Optional Realities & Project Redshift

surreality

@Thenomain said:

as what tends to happen when people are more concerned with enforcing rules than using the rules to enable gameplay.

Yep. It's one of the big reasons that I'm opposed to over-policing "theme" and other peoples' roleplay. Micro-managing players is a slippery slope to No-Fun-for-Anyone Town.

Policy should create options for players and not reduce options for players. That can also mean making sure that staff aren't playing the leadership characters in a game, so that players can drive that bus themselves.

There are a lot of ways to go about it. Some are more heavy-handed than others.

I don't see telling someone 'there are no skyscrapers here, and no you can't build one just because you feel like it' as heavy-handed if skyscrapers don't suit the setting.

When discussing setting cohesiveness -- as @Groth was -- what you can and can't do is entirely relevant. That's part of world-building, and plenty of RPG systems MUXes are built on already have a giant mountain of 'can't do' all over them. Every game decides which parts of those systems to use.

Using WoD as an example, if you are making a game in the Arctic designed for werewolves hunting down The Thing, and it says so on the tin, you are generally going to say no to the player who wants to come in and play a vampire running a sun-and-surf beach resort there because that's not the game you're running, because that player is out there. They are not looking for that game, they're looking for a game that will let them do that thing, and if yours isn't it, and if you don't say: 'no, that isn't going to work here', you can say goodbye to whatever coherent world-building you've done, for the most part.

Thenomain

@surreality said:

Using WoD as an example, if you are making a game in the Arctic designed for werewolves hunting down The Thing, and it says so on the tin, you are generally going to say no to the player who wants to come in and play (etc. etc.)

This shouldn't be a rule. It should be a definition of playing an RPG. You follow theme and setting. If you don't want to follow theme and setting, please find your entertainment elsewhere.

surreality

@Thenomain Exactly. That isn't 'shutting down player options'.

Shang is a brilliant example of what happens when anything is permitted. Cohesive theme? They try. Some people pay attention to it. Most don't.

We still had people on Reno showing up and asking if they could pretty please play a Strix (which is not even a character class) in the source material. We still had people asking to play mages, which, while they are a character class, were not in play. (And so on.)

il-volpe

@Thenomain said:

This shouldn't be a rule. It should be a definition of playing an RPG. You follow theme and setting. If you don't want to follow theme and setting, please find your entertainment elsewhere.

Cue 'Fight Club' clip of Marla Singer walking into the testicular cancer support group, "This is cancer, right?"

Cue me getting yelled at by players who are mad that I refuse to approve them to play an elf or a French princess on a Game of Thrones MU.

surreality

@il-volpe said:

@Thenomain said:

This shouldn't be a rule. It should be a definition of playing an RPG. You follow theme and setting. If you don't want to follow theme and setting, please find your entertainment elsewhere.

Cue 'Fight Club' clip of Marla Singer walking into the testicular cancer support group, "This is cancer, right?"

Cue me getting yelled at by players who are mad that I refuse to approve them to play an elf or a French princess on a Game of Thrones MU.

Yeah, this is pretty much the #1 factor when it comes to 'how to keep theme cohesive'. What you don't let in the door in the first place is not just an important step, it's an important signal re: no you can't just do whatever you goddamn please.

Frankly, if anyone feels too restricted by 'no, you can't drop your porn palace glitterbomb of celebrity starlet hookers and their international cartel-running boyfriends who hobnob with celebrities from Hollywood in this town that is too small for a McDonald's', I... well, I can't say I'm going to miss them.

The type of player who can't come up with a concept other than this tends to be a giant ball of OOC drama anyway. Plenty of totally cool people play these in appropriate settings and have no trouble playing something sane that isn't that when that option isn't available. It isn't the concept itself. It's 'but I have to play that and I won't play anything else!!!' that's a red flag in my book.

SparklesTheClown

I don't mind WoD, but a lot of the times I've played WoD games, I've felt as if the theme was significantly less cohesive than the games I typically spend most of my time on. This isn't really a product of WoD in of itself, but there's just a jarring amount of inconsistency and zero quality control that makes it difficult for me to care beyond casual RP. (Disclaimer: I haven't played Eldritch or Fallcoast yet.)

There's a thin line between unnecessary theme policing and quality control. Mega Man MUSH for example, which probably has the most defined MUSH theme at the moment (By virtue of having existed for like ten years and still being insanely active), keeps a level of continuity. If something gets destroyed, it's destroyed, if something gets built, it gets built. But it needs to make sense (The game has moved away from the old days of blowing up a city every other week).

Generally it's a good idea to ask staff before wanting to build a skyscraper (Which is not something you're going to be able to just magically do over night, or with questionable resources), trying to introduce some sort of new science, and other things like that. Of course just dicking around with minor inventions is allowed, because it ultimately doesn't affect much and isn't all that theme breaking if you have a grasp of the already existing technology.

But either way, my point is, I have trouble investing in a game that doesn't even invest in itself. Is there a hard, easily quantifiable line between theme policing and quality control? I'm not really sure. But I do know it when I see it. I don't mind having patience and not being able to do certain things right away, since being able to do certain things -immediately- (build a skyscraper), make no goddamned sense. Especially when you're building a skyscraper in a small town.

I will say that this might largely be my own personal preference, I don't know if anyone agrees with me on this. But when I join a game, I want to care about the theme. I want to feel like what I'm doing matters, that certain things have to be worked for. Not like I can just spend the XP and then bam, I have what I want. It's so completely and utterly dull for me. It's like role-play junk food. Instant gratification.

I know that a lot of people have a poor opinion of the game due to its past, but quality control, consistency, and having to actually work for things and having a sense of fulfillment when my characters work for their goals, is why I spend so much time in Mega Man MUSH. I could get into pretty much -any- theme if it worked like that.

That's just my two cents, on what I prefer when it comes to running and making a theme feel alive. Some people might think "But I don't want people deciding what I can and can't do", which I guess is a valid preference (This is why my BFF has never played in a MU).

But I honestly think that anyone would feel more fulfilled if they didn't just have instant gratification, had to really sit down and learn the theme, and felt like, "Alright, this will be my goal, I can't wait to see what happens when I try to pursue this", rather than being entirely in control of the outcome and all of the variables surrounding it.

Who wouldn't want to feel like they can impact the world and have their character actually gain legitimate fame or infamy beyond a small group that happens to be involved with a PRP?

Jaunt

@Thenomain said:

@surreality said:

Using WoD as an example, if you are making a game in the Arctic designed for werewolves hunting down The Thing, and it says so on the tin, you are generally going to say no to the player who wants to come in and play (etc. etc.)

This shouldn't be a rule. It should be a definition of playing an RPG. You follow theme and setting. If you don't want to follow theme and setting, please find your entertainment elsewhere.

It's a little easier to manage this with RPIs than the MUSHes I've run, in my experience, because more of the "micro-management" is hard-coded. For instance, to build a building in an RPI requires you gathering the necessary resources and crafting the building (the individual rooms, the furniture that goes inside, etc). If my game doesn't have skyscrapers, then I just don't create crafts to build skyscrapers.

If my game doesn't have elves, then they just aren't a selectable race when you're creating your character application.

So there's definitely a little bit more policing that needs to happen with MUSHes due to their communal-building aspect. Still, I always feel compelled to use a light hand with such. It's a fine line to walk between the following, and some games/admins do it better than others:

"No, you can't play a female dwarf in my 1970s NYC period noir game, because dwarves don't exist in that world and it's completely inappropriate."

Should be common sense, but players will be players.

"No, you can't play a Vietnamese immigrant baker in my 1970s NYC period noir game, because that character would have no reason to get involved in the meta-plot of Italian gangs vs Irish gangs vs the NYPD."

Well, who'm I to say whether or not that character couldn't find an interesting hook into the story? I suppose I'm in charge, but that seems too narrow-minded to me.

@HelloProject said:

There's a thin line between unnecessary theme policing and quality control.

SparklesTheClown

@Jaunt When people start saying "BUT THIS RACE WOULD NOT BE INVOLVED WITH THIS THING IN THIS PERIOD", I get some serious red flags about a game and the intelligence of the people running it. I guarantee that they don't know anywhere near as much about history as they think they do, and when you call them on it with proof, they freak the fuck out.

To be honest, in a MUSH you don't really -need- these coded things that an RPI has. Don't get me wrong, I love RPIs and all, but in a -good- MUSH what races you can and can't be should be pretty apparent. Exceptions to the rule largely spawn from either plot, canon, or someone bothering to look into the in-depth theme of the game, as a good MUSH isn't entirely inflexible. But just making shit up without any in-universe logic behind it is pretty much just breaking common sense. It happens, and it's not something that should even remotely trip up good staff members to say no to.

Yeah, in an RPI it's cool to be able to collect stuff and then say "I'm gonna build this", but I think that it's significantly more fulfilling to have to actually work toward what you want within a narrative (Granted, I haven't played a -lot- of RPIs, so maybe you have different experiences). If you just collect some sticks and build a skyscraper in a day, it breaks my suspension of disbelief super hard. And I say this as someone who plays a game with a man made completely out of tofu, because there is no limit to the blasphemies of Umbrella Corporation.

I think a good MUSH should generally run on some level of common sense based on that universe's logic. Good staffers won't have much trouble enforcing this, and good players will generally adapt to that or leave. I say this as someone who has played in lots of places that functioned this way plenty of times.

If something isn't clear from the documentation, all a player has to do is ask, "Here is my logic, can I do this thing?", and all a staffer has to do is say yes or no, and if no, explain why so that the player understands the game a bit more. A MUSH, to me, should be somewhat fluid, which is much easier to do when your theme is very detailed and defined. Once you set your boundaries and limitations, then you know how flexible you can be, and how your theme can grow beyond those limitations in future plots and such.

I think that on some level, this is the problem with WoD games. They shove in like 50 books, while boundaries and limitations are seen as weaknesses because having as many players as possible matters more than having a coherent theme. Actually being able to manage the theme, make all of the big stuff happening feel as if it should matter to the entire MUSH, it seems nearly impossible in a theme like that. If people are blowing shit up, assassinating vampire kings and shit, and half the game has no idea that any of this is going on? There's something wrong.

Comic MU*s are similar. These days it's all about sticking Marvel and DC together. Rather than having a single established universe, an entirely new and not anywhere near as defined universe is created. Players come in unfamiliar and disconnected, and you have a bunch of groups with similar narratives that somehow have to play together in the same universe now. This isn't to say that Marvel or DC don't have groups with similar narratives within their own universes, it's at least more defined how they play together in the same universe.

Focusing on fitting as much stuff into a single game as possible, to get as many players as possible, is a mistake. Trying to define your focus and your world, and actually give people something to care about, should always be the priority.

This is why I don't play many games for a long period of time anymore, and focus on just a few. I don't care about having a fancy sandbox, I want to play in a world. The trend lately seems to be fancy sandboxes where everyone can do anything but almost nothing matters.

Jaunt

@HelloProject said:

If you just collect some sticks and build a skyscraper in a day, it breaks my suspension of disbelief super hard.

Yeah, absolutely. It's all about good design vs bad design for both types of game.

Large building projects in RPIs can be designed to just be "type this thing a couple of times and you'll have a fort in a day". They can also be designed so that you have to work with a group of other characters to build your new area, require roleplay from the characters as they build (not hard to softcode this pre-requisite in most of the engines), put a cap on the amount of work that can be done in a single "day" so that it takes a believable amount of time to finish the project, and (depending on the setting) create scripted obstacles that might randomly get in the way of building. You can make the materials necessary for building require players to work together (and therefor, roleplay together) to be able to go out and get those materials. You can make those sorts of things collaborative by design.

SparklesTheClown

@Jaunt There is one thing I'm curious about, in my limited experience with RPIs.

Like, I'm not sure if the theme of an RPI generally experiences growth? I'm not saying they don't, this is an actual question. Like, if you could introduce some new technology to the theme, work your way up to starting a faction that addresses a problem that wasn't previously a focus for any factions (Assuming that a particular game has factions, of course). Or even the overall death of a faction once it's run its course and outlived its narrative usefulness.

Is it possible for RPIs to function in such a way, or are they generally more static and focused on preserving the theme, but allowing players to grow/rise in ranks/have political intrigue within the established climate of the game?

Jaunt

@HelloProject said:

@Jaunt There is one thing I'm curious about, in my limited experience with RPIs.

Like, I'm not sure if the theme of an RPI generally experiences growth? I'm not saying they don't, this is an actual question. Like, if you could introduce some new technology to the theme, work your way up to starting a faction that addresses a problem that wasn't previously a focus for any factions (Assuming that a particular game has factions, of course). Or even the overall death of a faction once it's run its course and outlived its narrative usefulness.

Is it possible for RPIs to function in such a way, or are they generally more static and focused on preserving the theme, but allowing players to grow/rise in ranks/have political intrigue within the established climate of the game?

It depends on the game, largely. IMO, the good ones are more than just a sandbox. I've ran two RPIs that approached the issue differently:

SOI Northlands/Mines of Moria. Back in the golden era of Shadows of Isildur, new regions were opened up frequently to allow for new meta-plots and more player options. It worked really well when SOI was very popular, and far less well when its numbers dropped. The typical progression was that new regions would open up, and eventually, player/staff meta-plot would lead to their closure so that new regions could open up once more; sometimes that closure could be the culmination of some cataclysmic event, and sometimes it could be a more subtle/nuanced ending to that area's story. Sometimes, it was abrupt and jarring. Different admins ran different regions independently, so the game actually varied broadly between regions in terms of themes (and quality).
Atonement, which is probably what I'm best known for in the RPI Community. I wanted to create a game and story that was a little more like a television show, with "seasons" (that I called campaigns). Each season would change and expand the scope of the over-all story to keep things fresh, but they all tied into telling one story that was designed to have a beginning, middle, and end -- all driven by players.

Season One: It started off with characters waking up from cryo-sleep aboard a derelict colony ship floating in space, with amnesia. It wasn't long before they realized they weren't alone (introduce the "Genetic Terrors" or "Our Zombies Are Unique"). The majority of the first season involved the characters trying to survive (and largely failing), being manipulated by the Terror's Queen, and trying to learn more about who they are and what they are doing out in space.

Season Two: The characters managed to take control of the ship and crash-landed on the Moon, where they found that, while Earth was unhabitable, humanity had survived (if barely) on a partially terraformed Luna. The survivors integrated with a wasteland society living in "Grungetown". Of course, they brought the Genetic Terrors with them, and ultimately, the Moon was overrun and the last bastion of survivors left on a repaired colony ship with hopes of finding other humans elsewhere in the solar system.

Season Three: After searching a nearby space station they believed might house a thriving human society, they found nothing but more answers and more questions, and finally realized that they truly were the last of the human race. In fact, the Genetic Terrors had already been there, and once again they pitched a battle for survival against their pursuers. They ultimately escaped.

Season Four: They landed on Mars after finding evidence that there was a human colony there, too. All they found were dust and eerie remnants of a colony that had fallen into decadence, and had chosen to stop trying to live rather than find a way off of Mars. Digging and exploring further, they learned that what they'd thought was some sort of supernatural phenomenon was actually the appearance of windows into an alternate universe, caused by an energy source experiment gone wrong on Mars. In this other universe, they saw living versions of themselves and the MANY characters that had died throughout the course of the game. While their "alternates" weren't always doing well, overall it was clear that the alternate universe had defeated the Genetic Terrors and survived. For many characters, they saw a world where they were happy. They also learned that humans engineered the "Genetic Terrors" as a sort of weapon, and that it had backfired on them. They were, themselves, responsible for their own downfall.

In the end, the Genetic Terrors hunted them down to Mars, and the players had to choose: do we try to break through the "windows" and escape into the alternate universe (would there be a season five)? Or do we fight (and most likely, die) to keep the Genetic Terrors from invading the alternate universe?

They chose to hide the alternate universe and fight, and Atonement ended with the death of the last remnants of man-kind in an epic space battle. Characters received glimpses of their alternate lives, and their sacrifice to protect a better version of their world was their "Atonement" (wah wah).

Only one of the four seasons featured any staff-created clans or NPC leadership at all. Players created their own clans/factions. In fact, one of the coolest things about the first season was watching hundreds of characters with amnesia and no idea what was going on, and then beaming with pride as they began to establish order and create a strange, but believable society on board the derelict ship --- 100% through roleplay.

Atonement was very popular and lasted for a little over three years. It didn't close because of burn-out or lack of player interest, but because its story was over. Some TV shows last for too many seasons, and their story suffers for it. I was actually rather happy with this campaign/season approach, as it allowed us to continually change things up -- but also tell a tight, focused, awesome story.

Having said all of that ... there are also RPIs that are just sandboxes. Immersive sandboxes, often-times, but not a lot changes on them. Some players actually prefer the "slice of life" approach to things, which is totally cool -- but that's just not me, or the sort of game that I like to make.

surreality

@HelloProject said:

Focusing on fitting as much stuff into a single game as possible, to get as many players as possible, is a mistake. Trying to define your focus and your world, and actually give people something to care about, should always be the priority.
This is why I don't play many games for a long period of time anymore, and focus on just a few. I don't care about having a fancy sandbox, I want to play in a world. The trend lately seems to be fancy sandboxes where everyone can do anything but almost nothing matters.

This is pretty much my concern.

Re: fame -- it has to do with the way the stat works. It has 3 rankings, roughly translating to: regional, national, worldwide. It is supposed to be restricted to a reasonable niche, but people go for the biggest niches they can find. It is super-inexpensive as a stat, and each level gives you +1 to all social interactions with anyone who would have heard of you. If I had a nickel for any 'Bumblefuck by Night' game crammed to the gills with internationally famous movie starlets, I could probably pay for a month of hosting. That is hopelessly implausible for the place I'm building and I'm not going to let it happen. Is this 'restricting players'? I'm sure the long-lost elven princesses will think so. And not one single fuck was given this day.

What isn't implausible for a small town where everyone is into everybody's business is to scale it down. Regional is now the top end (or a very specific niche for national). Think of a band that's big in your region and plays everywhere all the time, but no one has heard of on the opposite coast or maybe was a one hit wonder everywhere else or is just big overseas and in your specific area, or someone known nationwide for something not everybody on the planet knows about as an example. That's the +3 level, 'cause nobody in this town is Brad Pitt or the president of the US, nor would they be. The +1 level is 'that lady who always wins the pie-baking contest every damn year', etc. +2 is your classic small town harvest queen that year that everyone fawns over, a popular radio DJ, etc.

Because that's what makes sense. I'm generally not inclined to break theme for everyone to satisfy a small group of players' wish-fulfillment fantasies.

SparklesTheClown

@Jaunt Atonement actually sounds amazing. It's -veeeery- similar to String Theory, a dystopian future Heroes MUX (Based on the TV show Heroes). We had "seasons", though it was both player and staff driven, it was extremely successful.

It had a planned ending and got to the final season of things, though the nature of the theme meant that it wasn't an entirely loose-end tying climax. To celebrate the anniversary, one of the main plot runners wrote up a pretty interesting thing about the nature of the ending, which was fun.

That's really cool though, even though sad (I like happy endings because I'm a sappy bastard). I could definitely see playing something like Atonement.

@surreality I didn't mean fame the stat. Fame as a stat honestly doesn't make sense to me. It's like saying "I'm famous because I have a certain number in this stat". I prefer organic fame, where you're legitimately known and a big deal because you actually did shit in the game and the world ICly has a reason to care. This is obviously only possible in a game with an actually coherent world, though.

The -only- way that I think fame as a stat should be gained is by actually doing shit, and getting rewarded fame by staff as a result. If you're going to be a celebrity, then work for it. If you're going to be some famous hero or whatever, then do shit. But fame as a stat in a game with no coherency or consistency is completely and utterly pointless.

But personally, if I was running a WoD game, I would completely abolish fame as a system, period. It would simply not exist. It's stupid. I'd keep influence for organizations, but that's all. If you want to be famous, do shit. If people don't know who you are and don't care about you, you're not famous.

surreality

@HelloProject said:

But personally, if I was running a WoD game, I would completely abolish fame as a system, period. It would simply not exist. It's stupid. I'd keep influence for organizations, but that's all. If you want to be famous, do shit. If people don't know who you are and don't care about you, you're not famous.

That was the original plan. There was... really quite a lot of screaming. And unfortunately I know a handful of people in the real region the place is based on who, in their niches, are actually known world-wide. It's just that they're known for things that the vast majority of people have probably never heard of -- creating an especially sought after microbrew, being an internationally-known yarn-dyer, one I know of no longer there but had been for a while was/is the heir to a major DuPont patent... niche for that level is super niche and I really have no objections to people making characters like that.

It's reasonable enough to keep it low level and enforce the niche factor, and justifications/background foo will be required.

SparklesTheClown

@surreality said:

That was the original plan. There was... really quite a lot of screaming.

Honestly, that's one of the pitfalls of the WoD community, I feel like. People devolve to screaming and mob rule because it -works-. On some level staff needs to be willing to say fuck off when it comes to decisions that could possibly be good for the game, and not get held back by people who piss their pants at the idea of trying something new.

surreality

@HelloProject said:

@surreality said:

That was the original plan. There was... really quite a lot of screaming.

Honestly, that's one of the pitfalls of the WoD community, I feel like. People devolve to screaming and mob rule because it -works-. On some level staff needs to be willing to say fuck off when it comes to decisions that could possibly be good for the game, and not get held back by people who piss their pants at the idea of trying something new.

There's going to be a lot of that anyway, that much I'm sure of. I pick my hills to die on, and the lines are in sensible places appropriate for the game.

God help the first person who screams for a megayacht for their hollywood starlet, though, because they'll have the book thrown at them.

Jaunt

@surreality

You can always go the fun route of introducing an STD "plot" to deal with the starlets. It's LOL every time.

surreality

@Jaunt said:

@surreality

You can always go the fun route of introducing an STD "plot" to deal with the starlets. It's LOL every time.

Nah, since it has too much of a 'wrongfun' vibe for an RPG that does heavily feature sex and seduction in its real thematic elements. The 'sit around TSing all day thing' has zero to do with the type in question, it's the thematic thing.

It would, for instance, be hilariously thematic for the locals to get drunk, head out to lover's lane, and screw like bunnies because there's nothing else to do. There absolutely will be things for people to do in the game because of the game themes, but if you think of your classic podunk town where there's nothing else to do but that? That would be this town. They don't draw movie starlets by the truckload.

Most folks go for 'big enough city to allow for anything'. I fell in love with a real place because it was so chock full of classic horror movie tropes and unintentional references (like a real 'Crystal Lake' covered in camps) that it begged to become a game setting for that vibe, which isn't modern gritty urban horror covered in slick neon, it's campy 80s-90s horror film horror, which often enough involves just such places, and just such people going off to Lover's Lane because they're bored (only to find themselves the new seed of a local urban legend when something staggers out of the brush and chases them off again or eats them).

Anytown by Night has been done, and a number of players just port their character from one to the next whether they fit or not. That makes me sad, because one of the truly amazing things about this hobby is the chance to make new things and tell new stories. I just felt no need to pick a place for people to tell different permutations of that story again.

Jaunt

@surreality said:

Anytown by Night has been done, and a number of players just port their character from one to the next whether they fit or not. That makes me sad, because one of the truly amazing things about this hobby is the chance to make new things and tell new stories. I just felt no need to pick a place for people to tell different permutations of that story again.

It's the same problem in all mediums, really. Broadway, television, film, games -- they all struggle to tell new stories instead of rehashing old ones. It's challenging, and easier for players to just do what they've done (and enjoyed) before. Especially players who are looking for a slice-of-life sort of game fall into this trap often. I don't think it's purposeful for them, half of the time.

While it's somewhat inevitable for a lot of players, I do think that you can help mitigate the problem by giving them unique situations to react to, original personal challenges to overcome, and potential hooks for behavior/perspective-changing events. In my experience, some players are just going to ignore that so that they can sandbox and live out wish-fulfillment, but others will take the bait and find a new way forward with their rehashed concept.

I tend to like to create games that are pretty grim. One great thing about that (for me), is that it makes my games less attractive to people who want to roleplay happy, successful, super-awesome versions of themselves. There are better games for them to do that on.

ETA: And what you're doing, creating an environment that's not been done to death, is a great first step. I always like to think about 'surprise', too. When players aren't being surprised, then they're basically just walking through a story in their head for which they already know the ending. That's one aspect of a GM approach that can work wonders; you can kick players off of their straight, well-paved road, and then let them explore the surrounding woods. Who knows what they might find in there?

SparklesTheClown

@surreality You seem like you have a mindset that could actually get me to give a shit about and invest in WoD.