Best posts made by Arkandel

It's like Kawhi Leonard was created by min-maxing stats by a powergamer. All of his social stats are zero and all of his basketball stats are topped out.

There has never been a better player than him playing for the Raptors.

@lotherio said in MUs That We Would Love To Make (But Won't):

The difference for me is, we're voicing opinions and they are all valid. Just the near absolute of all modern games suck and everyone hates social is a bit extreme.

The way I read this is that it's commonplace in people extrapolating from their own current experiences. As you start to burn out everything looks shitty and it's easy to lose touch with the fact not everyone feels the same way as you do, and may be having fun with the stuff that still feels repetitive, stagnant, unfair, imbalanced, etc especially since you may still feel compelled to convince others. Why can't they see it?

It happens all the time with MMOs for example. "This game has turned to shit!" is a real cliche since players literally pay money to log on week after week, month after month, to tell everyone in public channels how little fun this all is.

I think the core of the matter is gaming isn't supposed to be life fulfilling. Hobbies aren't. Setting expectations that high for something you invest very large chunks of your time to is a very human, very flawed thing to do.

I will sign off on the sentiment that the plot feels rushed now.

Part of that is the time scale though, and I don't mean in screen minutes. Going by those it's not too crazy - we've had 6+ hours of episodes this season alone, after all. That's more than long enough for an entire movie trilogy where characters are introduced, developed, progressed and completely changed.

But the thing is those hours are compressed into a 5 week period iRL. It's hard to sign off on character development without a lot of real time to process what happened. Not to mention, as people have mentioned, there are a lot of 'character supporters' out there who are taking it personally.

@HelloRaptor said:

• I have not lost myself in Hello Kitty Online.

Well, then get your ass back on Diablo 3 you filthy casual. Those demons aren't going to grind themselves, you know.

@Testament I will say this: The Bucks' barometer isn't Giannis, although that sounds weird since he's clearly their best player by far.

It's Brook Lopez. If he starts hitting shots he spreads the floor for opposing big men, and then Giannis becomes truly unstoppable.

@aria said in MU Things I Love:

One of my players messaged me privately today to thank me for being a good org leader and setting them up with a bunch of stuff and now I am all mushy and full of feels.

Hello, I am new player! You are good org leader, set me up with bunch of stuff.

@nyctophiliac Dracarys!

@rightmeow said in Antagonistic PCs - how to handle them:

The PC itself needs to have connections, friends, etc. They need to be more well-rounded than just to sow discontent. They also have to have a reason for their thoughts.

Beware of trying to codify what makes for a 'good' antagonist.

Think of the worst, most abusive examples of predatorial assholes in gaming. They all had connections, friends, and they could offer long treatises on exactly what their reasons were.

They were, also, predatorial assholes.

@silverfox You just realized that's the best course of action?

@tinuviel said in Antagonistic PCs - how to handle them:

I used to really loathe the Super Friends thing. But then I realised that that isn't what I loathe, really. It's when Super Friends is the only thing going, and the internal 'sphere' plot is either non-existent or solely in support of the Super Friends.

For me it's that I'd rather have RP than not have it.

Inter-sphere RP is easy. You have something to talk about right out of the box - the whole learning about each other's ways trope is wide open. And the romance. And, yes, the fangs-on-fur-and-magic-sex trope, too.

There's something to be said about immediately accessible things to talk about. In itself there's nothing wrong with it. After all there's no guarantee that in-sphere RP is going to be creative and innovative either.

@Lotherio Let's not be too judgy guys. I can see how producers might be burned out after working on the same project for eight years. They probably rushed some things to wrap up this massive beast with so many characters and plotlines, but to their defense they also always expected Martin to have written the books by now, too.

We don't know what the SW project will look like. I wouldn't be cynical about it.

@groth said in Antagonistic PCs - how to handle them:

@arkandel said in Antagonistic PCs - how to handle them:

The reason I dislike it is because it taints future interactions. How is Bob supposed to build up to the next small tidbit of apocrypha he pries out of Joe and feel legitimate excitement about it when Jane has read the fucking handbook IC and knows everything there is to know complete with its canonical terminology?

I think this is an inherent issue with multisphere. You can either try to create a cohesive thematic experience or you can have the entire kitchen sink roam the grid but you can't have both.

While I'm whining about nonsense like an elitist jerk, you know what gets me?

Fine, fiiine, Jane can learn everything there is to know about the Lancea Sanctum in record time. But I wish at least it generated actual RP, instead of all that expertise being assumed between scenes, where an entirety of a sphere's knowledge was transferred in the background.

@Lisse24 said in Game of Thrones:

I'm really, really doubtful that the LoTR project is going to do well, but then, that's just because I'm a bit over LoTR.

BURN THE HERETIC

... Also a Warhammer property might be fun, come to think of it.

I think a lot of this belongs in a separate conversation. "What is a MU*"?

Is it the ability to pose?

Is it having a persistent grid and a character sheet?

Why is Arx a MU* but World of Warcraft isn't?

Double post but I had a general question for the class.

After watching yet another amazing trailer by World of Wacraft I keep wondering why they don't make full feature versions of these things.

Like... live action costs so much. Green screens, stunts, costume designers, high profile actors and then the special effects on top of it. Why not do something like the Safe Haven cinematic instead?

Maybe it's because of how much longer it'd take but surely once they have the models down it'd be greatly expedited. And then you can do whatever the hell you want with them - the 'actors' would never grow old (unless you wanted them to) and you just need the right voice talent for them which is far, far cheaper as well.

I would watch the shit out of such a thing. Even relatively cool fantasy animation movies (Castlevania comes to mind) isn't up to these cinematics' standards.

Let's perhaps look at it from a different perspective.

Take an Ares game.

What is a feature or limitation you add to it (or what do you take away from it) so that it is no longer a MU*?

@Lotherio said in Good or New Movies Review:

Neal McDonnough

You typo'ed Clint Eastwood's name.

@icanbeyourmuse said in Alternative Lords & Ladies Settings:

One thing to consider allowing an alt for is that characters in positions of responsibility can be draining and cause them not not desire to log in.

Is that a real problem though? I don't have nearly as much experience with L&L as many folks on this thread but I feel it's usually the opposite that's the issue -- there are too many chiefs and too few underlings. Sure, the positions involve work... but that doesn't seem to diminish their popularity.

So if there is such high demand for the top-end positions why give them away to players who aren't active enough for them? Isn't that a more desired solution than handing them away to the person who has multiple alts, or who wants the prestige of a rank but not the associated responsibilities?

@Pandora SHOTS

@kestrel said in RL friends:

That discourse aside, I'm curious if people within the MU* community have noticed patterns where the people they enjoy socialising with IRL are concerned.

I'd say it'd depend on which time period in my life we're talking about.

Early on when I was young my RL friends were whoever I was associated with based on geography and occupation.School mates, folks at the university, from basketball runs. And yes, those who fit the criteria above and enjoyed similar things took priority; I met my roommate, with whom I still talk and hang out regularly, at a Star Trek group.

But later on as I entered my mid-thirties and people were no longer dating or breaking up but getting married and had kids it became very apparent I could no longer be picky. Friends vanished; they had more important things to do than hang out, and they didn't just magically appear. I'd get close to coworkers while we were at work but not hanging out depended on when they had time; coordinating groups larger than 2-3 at a time got harder and harder, too.

But my hobbies have always been integral to actual close friendships. It may be that I was never really into just generically hanging out. My partner can go out with a friend and drink beers, chat, etc for 5+ hours in a row - I'd never choose to do that. But participate in an activity for that long? Gimme. A long D&D session sounds amazing. Dinner+movie, yes please. Going outdoors to hike is great. I did play WoW with people I knew iRL, too.

On the other hand MU*ing had always been separate for me. None of my friends really played the way I did; a couple played MUDs back in the day but didn't roleplay, and stopped when MMORPGs became popular. It just felt... weird, too, or at least I felt self conscious to rant about random game-related drama when I was with them, which also widened a disconnect. I was investing time in a part of my life that wasn't being actively shared - if that makes sense.

So to answer the original question - I connect with the real world through activities and hobbies. It's just that MUs, specifically, never became a conduit to doing so.