@icanbeyourmuse said:
I don't think anyone would be forcing you to look and see what a person would have?
If the information is out there in the open it's no fun to find and hunt for it.
I wasn't aware how someone's numbers on a sheet was that super important. I mean, unless you want to munchkin it up.
@The-Tree-of-Woe said:
And how do you propose to rein in players whose first impulse in any confrontation is to leap to the combat dice?
Social penalties may be used to dissuade physical confrontations. No one likes to deal with a bully. If the game has a working political/influence/status/social system in place, known violence may be accompanied by rumors and negative impacts.
Also, judicious staff NPC beatdowns.
Story requirement based combat penalties.
If you haven't had enough story, you have a hard time killing one another off, and an easier time surviving. Mooks etc are not so protected. Extra points if players are allowed to play mooks.
I have a waggish sense of humor.
@Misadventure said:
Story requirement based combat penalties.
If you haven't had enough story, you have a hard time killing one another off, and an easier time surviving. Mooks etc are not so protected. Extra points if players are allowed to play mooks.
Man, it's hard enough getting people to accept needing to be active to buy shit that requires actual action by the book's rules (like Renown). If you tell people they can't even beat each other up unless they have "enough story" (could you be more ambiguous?) they won't even bother. They are much more likely to accept "you just can't get into fights with other PCs", even, IMO.
I was wondering what these story requirements were too. I personally hate doing justifications and logs for shit so I'm in the corner of not bothering.
I have thought about this a lot and i know i how would handle not supporting pvp on a game I ran.
I would simply make it policy that staff would not get involved in PvP things.
For example if Player A and Player B want to get all murderface with each other that is cool have fun, but Staff does not step in unless there is OOC conduct that makes such necessary, if when one wins the other retired the char to match the IC result Hey awesome sauce if A and B can't get along with each other and work out anything then they are stuck with not being able to do it.
Of course I would also go back to the primary function of staff being storyteller and let the sphere heads be in charge of setting their own limits for how many folks they can handle in their sphere.
For problem instances usually the core issue is with the player not the character and killing the pc does nothing to address.
"I want to use SetThingsOnFire to set you on fire!"
"Nah-UH, I'm not a thing, so SetThingsOnFire doesn't work on me!"
"Sure it does!"
"No it doesn't!"
"I want to kill you because you murdered my ghoul."
"You don't IC know I murdered your ghoul."
"I do, but I won't tell you where from since I don't want you to know OOC."
"I want to kill you because I'm playing a psychopathic serial killer."
"That's not allowed!"
"Sure it is, staff approved me, didn't they?"
Just some examples where staff intervention is needed without any OOC conduct issues.
Not really tell the folks who can't get along to play in separate rooms. If they refuse that boot them both.
Now that was a bit flippant but really staff shouldn't have to play baby sitter if two adults really cannot get along and won't separate peacefully your game does not need either.
@ThatGuyThere said:
Not really tell the folks who can't get along to play in separate rooms. If they refuse that boot them both.
Now that was a bit flippant but really staff shouldn't have to play baby sitter if two adults really cannot get along and won't separate peacefully your game does not need either.
I'm not sure how your answer relates to the examples I used? None of them are about people who're unable to get along.
For instance the first one has to do with different interpretations of a game mechanic, so that an impartial judge (typically staff) has to settle the matter. What does that have to do with playing baby sitter?
Well there would be a house rule about it. If not then put in a request to have a ruling and wait I guess I would not feel staff had to deal with the matter any quicker then when it's turn in the queue came up. The second one is example about the ghoul is exactly the type of PvP thing i would not have staff get involved with unless they wanted a PvP heavy game, as is the third.
@ThatGuyThere said:
Well there would be a house rule about it. If not then put in a request to have a ruling and wait I guess I would not feel staff had to deal with the matter any quicker then when it's turn in the queue came up. The second one is example about the ghoul is exactly the type of PvP thing i would not have staff get involved with unless they wanted a PvP heavy game, as is the third.
I feel like your approach would lead to a drama-infested game the likes of which are only possible if you gave Spider some sort of MU-version of prima nocta or something. Seriously.
I think I just gave myself nightmares.
"Excuse the hell out of you. He's a bag of dicks. I'm a carefully curated box of cocks." -- to @GirlCalledBlu upon being misrepresented.
Double post to clarify.
If a game has the stated goal of wanting to avoid PvP why should they worry about supporting it?
there are plenty of games that due for those that want it, for good or ill it is up to staff to decide what game they want and enforce that.
PvP is no different then any other design decision, for example if staff wanted an high adventure game I would not expect them to worry about how to make those that want a political game happy, just to be open about the game they are running.
No if they want adventure and all the players want political then maybe the best option is not to open or to let a game die, but sometimes it is better to fail at doing what you want then to succeed at what you do not. Especially when we are talking about a hobby game.
@ThatGuyThere said:
If a game has the stated goal of wanting to avoid PvP why should they worry about supporting it?
If a game has avoiding PrP as a goal then they would most likely be consent-only.
However don't think for a moment that takes staff intervention out of the equation as I suspect anyone who's played on Shang could attest to that. There is more potential for 'conflict' whether there is 'PvP' or not.
@Coin Her new nickname is "Longshanks."
@Coin said:
I highly suggest not breaching the veil for Demon. Secrecy is basically their raison d'etat and basically everyone knowing would ... fuck them up. Unless you're going to change really core, central themes of the game.
@Derp said:
This, and also what @coin said. You just... you can't do no veil of any kind. You're going to completely break your games. Mage has paradox, Demon has ... everything.
@TNP said:
As for supernaturals being out, I love the Anita Blake universe and they're out. My favorite game was an AB game. As for how it would affect WoD supers, it doesn't have to. There would still be no need to know who a demon is just that they exist. And as for believing in magic, how many people today truly don't believe in evolution or other scientific theories?
What I think would be really cool and still work for WoD is not a completely-ripped-away, giant-squid-monster-buying-corn-dogs-on-the-street Veil, but something a little more like you'd find in the Buffyverse or the Dresden Files; a "Line of Sight" Veil, if you will. :neckbeard:
Normal everyday people either don't know or find it in their best interest to ignore or explain away the supernatural. The supernatural is completely (or like 99%) unveiled to itself, because that's how people fucking play it anyway, haha.
Governmental institutions know just enough to hurt themselves and always want to know more, crime families/syndicates/whatever know just as much as they need to know to mostly avoid doing the same, but get burned often.
[it's] going to attract a very tiny subset of players, and I wonder if it'd even be enough to sustain your game in the first place.
But, ultimately, it's your game. You can do with it as you please.
Just, you know... expect it to only cater to a relative few.
I still see nothing wrong with this. And for the record, open sheets = VERY YES in my opinion.
^_______^
(@_____@)
---|---
/\
@Wizz said:
What I think would be really cool and still work for WoD is not a completely-ripped-away, giant-squid-monster-buying-corn-dogs-on-the-street Veil, but something a little more like you'd find in the Buffyverse or the Dresden Files; a "Line of Sight" Veil, if you will. :neckbeard:
Normal everyday people either don't know or find it in their best interest to ignore or explain away the supernatural. The supernatural is completely (or like 99%) unveiled to itself, because that's how people fucking play it anyway, haha.
Governmental institutions know just enough to hurt themselves and always want to know more, crime families/syndicates/whatever know just as much as they need to know to mostly avoid doing the same, but get burned often.
That would certainly work, yes. It could also be fun. But I think public knowledge of the various supers would work just fine for WoD too. I'm a fan of the Anita Blake universe as well as that of Mercy Thompson and the public knowing of the existence of supers - and the inevitable bias against them from many directions - lends a whole new level of complications and possible RP. Vampires, for instance, would have to worry not just about vampire politics but human politics as well.
Also, how would the various clans handle humans actually wanting to be turned? How do they learn about the clans so they can decide who they want to join? Would Ventrue have very strict standards? I imagine the Daeva would probably have the most converts. How do the Nossies react to almost no one willingly wanting to be one of them?
One could argue it would no longer be WoD but I see it more as an expansion.
I assume that the Ventrue would have an academy of some nature. Weed out the weak and undesirable.
And the Nossies, on the other hand, would welcome the undesirable. Homeless? Dying? No one else to turn to? Eternal life. Never have to worry about anything again. For a small price. But you're already used to society shunning you, aren't you? Doesn't seem so bad, in that light. ...
@TNP said:
That would certainly work, yes. It could also be fun. But I think public knowledge of the various supers would work just fine for WoD too. I'm a fan of the Anita Blake universe as well as that of Mercy Thompson and the public knowing of the existence of supers - and the inevitable bias against them from many directions - lends a whole new level of complications and possible RP.
It's just not my cuppa, but more power to you!
EDIT: I think you could still have the bias angle with a partial veil -- people get drawn into the secret world and then are like "Nope nope nope nope" whether it's deserved or not -- but that only seems to be part of the equation for you. Eh! ¯_(ツ)_/¯
