The 100: The Mush

Three-Eyed Crow

I know a Staffer who I used to praise for keeping their characters more on the sidelines, but over the past few months... they began putting one of their PCs as the lynchpin in scenes more and more. And it's been kind of depressing to see.

I think this is another thing that can be solved by having more eyes/hands running a game (and thereby running plots), but it's one of those things that's really exacerbated on solo projects. Also, ideally, if you have someone looking over your shoulder, you have a check who can say, 'Dude, back this the fuck up' when you start to do dumb/show-boaty shit. This circles back to why I think the biggest problem the folks running The 100/Fifth World had was a lack of additional staff, not something specific to them per se.

Apos

@Sunny said in The 100: The Mush:

@Apos

I agree that it shouldn't be said that anything is possible when it isn't, but I vehemently disagree with a premise that staff characters shouldn't be played as characters. Staff are players, too. If that's their preference that's one thing, but there are MANY MANY benefits to having your staff play alongside everyone else. It is a bad premise.

I agree that staff playing can be tremendously helpful, and a big example of that is often kicking off stories with staff is too overt and more like a sledgehammer versus directing other characters towards a story on a PC can feel a lot more immersive and organic, and help people seamlessly move people into the story/plot. My preference is just to restrict myself to supporting characters without a story of their own, and I enjoy doing that, but I don't think it's a big deal if other people disagree and feel it would be an unfair tradeoff that being staff means they can't be central to stories and plots.

Cupcake

I can think of good and bad examples of how the staff PCs were handled, albeit solely in my opinion.

Good: Staffer alt wants two other people to sneak out with him to go negotiate with the leader of the other faction's village. He gets the two other PCs off their butts and on their way, and once there, lets the other PCs do most of the talking. This is using their PC to move the story along and then settling back to let the other PCs Get Stuff Done.

Bad: A handful of PCs want to go talk to a head honcho NPC. Staff alt is a former protege of head honcho, but their parting was on bad terms. Staff alt declares intent to go with the group, is turned down because people are aware of the chilly relationship between head honcho and staff alt. Staffer-player comes off as pretty miffed about it. Whether they actually were, I couldn't say - I'm often shit at reading intention into text.

Arkandel

@Auspice Sometimes this is a major lose/lose no matter what you do. Which is a shame but it's how it is.

Years ago I was a player on this MUD and ended up with a pretty powerful character which took almost almost two years to do. The game needed coders and I was young and stupid enough (sorry Theno) to sign up for it... so in a few months I was one of the three game runners. But I also had an important character, and some people complained about it - which I could see even then was an issue, but I didn't want to give him up either. I had invested so long developing him, and playing was the reason I was there in the first place... so was it better if I stopped coding instead?

Choices, choices. Most of them bad.

Kanye Qwest

People get jealous when other people are getting attention. That doesn't change with titles, from either side.

Kestrel

@Admiral said in The 100: The Mush:

They singled you out and treated you nicely because they wanted to be able to prop you up and say 'See? This person likes us! We can't be doing wrong!' They picked you to help be their enabler. I'm sorry, Cupcake, but they very much are making you their patsy.

VASpider has/had the same modus operandi and just about everyone on this board who dealt with her can verify that statement.

So I guess I was also singled out and treated nicely so I could be propped up? Given that I too have plenty of good things to say, despite having a character who was forbidden from using firearms due to her behaviour, and who walked around with a serious head injury for three months. I assure you that while I was present, I was not central to any plots.

I didn't leave because of staff being central to any plots. I liked staff PCs: I liked Grey, Gideon and Lionel (though admittedly Hanne wasn't really my speed). They were fun to write with. I also think they're great people, who showed an inspiring amount of tolerance and positivity around some pretty shitty players.

I got burned out after they asked me to run an event. I'd already been losing interest before then, but that experience was so needlessly aggravating that it made me realise I was just sick of the playerbase. Disrespectful backseat GMing, constant whining and sniping over consequences. If that's what A&O had to put up with on the regular I really don't blame them for giving up.

They weren't perfect. They made some bad choices in the way they chose to run the plots, but that had nothing to do with the complaints that many other people voiced here about too much antagonism. If anything, I left because there wasn't enough conflict, of the strictly IC variety. Which is no wonder, because any time something started (I fondly recall Arlin kom Trikru punching Grey and making him drop the wounded Asher, after a missile blew up his village as a result of an 'I warned you this would happen' situation), some salty self-centered toddler would throw a tantrum about it OOC and cry 'WHY CAN'T EVERYONE JUST GET ALONG'. That, that is what killed the game for me. Not the staff, except perhaps insofar as staff caved to it and didn't do enough to police the tone.

Cupcake

@Kestrel said in The 100: The Mush:

I got burned out after they asked me to run an event. I'd already been losing interest before then, but that experience was so needlessly aggravating that it made me realise I was just sick of the playerbase. Disrespectful backseat GMing, constant whining and sniping over consequences. If that's what A&O had to put up with on the regular I really don't blame them for giving up.

They weren't perfect. They made some bad choices in the way they chose to run the plots, but that had nothing to do with the complaints that many other people voiced here about too much antagonism. If anything, I left because there wasn't enough conflict, of the strictly IC variety. Which is no wonder, because any time something started (I fondly recall Arlin kom Trikru punching Grey and making him drop the wounded Asher, after a missile blew up his village as a result of an 'I warned you this would happen' situation), some salty self-centered toddler would throw a tantrum about it OOC and cry 'WHY CAN'T EVERYONE JUST GET ALONG'. That, that is what killed the game for me. Not the staff, except perhaps insofar as staff caved to it and didn't do enough to police the tone.

This. All of this. Upvote forever.

My character pushed for peace, because that's what she was designed (by me) to do, and because she believed that a war of any serious sort would utterly wipe out Skaikru. She took injuries and risked her neck to do it. I only went into GetAlong mode after the nastiness between the two krus became so bad it crossed into OOC. The aforementioned player behavior was a huge part of that.

Edited to add: @Kestrel had one of the most amazing antagonists I've seen in play anywhere. She was totally our Murphy. You loved her. You hated her. You loved to hate her, you hated to love her.

lordbelh

@Miss-Demeanor said in The 100: The Mush:

despite many of the PC's at the time being all for hunting down and raiding the Grounders and wanting revenge or retribution for so and so being captured or hurt by the Grounders.

Really? Because I wasn't around for the Adult PCs/Mountain Men storylines. But I was there for the initial grounder stuff. What I recall is everybody wanting to nut hug the Grounders, and sympathizing and excusing them every step of the way.

Auspice

@lordbelh said in The 100: The Mush:

@Miss-Demeanor said in The 100: The Mush:

despite many of the PC's at the time being all for hunting down and raiding the Grounders and wanting revenge or retribution for so and so being captured or hurt by the Grounders.

Really? Because I wasn't around for the Adult PCs/Mountain Men storylines. But I was there for the initial grounder stuff. What I recall is everybody wanting to nut hug the Grounders, and sympathizing and excusing them every step of the way.

I find that to be a common problem on MU*s. People are so afraid to hold to antagonism.

On Arx, my character is married to a foreigner... and has a shav in her employ. I've been really glad for the people that look side-eyed at it and wonder if her head is in the right place.

Ghost

I never played at the 100 but I got snippets of what was going on, and I'm not surprised that this happened.

I don't think there's anything wrong with staff playing on their own game.
I dont think there's anything wrong with staff funneling plot thru NPCs on their own game.
I don't think there's anything wrong with staff being interested in their characters

Nice people or not, though, what repeatedly happens with these two is that they center all plot thru their PCs, focus the game on their characters, push against other players trying to create plot elements that don't match their design, and then close the game when it doesn't pan out their way.

When you run a game that is open to other players, you have got to accept that they won't want to center their experience around your characters. They want a stake in it, too, and when there is so much self focus, it comes across as staffers who have created a game for themselves, or a small clique, but wanted to avoid the boredom of sandbox rp to have other people to rp around, but not let those other players into prominence because the game was never made for THEM.

When you open a game to the public, you do have responsibilities to craft the environment for your players' benefit. Some part of you should take a step back and let your players have some spotlight. Everyone joining a game assumes that is why the game is open to the public in the first place; that you are looking for new players and perspectives to craft a group story/roleplaying experience.

I didn't play this game because, like some others, I had seen this mistake made multiple times by these staffers and history has repeated itself with them so many times that there was little point.

To 100 staff: Stop running games and opening mushes unless you are willing to let others craft the story and affect the metaplot. No one wants to hang around a railroad to support your characters in fulfilling your stories. This kind of behavior will contribute to souring an already dying and difficult hobby.

Arkandel

@Ghost said in The 100: The Mush:

Nice people or not, though, what repeatedly happens with these two is that they center all plot thru their PCs, focus the game on their characters, push against other players trying to create plot elements that don't match their design, and then close the game when it doesn't pan out their way.

Not only is that quite true, it's also baffling; for a new game where players haven't had the chance yet to invest in their characters (and thus have a high chance of sticking around) you'd think staff would want them to do so. That is, I'd expect especially early stages of MU* to be quite generous as to how much PCs get to be in the spotlight and/or get to do cool things, get involved in plot - which showcases why your MU* is so cool - and generally create positive word of mouth.

The reality is different. But... I guess that's a good thing in a way, if these annoying tendencies show early on - less time wasted for everyone involved than if you had to play half a year first before badness happened.

deadculture

@Arkandel said in The 100: The Mush:

@Ghost said in The 100: The Mush:

Nice people or not, though, what repeatedly happens with these two is that they center all plot thru their PCs, focus the game on their characters, push against other players trying to create plot elements that don't match their design, and then close the game when it doesn't pan out their way.

Not only is that quite true, it's also baffling; for a new game where players haven't had the chance yet to invest in their characters (and thus have a high chance of sticking around) you'd think staff would want them to do so. That is, I'd expect especially early stages of MU* to be quite generous as to how much PCs get to be in the spotlight and/or get to do cool things, get involved in plot - which showcases why your MU* is so cool - and generally create positive word of mouth.

The reality is different. But... I guess that's a good thing in a way, if these annoying tendencies show early on - less time wasted for everyone involved than if you had to play half a year first before badness happened.

You know, not that I have any particular stake on this, but just by way of commentary, the whole 'showcase your character in a plot' was what got hooked me on Firan, back when there was a certain OC plot. It was my first character on the MUX and he went on a plot! I felt like I was a liked member of the community instead of a nonfactor.
Of course, my nonfactoring came later on, which sucked balls but hey.

TiredEwok

I can't remember but I think I was told that the people who ran this game were the same couple who ran The Fifth Word. Is this correct or am I remembering incorrectly?

Ghost

@Apu Correct

TiredEwok

@Ghost

Thought so. Think that's why I decided not to try the game, among several other factors like having watched a few episodes of the show and it not being for me.

Auspice

The show not being my speed was my primary reason, but I'm still feeling kinda hurt after 5W and how things turned out with Rozlyn. I really do like playing with these two as players, but I just can't comfortably play 'under' them.

And being involved is awesome. I got pulled into some major metaplot-y foo on Arx yesterday. It came just in time, too. I love my char, but she's not made for noble-ing about a city, so I was feeling a bit directionless.

Miss Demeanor

@BobGoblin I'm not suggesting staff not play at all. But most people are capable of enjoying more than just one sphere. And yes, while you are more likely to staff in the sphere you like most? That's also the highest temptation to start abusing your position for your own gain if you get to play a PC in that sphere. And in this case, since more people than just the good staffers are put on the hook for what the other staffers are doing? I feel its more prudent to 'punish' the good with the bad than to just keep letting it happen and making the players suffer.

Three-Eyed Crow

@Miss-Demeanor said in The 100: The Mush:

But most people are capable of enjoying more than just one sphere.

This wasn't a game with spheres in the way they exist in WoD, though. There was a factional split between the delinquents and grounders, and maybe you could argue they should've had dedicated admins to each, but it's not really the same thing (I don't think, in this case, it would've really solved the problem).

I'm not a WoD player and I've logged a lot of time on single-faction games where this isn't really an applicable solution.

Miss Demeanor

I'm well aware it wasn't a sphere'd game. Which is why my original post said 'or not have their PC's in such prominent/leadership roles'.

TiredEwok

@Auspice said in The 100: The Mush:

The show not being my speed was my primary reason, but I'm still feeling kinda hurt after 5W and how things turned out with Rozlyn. I really do like playing with these two as players, but I just can't comfortably play 'under' them.

And being involved is awesome. I got pulled into some major metaplot-y foo on Arx yesterday. It came just in time, too. I love my char, but she's not made for noble-ing about a city, so I was feeling a bit directionless.

It is a shame to see that the two of them have yet to realize that a mu* should not be all about them. But it is like they want to be the puppet masters and everyone else are their little puppets.