What's jarring and incredibly immersion breaking to one person will be easily handwaved and tossed aside by someone else. It's a moving target and I don't think there's anything you can do but pick a point, make it a communal standard, and anyone above or below that point is nudged towards it. Obviously the closer to a standpoint of needing expertise, the more niche it will be, but the further it moves from it the harder it will be for it to be satisfying for anyone that's an expert in the field.
Posts made by Apos
-
RE: Original Sci-Fi?
-
RE: Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?
About descs and clothing objects, there's a few interesting consequences of design choices there. Generally speaking, the more information about current state that's available passively, the more organic the Rp tends to be. In other words, if you have information that isn't readily available to someone passively, and has to be mentioned in a set each time someone comes in, the less organic I find the rp. This is just a stylistic difference and not good or bad, but I should mention I never even heard the term 'pose order' until I tried a WoD game, several years after playing routinely on other MUs, and sets tended to be extremely minimal in other places due to current state-of-play being accessible on 'look' in other games. So I definitely am more in the minority (which would probably be closer to a majority for RPI type games) of using 'look' regularly, paying close attention to descs, using clothing objects to change the current state-of-play, and not really paying much attention to wikis. It's just a stylistic difference, not right or wrong imo, like Faraday said.
-
RE: Regarding administration on MSB
@arkandel Yeah I kind of think one post and then a link to FAQs or Rant threads would be good. With some questions you expect to find in a FAQ like, 'What game system are you using?' would be fine, while, 'Why is Apos worse than Hitler?' might be frequently asked, but would probably go to the latter.
-
RE: Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?
I don't like changing mediums when into something, I find it jarring. I would keep things in both places, preferably automatically without any need for double updates, though I can understand if that's a technical limitation.
-
RE: Potential Game / Temperature Read
@faraday said in Potential Game / Temperature Read:
I don't think the discouragement is limited to those kinds of games. It's so pervasive that even when your game policies are all: "You can run plots. No really. PLEASE RUN PLOTS." nobody(*) believes you.
And because people are so sensitive about it, even the slightest thematic or continuity correction often gets taken as "ZOMG you said I could run plots WTF" and leads to people being gunshy.
To be honest, I'd say the vast majority of my time is spent coaching people and answering, "Can I run...?" type questions. That's not bad, but it becomes circular in that the more time I spend assisting other people, the less time I spend creating content myself, which in turn leads other people to want to create content to fill in the gaps, which then requires me to spend more time reviewing their suggestions. I think after a certain point, it becomes unavoidable that a head GM becomes less of a GM and more of a manager of other GMs, and if things scaled infinitely it would just be more layers of it.
Sure, we have ways planned to reduce that overhead, but even an environment that's successful in cultivating an atmosphere where players feel empowered to create content can have its drawbacks.
-
RE: FCs on Comic MUs
@ixokai said in FCs on Comic MUs:
One just kept going on about how she was right and that people have no right to..something. Slander them and make them look bad, something like that (man, I still have that log, it was kinda funny -- The original issue was minor: they made an off-color joke that was offensive and if they had just shut up all woulda been fine.)
One of my banned conversations was pretty much identical. Probably the same person.
-
RE: Is there a MUSH/MUCK out there with an incredibly active population?
@megalovania Yeah, there's a few hundred players on Arx.
-
RE: Make MSB great again!
@faraday Yeah I agree, I mean not cleaning would be making it harder. They need to be obvious without clicking on a thread which games are open or not.
-
RE: MSB Popularity Contest
@brent We see what you did there and upvoted anyways.
-
RE: Make MSB great again!
I dunno why you wanna make it harder for people to find games tho.
-
RE: Make MSB great again!
@ganymede Yes, I think that is reasonable. It wouldn't really be a big deal to repost in the worst case anyway.
-
RE: Make MSB great again!
@ganymede I think removing games would still be reliant on someone posting that the game is dead. Sure, that could mean some games are on a list that are dead in all but name, but it's better than like wading through lists of a hundred non-RP MUDs with 2 players each on the other aggregates imo.
-
RE: Make MSB great again!
Anyways back on topic, I'd lean towards a single sticky'd post of current active games, because it trips me out that I have seen a few different subjects of people posting like, 'HEY ARE THERE ANY X GAMES STILL OPEN' which is a little fucked up that on the one forum actually dedicated to this hobby that someone needs to do that.
And then for the ad forum itself, yeah I'd say just a single post by owners introducing games, which they could update with responses or whatever/a faq, and then a separate thread wherever for the actual questions that can lead to people posting for 30 pages about why not having hookers is bad.
-
RE: MSB Popularity Contest
@lithium it does make light of the reputation system without flaming anyone, tbh.
-
RE: Make MSB great again!
@wizz I've been on boards a lot more toxic than this that turned a corner and became positive, and usually it wasn't like some big thing or clear cut push, just people finding that shit was getting a little old and starting to be a little more constructive. I have a lot of really mixed feelings about the forums, and I think they could be more useful. I don't think it would take much.
-
RE: Make MSB great again!
@three-eyed-crow Even though we have the mudconnector or mudstats, having a sticky'd post on the Ad forum just listing active games run by board members on here might not be awful, since it's probably games more relevant to what people here are looking for anyways than those aggregates. Might help make the ad forum more useful for the purpose you're thinking of.
-
RE: FCs on Comic MUs
@roz Yeah but I'm talking about it in so much as thinking of practices that limit points of failure and make it easier to maintain, so I do think of it as bad policy because it's demanding without any significant advantage to it. It's just highlighted because bad staff make it more likely to fail, and it could be avoided entirely with something more robust.
-
RE: FCs on Comic MUs
@roz said in FCs on Comic MUs:
I mean, sure, obviously that's a thing that commonly happens. That's also just called bad staffing. You do need good staffing to make any sort of system like this work. There's no "this system will totally work even with lazy or conflict-averse staffers."
I think it's a little contrary to what I was trying to get at originally. While you're right, you can definitely design things systematically that makes it way way way way easier or harder. Like I would rather start from the point of, 'Well, a lot of staff are conflict-averse. What system is least bad with those people?'
Generally, you'd want to design something with the least amount of decision making, with systems that resemble what choices would be made by someone fair minded. Like if every top tier FC had a set limit for how long someone could possess the character before it had to go up for grabs, and then the metric for deciding who got it next was automatically determined based on how you quantified who made me the most rp for the widest spectrum of people among. I mean sure, any of those things can be weighted unfairly too, but frankly even in systems that have really terrible weights there tends to be way less hostility because it's a little bit emotionless and detached.
-
FCs on Comic MUs
So I didn't want to clutter up the ad thread of United Heroes with a big tangent, but @Arkandel made a joke about how much drama there was compared to WoD games, and I think it's important to consider why.
When making a game, someone has to ask themselves what design choices they are making that will put any players in a position to feel antagonistic to one another. If they opt into that, if they -want- that, what they can't do is say, 'I expect players to be mature and never get upset' because that will never happen. Encourage it, foster it, but absolutely never depend upon it. So either you take active steps to avoid a toxic, antagonistic environment where players loathe one another, or you ignore it and let it happen, and just hope for the best. I've never enjoyed games that opt for the latter and I swear an awful lot do, because it isn't really fun to think about this stuff for game runners.
So what design choices are resulting in extreme toxicity on some comic or multiverse games?
For games that are essentially entirely PvE and collaborative, they have one of the most antagonistic setups imaginable from an ooc perspective. You have people wanting to play or play with other feature characters as their motivation for playing the game to begin with, put in a position of judging other people's roleplay and whether they are basically doing their job by roleplaying. With not being able to really see what other people are really doing, and motivated to believe the worst about others if they don't get the interactions they want, there is absolutely no way that does not become toxic without extraordinary effort to prevent it. Look at the huge number of posts on UH's ad thread bitching about how people are playing their characters, and I really, really do not think any of those people read that and go, 'Wow, that's a fair complaint, I better spend more time RPing with this person shit talking me. Thank you, @Social-Diseases , I learned a lot today.' Putting people in a position of feeling competitive for either time with FCs or playing the FCs themselves is always going to result in resentment for how they are played- it doesn't really matter if the criticism is justified, just the fact it happens is going to create fights.
Games will usually have a honeymoon period and then a crash, and how violent the latter is depends upon how much resentment is allowed to build. The game opens, there's a wave of a hundred people taking characters. They are having fun, so they ignore the shit that really bothers them. Months go by, they still aren't getting the RP with some FC that is off RPing with his friends mostly, they get annoyed about it, say that FC is always TSing. FC might be spending 50% of his time RPing with strangers, but the larger the game, the less that will be noticed or appreciated. Criticism gets back to him that he doesn't do shit, he is now intensely resentful also, scales back what he was actually doing. Repeat this 500 times, as people become less and less willing to ignore the stuff that they were annoyed at to begin with. Complaints pile up, Staff starts dealing with embittered people rather than making story for people that aren't embittered, resulting in people that were having fun and happy not doing so. Eventually staff quits, game collapses, or there is a mass exodus as staff retaliates in ways that punishes people for having resentment and drives them off.
So what do you do to avoid that?
For starters, create powerful incentives for people RPing outside their circles and not just their friends. This is important to begin with in games. On games with FCs that are why people are there to begin with, I won't even say it's important, I'd say it is vital. Like I disagree with the reserve system to begin with, but if I had to maintain something that checked activity with votes or one ups or whatever, I would never allow the same people to ever vote again, relative to the size of the player base. For something like UH, you could pretty much say someone could never claim the same person again and be fine. On a WoD sandbox, cliques can exist pretty much without incident since no one really needs one another at all, or even particularly wants to interact with them, and a game of 200 people can be more like 50 games of 4 people each. That just isn't true for a FC game, and the dynamics are way different, and each one of those 50 cliques is a recipe for intense resentment. If they aren't playing with one another, there will eventually be a blow up.
Now on the flip side, when I said that staff should not expect players to be mature and never get upset without creating a place that encourages that, staff has to absolutely be proactive in creating the positive atmosphere and pushing back against the kind of behavior that will create long term problems. That sounds basic but very few people want to deal with behavioral problems, and the ones that DO want to deal with it are very rarely the people that should be. This tends to be the default because most staff don't create games because they have a burning desire to punish bad behavior from their friends or from socially dysfunctional members of the community. It is mind boggling that people think that, 'I really don't want to start a fight with the people I enjoy RPing with and police them on the behalf of strangers' is the most machiavellian, mustache-twirling corruption, because I guarantee you that will be the default for almost everyone. If you see problematic players and they aren't talked to, you can be absolutely certain that problematic staff aren't being talked to either, and the place is probably doomed. That is not rare, and that's not special, that's normal, and if a game opens as a lassiez faire, anyone-can-do-anything, that often probably means they have zero desire to police things and you can expect this. Basically, if there's chatter on channels that is snarky and acerbic, and it goes by without being challenged, run. So yes, running a large game is exceptionally challenging, but you either run it, or you let it devolve, and god help you if you set up it up in a way that has players disliking one another for their RP.
-
RE: RL Anger
@olsson Yea, I mean it's sexual assault. It weirdly feels like an escalation to describe something accurately, but I mean, by definition it is.