancement.

Pure Consent, with no system at all... Well, needless to say, it's very off topic and probably would derail it's own thread if it had one.

[Tempest]

Final Fantasy Tactics MUSH with the grid/map system from the d20 Star Wars games, when?

[Bobotron]

@dariryu

Re: ALL THE FINAL FANTASIES MUSH.

This was tried a few years ago by the M3-circuit. It lasted about 4 months about 8 months and before the game actually shut down, had fairly collapsed under the sheer insanity of its own players and setting.

ETA: I forgot they actually closed-closed due to RPGWorks closing, but the faction implosion and player issues were a big deal with a lot of characters dropping.

[Bobotron]

@lithium
You can have consensual policies (like the ever-maligned 'conesensual death' policy where your PC can't die unless you want it to, or you violate other policies) and a stat system. Every Transformers MUSH I can recall (except for one) had stats and a full-blown combat system with consensual policies. Same with Megaman MUSH. Really, anything from that circuit.

[Tempest]

@bobotron said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

This was tried a few years ago by the M3-circuit. It lasted about 4 months and then collapsed under the sheer insanity of its own players and setting.

I want to play in stuff like Final Fantasy, or Super Robot settings but....

Without 90% of the people those kind of games tend to attract.

<_____<

[Bobotron]

@tempest
You have a limited pool of MUSHers that those settings and setups are going to attract. Unless you're really, REALLY good at dragging people into things that aren't their comfort zone.

ETA: If anyone seriously thinking about this wants to see how the other people mooshed everything together, their 'development blog' is here: http://ff-mush.livejournal.com/

[mietze]

I also prefer consent based (which can indeed have systems also, as far as negotiating/what you can accomplish, ect). But as others have said you will have people who for various reasons will totally lose their shit at such an idea. To be fair, people will lose their shit just as much (sometimes even the same people who hate consent-based and think it's for losers or whatever) at systems that take away some player autonomy over their PCs actions (the dreaded social skills) and claim that only they should have any say in how their PC reacts to anything.

So honestly I think the vast majority of folks here that I've seen DO actually /prefer/ limited consent, or capped non-consent, take your pick.

[Seraphim73]

@ganymede said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

FS3, as a system, is not capable of handling PvP competitiveness -- at least, not to the complication that many people who do like PvP will get much, if any, benefit. What FS3 does well, however, is simulate a battle scenario with two sides, which may be unbalanced number-wise, and figure out the outcome on a per-turn basis.

Two OR MORE sides!

@faraday said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

Y'know, except the one who shot my archer in the head

That was an NPC, wasn't it? Or was it a PC? Huh... now I don't remember. I think they were all too busy shooting the Tank-lady.

More off-topic yay!

I wonder if a Fast and the Furious/street racer/something like that game could work.