Game Idea

[Coin]

@Ganymede said:

@Coin said:

Because it's a commonplace ocurrence of your Requiem and, while important inasmuch as establishing the night-to-night activities, it doesn't actually further your characterization--it simply marks the status quo of it, much like the "dude who goes fighting every saturday" or "rave-a-holic". If it's part of your every day life, it's not progression, it's reinforcing the status quo.

While I would agree that all Aspirations should represent a change in the status quo, I disagree with your conclusion that setting short-term aspirations for each of the people you want to sleep with is not reasonable, especially if they are PCs. On a MU*, this could have profound consequences. While "getting laid" with mortals is likely inconsequential, shacking up with every neonate may very well be.

But how? There's no context. How? Why? How does it further your character in a way that isn't commonplace? Notice I gave an alternative I found acceptable that was more detailed than just "fuck every neonate".

[Ganymede]

@Coin said:

But how? There's no context. How? Why? How does it further your character in a way that isn't commonplace? Notice I gave an alternative I found acceptable that was more detailed than just "fuck every neonate".

In my opinion, vampires having coitus with other vampires isn't commonplace -- at least, it shouldn't be. In a society of apex predators, getting up close and personal is a catastrophe waiting to happen, and is a profound vulnerability where the person you want to fuck ends up tearing your head off because killing another vampire ain't against the Traditions.

[Coin]

@Ganymede said:

@Coin said:

But how? There's no context. How? Why? How does it further your character in a way that isn't commonplace? Notice I gave an alternative I found acceptable that was more detailed than just "fuck every neonate".

In my opinion, vampires having coitus with other vampires isn't commonplace -- at least, it shouldn't be. In a society of apex predators, getting up close and personal is a catastrophe waiting to happen, and is a profound vulnerability where the person you want to fuck ends up tearing your head off because killing another vampire ain't against the Traditions.

Then you need to point out when you file for the asp that this is how your vampire operates. Because your opinon is just that--and not everyone else's. So we're back to context.

[Ganymede]

@Coin said:

Then you need to point out when you file for the asp that this is how your vampire operates. Because your opinon is just that--and not everyone else's. So we're back to context.

I am hesitant to pass judgment on player's reasoning when it comes to aspirations. I see your point, but it borders on violating the "wrongfun" doctrine. I realize that GMC/CoD encourages greater ST participation in the crafting of a PC, but I am cautious, in a MU* context, of setting up a system where staff has to constantly question why a player is requesting something.

[Derp]

@Coin said:

this is because the book and the writers of the book assume that it's understood that each Aspiration, even short-term ones, are supposed to further the character's progression.

I get what you're saying, and where you're coming from, but I disagree with your premise.

An aspiration is a tool to help advance a character through a story, yes, but it's really nothing more than trying to set out a couple of points that you would like to see happen in this character's particular narrative at that time. They are things to keep in mind, and directions you want to take them in. Nothing more than that. They don't have to represent some deep and philosophical soul-searching journey. They're just... what they are. They are things that either the player or the character want to see happen in a story, minor accomplishments for short-term stuff and major accomplishments for long-term stuff. It doesn't have to go any deeper than that, and trying to judge what aspirations are worthy may end up being more of a pain in the ass than it's worth. All that should really be required is:

Is this an action that requires the character to go out on the grid and interact with the world in some way that's important to their enjoyment of the game?

Some context might be necessary, on certain ones, sure. 'Buy Sammy a beer' might not be great, but 'Buy Sammy a beer so that we can start establishing a friendly relationship' is better. Either is simple, gives the character and the player a direct goal to work toward (rather than having them wander aimlessly wondering what to do) and is easily check-able.

[Coin]

@Ganymede said:

@Coin said:

Then you need to point out when you file for the asp that this is how your vampire operates. Because your opinon is just that--and not everyone else's. So we're back to context.

I am hesitant to pass judgment on player's reasoning when it comes to aspirations. I see your point, but it borders on violating the "wrongfun" doctrine. I realize that GMC/CoD encourages greater ST participation in the crafting of a PC, but I am cautious, in a MU* context, of setting up a system where staff has to constantly question why a player is requesting something.

Nothing I said is meant to be interpreted as my saying you should judge. But requiring context is important. So instead of saying "well, i guess they could have a reason for this", staff should ask, "thiscould work, what's your reasoning?" and try to leave bias behind.

@Derp said:

@Coin said:

this is because the book and the writers of the book assume that it's understood that each Aspiration, even short-term ones, are supposed to further the character's progression.

I get what you're saying, and where you're coming from, but I disagree with your premise.

An aspiration is a tool to help advance a character through a story, yes, but it's really nothing more than trying to set out a couple of points that you would like to see happen in this character's particular narrative at that time. They are things to keep in mind, and directions you want to take them in. Nothing more than that. They don't have to represent some deep and philosophical soul-searching journey. They're just... what they are. They are things that either the player or the character want to see happen in a story, minor accomplishments for short-term stuff and major accomplishments for long-term stuff. It doesn't have to go any deeper than that, and trying to judge what aspirations are worthy may end up being more of a pain in the ass than it's worth. All that should really be required is:

Is this an action that requires the character to go out on the grid and interact with the world in some way that's important to their enjoyment of the game?

Some context might be necessary, on certain ones, sure. 'Buy Sammy a beer' might not be great, but 'Buy Sammy a beer so that we can start establishing a friendly relationship' is better. Either is simple, gives the character and the player a direct goal to work toward (rather than having them wander aimlessly wondering what to do) and is easily check-able.

If your status quo for establishing a relationship is buying someone a beer, and you routinely use "buy X a beer to establish a relationship", then it's a bad Aspiration, IMO. I don't care, particularly, if it's viable or not, if you are going to abuse it. So once? Sure. Once every long while? If you can tell me why you think it's relevant again. Once a week? Nope.

This is obviously my own criteria, and what I interpret from the books.

[Misadventure]

I'd like to think that an Aspiration would change things if successful, and definitely have consequences if it failed. Don't get to party or have a bad time of it? Now you are depressed, or return to drinking too much, or you get grumpy and pick a fight until you get trounced, or tossed out of where ever and invited to never come back.

[Arkandel]

@Coin said:

If your status quo for establishing a relationship is buying someone a beer, and you routinely use "buy X a beer to establish a relationship", then it's a bad Aspiration, IMO. I don't care, particularly, if it's viable or not, if you are going to abuse it. So once? Sure. Once every long while? If you can tell me why you think it's relevant again. Once a week? Nope.

I heard (but I've no first-hand experience - obviously) that on Eldritch it got pretty common for some people to use Breaking Points constantly about their characters. As in, everything was one, they suffered blows to their delicate egos all the time and grew in power from these tribulations.

That's the weakness (or one of them) of the Beats system, which I otherwise do like... it can be milked for easy XP by bullshitting players and accommodating staff. On its own it's not the end of the world or anything but it can set a very quick power gap between those who're willing to go the extra mile that way and those who don't.

[Coin]

@Arkandel said:

@Coin said:

If your status quo for establishing a relationship is buying someone a beer, and you routinely use "buy X a beer to establish a relationship", then it's a bad Aspiration, IMO. I don't care, particularly, if it's viable or not, if you are going to abuse it. So once? Sure. Once every long while? If you can tell me why you think it's relevant again. Once a week? Nope.

I heard (but I've no first-hand experience - obviously) that on Eldritch it got pretty common for some people to use Breaking Points constantly about their characters. As in, everything was one, they suffered blows to their delicate egos all the time and grew in power from these tribulations.

That's the weakness (or one of them) of the Beats system, which I otherwise do like... it can be milked for easy XP by bullshitting players and accommodating staff. On its own it's not the end of the world or anything but it can set a very quick power gap between those who're willing to go the extra mile that way and those who don't.

I don't recall this happening much at all. Any examples?

And anyway, Breaking Points are 1) an issue because apparently they are impossible for people to actually understand. I have never been more frustrated than trying to explain over and over what a Breaking Point even was. Half the time people hadn't even read the book. 2) Breaking Points are supposed to be about their characters. If "everything" is a Breaking Point, you're gonna end up broken. I actively discouraged and talked people down from genuinely fuciking stupid shit like "seeing children suffer". You can't watch a fucking news program without seeing children suffer. Please be more specific. One guy had "witnessing women being mistreated". I wanted to shake him. He was going to psychologicall fall apart after a short walk anywhere in the world. Surprise, the patriarchy exists. 3) Breaking Points are not Aspirations. Aspirations give you beats just for completing them; Breaking Points give you beats depending on the resolution of your roll to resist it. So if you're gaining a Beat but losing a dot of Integrity, I don't really care if you abuse it. Eventually you're going to be a quivering heap in the corner.

[bored]

@Arkandel said:

That's the weakness (or one of them) of the Beats system, which I otherwise do like... it can be milked for easy XP by bullshitting players and accommodating staff. On its own it's not the end of the world or anything but it can set a very quick power gap between those who're willing to go the extra mile that way and those who don't.

Yeah, this is one of the problems I have with 2.0 in the MU environment, and it's made me hesitant to play. The aspiration/breaking point/condition beat feedback stuff is great for helping mold players into a more narrative style and is one of the best 'you have a reason to lose' implementations I've ever seen in an RPG... for tabletop. But on a MU, it's just another farming system. If you want to have a competitive XP rate, you have to be obsessively active and constantly engineer scenes, log, and +request them (so it even adds extra OOC work). I have a hard time seeing how 'go and have trite RP to tick off a trite short term aspiration' is any better than 'go and have trite coffee shop RP to farm +votes.'

Without some kind of sane cap on it, its a real turnoff to me.

[Ganymede]

@bored said:

Without some kind of sane cap on it, its a real turnoff to me.

And this is what RfK did.

When I said that they gave the system a lot of thought, I'm not kidding. They capped your Beats per week gained from pursuing Aspirations, short or long-term. You got more Beats from engaging in scenes with others, which is what you probably want people to do.

[bored]

Yeah, I think that's the best approach.

People will argue that staff can just not allow 'trite' aspirations in the first place (ie rely on the same limitation you'd have in TT, social contract) but that quickly goes down the judgmental-staff / favoritism / etc rabbit hole.

[tragedyjones]

I had to train myself to not generally care TOO much about what peoples aspirations are.

[Arkandel]

@Ganymede Eldritch's were also capped, that doesn't actually fix it. Some players are naturally more inclined/willing/shameless enough to pursue such things as 'the cap' aggressively and others don't, and it adds up fast.

It even has a diluting effect on other kinds of rewards - if I can get a Beat for 30 seconds' worth of typing an one-line justification and you have to run a multi-hour PrP with several players in it it's the same incentive being applied, but one action helps the game a great deal more than the other.

[bored]

This is me agreeing more.

The beats and aspirations are very clearly designed to work inside the kind of environment you have in TT. Stuff is going on, rather than players just creating scenes out of thin air, so any aspirations you're fulfilling are likely to be in the context of the rest of the game and carry narrative costs and consequences (ie, pursuing a personal goal over a plot clue). I just feel like it doesn't work when players are both creating the aspirations and then creating the circumstances that resolve them.

[tragedyjones]

Speaking of Aspirations, I want someone on BITN to make a Wish (per the Dread power).

[Ganymede]

@Arkandel said:

It even has a diluting effect on other kinds of rewards - if I can get a Beat for 30 seconds' worth of typing an one-line justification and you have to run a multi-hour PrP with several players in it it's the same incentive being applied, but one action helps the game a great deal more than the other.

I know this. There is no perfect system. Sorry. There just isn't, and there never will be. That does not mean we should not install some sort of system, consequences known and damned. I will note that the reward for running a scene can be greater than what you'd get by fulfilling an aspiration or resolving a condition. And people won't engage in a behavior if the reward is too low.

Presuming that aspirations create RP, though, you are still engaging correctly in positive reinforcement. Giving people more for STing or participating in PRPs is a good idea. Cap your gain or make XPs cost more beats as one gets more XP, and that's about the best you can do to achieve balance.

[Taika]

Hmm. I'm almost inclined to do away with the 'per week' flat rate xp and just cap aspiration/breakingpoint/condition beats to 2. Like I said, it is a lot easier to start too low and go up than start too high and go down.

I also liked the raised cost for things. I can't remember what interval it was... Every 50 xp?

[surreality]

@Taika That cap on the activity beats would be a deal-breaker for me. Not just in terms of being 'too low', but in that all of those things can and do pose a real risk to the character in terms of damage being done. (Not so much aspirations, but breaking points and conditions, definitely.) Gaining XP for these hardships is built into the system as character growth -- as in, it's 'hard earned experience from bad situations'.

With a cap that low, you're asking players to face a lot of risks, suffer more than a few losses, and not get the rewards the system is created to provide for them in return. Not as rosy when you look at it from that perspective.

[Taika]

Duly noted.

What would you suggest that might work to help prevent monstrous sheets? Thiugh, it seems more and more like I may just have to deal with it.