The Desired Experience

[Sunny]

@arkandel

I mean in a perfect world, the Prince is played by somebody who can only RP once every third month to begin with outside of scheduled 'court' type scenes, anyway -- your vampire sphere is a LOT more healthy without having the head honcho about and engaged. Bad leaders are WAY better for creating RP and conflict than good ones.

Playing with the sheriff for the things the sheriff is assigned to do might not hit as hard, but it's way better for the health of the sphere. If your sphere is designed that it can't function without the head honcho breathing down everyone's necks, your problem isn't them taking a vacation.

[Arkandel]

@sunny At that point the Prince (or whoever) should probably not be a regular PC. Make the bit staff-only - a glorified NPC.

Then the issue is solved since when a scene is warranted the character is available. The drawback is making sure staff keep track of what they are doing with that bit to make sure they don't contradict each other when the staff member behind the Prince changes.

[Pyrephox]

@sunny said in The Desired Experience:

@arkandel

I mean in a perfect world, the Prince is played by somebody who can only RP once every third month to begin with outside of scheduled 'court' type scenes, anyway -- your vampire sphere is a LOT more healthy without having the head honcho about and engaged. Bad leaders are WAY better for creating RP and conflict than good ones.

Bolded for emphasis. Absolutely. And I DO tend to think, these days, that the Head Honchos should be NPCs. PCs get too invested in things going 'right', or blaming IC leaders for things going 'wrong', and they often have this utopian ideal of how an org/sphere "should" be run that basically results in systemic burnout from leaders, and constant bitching from non-leaders.

Make the head honcho an NPC who does not give a shit about people's kvetching, who has major, interesting flaws that drive story, and who is there primarily to maintain your theme and push plot. Sometimes by being terrible. Sometimes by cutting through bullshit. Sometimes by not wanting to deal with something and so appointing a few random PCs to 'sort it out and tell me when it's finished'.

[Arkandel]

@pyrephox It's kinda of a MUSH trope for bad NPC leaders to be so bad they need to be toppled over and replaced. And they are! So many authoritative Princes, inept Kings and assorted leaders who slip into a coma.

Then once a perfect leader emerges among PCs it's back to perfection. But you're right on the money.

[Derp]

How often do you engage with royalty?

Why should vampires, or anyone else, expect more access?

There are well established protocols and traditions and chains of command for exactly this kind of thing. Your NPC leaders should be distant and have an unassailable aura and plenty of clout. Knocking over the damn king should be difficult, even if they are bad. It is not a democracy. It is a story boundary, and an important one to keep under staff control.

[Ominous]

I recently started thinking about faction design, and I have debated going with a looser faction than what most MU*s have with factions. Instead of noble houses or groups with a defined leader, I am thinking that factions need to be more akin to political parties and interest groups. Biden is the head of the Democratic Party, but the actual sway he holds is minimal and others can stamp out a position contrary to his and win the hearts of minds of members. Unlike a Noble house where the head of the house can disown you and remove you.

With these looser factions you can have some tenets that are immutable for the faction and then a bunch of less firm doctrines. GM staff will have the NPCs react to things based on the tenets and doctrines but the doctrines can be changed over time by the PCs. If a PC is doing something against a tenet or a bunch of doctrines, then they'll lose influence and disregarded. This gives room for jockeying within the faction between PCs and also solves the absent leader problem.

[Sunny]

@arkandel said in The Desired Experience:

@sunny At that point the Prince (or whoever) should probably not be a regular PC. Make the bit staff-only - a glorified NPC.

Then the issue is solved since when a scene is warranted the character is available. The drawback is making sure staff keep track of what they are doing with that bit to make sure they don't contradict each other when the staff member behind the Prince changes.

I mean yes, but that's an entirely different conversation. The point is that the bottleneck is the problem, and the expectation that the leader PCs have to be available for your trivial bullshit is the problem. You shouldn't need the prince (sheriff, deputy, count, baron) to advance your story, and if your story can't advance because you can't get access to <insert key character here> then that is a design failure, not a failure of <insert key character here>. Whether they're a leader PC or not.

The reason you (general) can't get and keep a good Great Pumpkin player long term is that you make them far, far, far, far, far too responsible for the fun of other people, and there's a community problem with expectations and availability (see: geek social fallacies).

Think of all of the reasons you come up with as to why the Great Pumpkin has to be accessible to more than four people.

Now, think of other ways to address those problems, that don't involve making the Great Pumpkin do things that they're not really into doing, don't make them log in on their vacation, remove their ability to take a break.

NOW, you have begun to address this issue with game design, rather than foisting it off to something that will, 100%, lead to the burnout of the very players you want to keep.

It's completely possible to address this as staff instead of passing the buck, but many mushes absolutely refuse to do this and instead go 'well if they want the benefits of playing one of these characters, they have to deal with the responsibilities, too'.

News flash: if you think playing a leader PC is more benefit than it is a headache for any halfway reasonable, responsible player who is capable of doing a good job? You're dead wrong. The mythical "but you get so much RP! people beat down your door!" seems to completely forget that what you get is twelve peoples' worth of TRANSACTIONAL RP (where they are getting something from you), and it uses up every shred of the time you had, leaving NOTHING for non-transactional RP, let alone PERSONAL RP (do that too much, and people start bitching about your sandwiches).

We have learned on MANY occasions that making rules that punish the GOOD PLAYERS because of the actions of a small minority is a really bad idea. Yet, this is the same thing.

You are burning out or making ineligible the very people who you MOST want to have in these jobs, because they have lives, families, jobs, and things going on in their life that aren't the game. The people who can literally spend 24/7 on the mush are almost always (not always, but almost!) the people that YOU DO NOT WANT in these roles. You want people who take a measured approach OOC, are patient, and have a healthy perspective on just how important pretendy fun time is (see: both vital, and absolutely useless, at the same time).

They don't take the game too seriously. <--- this is key. If you're spending the bulk of your hobby/free time with a mush, with a specific game -- if this is your only outlet for the RPz or your only hobby, you are by the nature of brains going to take it REALLY seriously, and little problems (if you can't explain whatever it is over coffee with a non-RPing friend, it's a little problem) become HUGE.

But stringent activity requirements and rules about leader PCs interacting with the people they're responsible for...self-select AWAY from people who don't take the game seriously.

[reversed]

@sunny said in The Desired Experience:

News flash: if you think playing a leader PC is more benefit than it is a headache for any halfway reasonable, responsible player who is capable of doing a good job? You're dead wrong. The mythical "but you get so much RP! people beat down your door!" seems to completely forget that what you get is twelve peoples' worth of TRANSACTIONAL RP (where they are getting something from you), and it uses up every shred of the time you had, leaving NOTHING for non-transactional RP, let alone PERSONAL RP (do that too much, and people start bitching about your sandwiches).

This was the situation I found myself in on one leader PC recently -- 90% of my RP was "people coming to my PC to ask if they can do something without me, or tell me they plan to do something without me, or ask me to talk to someone else about something that happened without me, or tell me about some stuff that happened without me," 10% was personal RP, 100% was RP in and around my character's house, 0% was RP that made me feel plugged in to the metaplot/game story/whatever as an active participant instead of "someone who gets told about the stuff other people do."

So I got burned out and put up a bbpost saying "I'm not doing 1-on-1 meeting scenes anymore, I just don't have time. @mail me if you want to bring something to my attention, I'll @mail you back."

So now no one asks me for RP and no one @mails me. I sure showed them!

[il-volpe]

@derp said in The Desired Experience:

Why should vampires, or anyone else, expect more access?

Because Vampire is supposedly a game where the win friends and influence people element is important, and specific MUs often advertise that this is what the faction play is focused on. You can't lick asses that aren't there.

[il-volpe]

And, come to think of it, there's a city of four hundred and sixty five thousand people, I live outside the city limits. Yet I am still able to go annoy the mayor with my opinions weekly or more, if I should feel so inclined. Presumably said mayor has some obligation to allow me to do this and a vampire prince does not, but even at ten times the canon population for vampires the prince has all of 40 subjects. Which is at least four times as many as can be expected to run a coffee-kiosk without an owner/manager showing up regularly and also far, far from the teeming multitudes lined up to see how Prince Charlie's teeth are holding up.

[Derp]

@il-volpe said in The Desired Experience:

@derp said in The Desired Experience:

Why should vampires, or anyone else, expect more access?

Because Vampire is supposedly a game where the win friends and influence people element is important, and specific MUs often advertise that this is what the faction play is focused on. You can't lick asses that aren't there.

And you think that the way to do that is to go directly to the top? Like it's some kind of democracy where you can hold the guy at the top accountable, and he doesn't just skin you semi-alive for being annoying and leave you staked in the sun?

I think that's more a failure of imagination, rather than a failure of availability.

[il-volpe]

@derp Who said directly? And who said anything about holding him accountable? I said ass-licking, FFS.

My experience has been that you cannot work your way to the top when neither the top nor most of the ladder rungs to get there are available. I've never encountered a game where a proxy prince was available. Either the prince was a PC or NPC one could RP with without it being a task to arrange, or the characters one could interact with enough to have a relationship of any depth topped out at primogen.

I have imagined it being otherwise, though, yes, thank you.

I think when you have the non-available prince and their supposedly available PC proxy, the proxy gets bored of having all the bother while being too pawn-like, and PCs still wish they could worm their way closer and closer to the Prince's ear without getting stopped by the OOC consideration of the prince not really being an 'on-screen' character.

[Kestrel]

Social desires:

I want to be respected. @Ganymede phrased this as 'I hope to entertain' and that resonates but I'll go a step further and admit that I have a certain need to be admired and appreciated. I rarely do things with intention to harm other people, but this is partly because if others feel bad because of me, I feel bad about myself; I want my contributions to add positive value.

I want healthy separation. Despite the above, what I want from the community is to feel wanted, not needed. If I start to feel like people are making demands of me or that my contributions are no longer seen as voluntary but an expectation I have to meet, I peace. I want the freedom to come and go as I please, RP with others outside of my usual circle, and choose what I participate in without being judged for what I choose not to. I never want to have to explain why I do or don't want to do something.

I want a "professional" relationship, with fellow members of the community being more akin to colleagues than friends. This is a controversial one, I'm aware. This relates especially to displays of affection and familiarity and especially one-to-one. My interest in engaging with someone communally or for RP purposes doesn't necessarily mean I want to engage with them individually for OOC purposes, and expressions of admiration on my part are not an offer of lower social/sexual/romantic boundaries between us. I take care not to invite the assumption that it should, and will avoid people who show signs of misinterpretation/desperation.

---

Personal desires:

I want to pursue omniscience in a world full of mystery. To find out what makes every character tick, what the relationships are between them and the overarching story. For this reason I tend to play spies, scientists, hackers and detective types — people who have an excuse to go digging or interrogate people one-to-one. When I get into romantic storylines, it's likely to be with a character I find complex and interesting to try and figure out, who throws me a lot of curveballs and maybe even starts out as a rival, so there's initial resistance to tease out curiosity. I avoid characters who come across as very flat or don't give me a lot to work with, and I avoid settings that feel too predictable.

I want social commentary. (I think this is also a controversial one.) The setting has to provide some room for ideological conflict that goes beyond just light vs. dark, good vs. evil, nice vs. bully. My characters aren't often a reflection of my RL values, in fact they'll often be the opposite specifically because I want to act as a foil, make people think and give people something to criticise.

I want shock, horror, awe, action, adventure, impossible choices and exceptional circumstances. Take me outside the confines of RL humdrum, I'm here for a thrill-ride. If I engage in bar RP it's to set up the connections/investment for when things go awry or to decompress/commiserate/celebrate whatever cool big thing we just survived. But I want what really drives and holds our IC relationships together to be those major events, not day-to-day or smalltalk.

I want tension tolerance. It's fine if our characters don't get along. It's fine if things don't always go our way. It's fine if our lovebirds won't get their happily ever after. It's fine (good actually) if the stakes feel high. It's fine if I can't cleanly put your character into a box of friend or enemy. I like it when things aren't straightforward and am comfortable with uncertainty, changing dynamics and unexpected roadblocks. Don't make things too easy for my character; it'll bore me and the story I'm pursuing is more often about the challenge they face than the finish line.

---

These are not all needs, some of these are just wants. And if other people communicate their needs, I will often be happy to accommodate as long as I'm likewise having fun. I'll adjust my playstyle to the setting, community, and my current RP partner and can slow-roll things until I understand their comfort levels. (I will default to the assumption that you don't want an epic rivalry, for instance, and keep things ICly cordial and fluffy until I get the go-ahead to assume otherwise.)

[Ganymede]

@il-volpe said in The Desired Experience:

I think when you have the non-available prince and their supposedly available PC proxy, the proxy gets bored of having all the bother while being too pawn-like, and PCs still wish they could worm their way closer and closer to the Prince's ear without getting stopped by the OOC consideration of the prince not really being an 'on-screen' character.

I think the above scenario is an example of (1) how stupid Vampire players' expectations often are; and (2) how infrequently staff actually instill the spirit of the game into the MUSH.

FFS, you're supposed to spend a lot of time not getting crushed.

[Tinuviel]

@ganymede said in The Desired Experience:

@il-volpe said in The Desired Experience:

I think when you have the non-available prince and their supposedly available PC proxy, the proxy gets bored of having all the bother while being too pawn-like, and PCs still wish they could worm their way closer and closer to the Prince's ear without getting stopped by the OOC consideration of the prince not really being an 'on-screen' character.

I think the above scenario is an example of (1) how stupid Vampire players' expectations often are; and (2) how infrequently staff actually instill the spirit of the game into the MUSH.

FFS, you're supposed to spend a lot of time not getting crushed.

Agreed. Vampire is a long game. "Getting to the top" takes hundreds of years. The best a player coterie can hope for is a rather thin slice of the influence and territory pie.

[Derp]

@tinuviel said in The Desired Experience:

@ganymede said in The Desired Experience:

@il-volpe said in The Desired Experience:

I think when you have the non-available prince and their supposedly available PC proxy, the proxy gets bored of having all the bother while being too pawn-like, and PCs still wish they could worm their way closer and closer to the Prince's ear without getting stopped by the OOC consideration of the prince not really being an 'on-screen' character.

I think the above scenario is an example of (1) how stupid Vampire players' expectations often are; and (2) how infrequently staff actually instill the spirit of the game into the MUSH.

FFS, you're supposed to spend a lot of time not getting crushed.

Agreed. Vampire is a long game. "Getting to the top" takes hundreds of years. The best a player coterie can hope for is a rather thin slice of the influence and territory pie.

[il-volpe]

This would be relevant if "getting to the top" in this context meant "occupying the top position" rather than "getting chances to personally ingratiate myself to my betters, or fuck up trying to do so." Maybe "getting at the top" would better serve.

[Derp]

@il-volpe said in The Desired Experience:

This would be relevant if "getting to the top" in this context meant "occupying the top position" rather than "getting chances to personally ingratiate myself to my betters, or fuck up trying to do so." Maybe "getting at the top" would better serve.

You keep moving the goalposts.

And I mean, I guess this is the place to talk about things you want as an ideal, desired experience, but -- I think the experience that you're looking for doesn't necessarily match up with what you're going to be able to find, on a couple of different levels now.

But it's good to get that kind of thing out there. Maybe there's a pocket out there with like-minded folks, but I think your desired experience is the outlier in this situation.

[il-volpe]

@derp From my POV, I'm not moving goalposts, I'm pointing out where you're jumping to conclusions.

I don't know what experience you think I am looking for, but I am pretty sure that it's a far cry from what I actually want or have said. I want to be able to get into a scene regularly even though all my old sandwich club have died or quit. This is my desired experience. I think people ought to try to facilitate that as best they can (rather than just dismissing it and assuming I'm not fun) and feel that it is best practice for staff to incentivise broader interactions and for inclusive and pro-community acts like inviting somebody you don't normally scene with to play to be valued. Somehow this was reframed into me wanting to tell other people who to play with. Don't ask me, I have a neurological disorder. So I can't guess what you think I'm saying I desire. What I've said I desire is to get to RP, and to have my RP have consequences. (Play too, agency.)

I don't have any skin in the prince thing. I'm generally against PC leaders in most cases for various reasons. I was just frickin' saying that the reason some Vampire players want to actually be able to interact with the IC Powers That Be is that some of them want to play the political game via acts of interpersonal manipulation.

ETA: PC leaders at prince-type level. at higher tiers. oh god now will you tell me how it's impossible to RP without a member of the group taking a leadership role

[Ghost]

@jeshin said in The Desired Experience:

@devrex

My desired experience is to escape the burdens of a dissatisfying work, family, and sex life to replace it with simulated romances that I carefully craft to fulfill my emotional needs. Then, should I find disappointment will attack it as a personal slight against me and then obsess over needing to find "safe" roleplay, which means pigeonholing my online activities to players and roleplay situations that will fulfill these needs, but do so under the guise of it being their fault and not mine.

TLDR - Roleplay is Escapism

Haha I didn't think this would happen. Cheers, bruh