@Misadventure said in Welcome to the Euphoria - Alpha:
(Every relationship anyone has will either end or one of you will die.)
This got dark fast.
@Misadventure said in Welcome to the Euphoria - Alpha:
(Every relationship anyone has will either end or one of you will die.)
This got dark fast.
@surreality Well, it's not porn, but for most of us it's not safe for work either. But that's my point - very little is safe for work.
IMHO this material is inoffensive but whereas people ought to be opening anything of the sort from work is up to them, since they're the ones who have to know what's considered acceptable in general. For example some workplaces wouldn't approve of anything that looks game-y at all - it's not about the boobs, per se - but others openly have Facebook tabs open since that's the company culture. But they are the ones who should know what's right for themselves.
Seriously, it's not worth worrying about.
@Coin said:
I disagree with @Arkandel or our dearly desk-flipping, indignantly-quitting @HelloRaptor all the time.
To be fair, it wouldn't happen as often if you weren't wrong all the time.
But yes, if anyone is thin skinned enough around here to worry about people disagreeing with them... boy are they in the wrong place.
@Ghost It is not. Constructive is asking them to stop and notifying an admin to take action if they think it's beyond the forum's rules.
Calling people names in the name of justice is not constructive.
(This is derailing the thread's topic)
There are two fundamental problems with justification requirements.
The first is that they cannot be universal unless it's a single-sphere game, and that creates an additional barrier to character progression - one that's based on the player, not their PC. The Vampire raising Blood Potence? "Uh, my blood got stronger I guess!" The Uratha raising Renown? "... Let me find someone to run a PrP chain, hope the dice which need to be challenging don't kill the PC, find someone IC to spin the deed and then write a small essay."
The second is the very purpose of having justification requirements in the first place isn't consistent in general. If it's to promote IC plausibility then no character on the grid should ever raise their Medicine over 3 unless they start high; that stuff takes years! If it's to ensure only the top players with most robust understanding of the rules rise in power or skill then why tie it to IC achievements in the first place?
These are essentially home grown systems-within-systems.
@Ghost said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):
I'm exiting the thread, but I want to let it be said that when someone who's made a post seeking constructive input that she's worked hard on, for a game idea, getting nitpicked until she says "fuck it" and walks away, leaving the rest of us to look forward to the upcoming games run by the people who henpecked her to death...is not constructive.
I don't disagree. And believe me that I like @surreality a lot more than @bored, whom I don't know at all.
Either we have rules we kind-of sort-of try to adhere to or we don't. Tossing them aside when it's a friend involved, even if they are right, is wrong. If you had criticized @bored severely but civilly I wouldn't have said a thing.
See you on other threads.
@Sundown One of the uncelebrated advantages of setting games in the post-WW2 era is also that you don't run into the classic problem with historical settings where some players don't know enough OOC (and some know too much) about the time in question. If it's in the 70s they know what to expect in terms of technology, general politics - just have a wiki up with the basics such as who the US President is, what's happening in the USSR, etc - and general feel.
No one will object because you posed your character going to the bathroom ("you mean the street outside?") or taking a shower before plumbing was advanced enough to allow for such comforts.
The tough part will be finding PB pictures with age-appropriate haircuts and pants.
My candidate would be The Broken Empire world in Mark Lawrence's books.
It's grimdark fantasy set in a pseudo-medieval setting in our future, where something happened to fuck up reality. Technology is about the usual level in fantasy but there are rogue modern weapons out there - malicious artificial intelligences, branches of deterministic mathematics that can predict or enforce the future - while the barriers between Earth and other places have been weakened by the apocalyptic events of the distant past to occasionally allow horrors to break through.
And in the middle of all that humanity is broken into a hundred mini-kingdoms, each of them ruled by a monarch (some of whom are puppetted by wizards) struggling between themselves to defeat, subdue or ally themselves all the way into ascending to become Emperors.
The combination of classic fantasy, hardcore politics, a rich and open setting where GMs can run their own thing without that much thematic restraints... it'd be fantastic.
To me a "hunter" isn't someone trained from birth, with a membership to secret organizations and access to high-tech vampire-slaying nanobot swarms.
He/she works at the supermarket register or is trying to make ends meet as a second year college student when they see something they shouldn't have or survive an encounter with something insane... and they just can't go back to hiding. They just can't ignore it, they have to Do Something About It even if they fully realize they're way out of their league. They aren't respected by their peers - they're the person you end up seeing on the news raving about their neighbors, leaping over fences and being chased by the cops for doing something really illegal, stupid and suicidal... only they happen to be right.
Obviously there are many ways to do it! Whatever is fun to you, @Cobaltasaurus .
@SG Come on man, youtube video comments is the closest thing I've seen to hell on earth.
tinyfucking, hee.
I think long policies in general attract idiots who try to find the loophole. "Don't be an asshole" should about cover it.
Let's face it, we (*) do care about tinyfucking. This is known.
(*) In general, exceptions exist. The majority if you will. Us.
@Tempest said:
The important question is, can you be force sensitive and have a lightsaber.
Gonna assume not, since 9/10 Star Wars MUs seem to outright ban that or save it for staff-pals. Which is why the genre has died, IMO. I don't wanna play some goddamn Han Solo knock-off. I want a lightsaber.
See, so many multiplayer Star Wars games make the same stupid design choice. When many players think of the setting they want to play a damn Jedi. Or Sith, whatever. And yet even in the MMO (well, the first one at least) actually playing a Force-user was reserved for a tiny minority - screw that.
It's like running a World of Darkness MU* where 1% of the players get to be vampires or werewolves and everyone else has to be mortal. Not chooses to be because that's what they feel like playing; has to be.
Nope.
@Rook said in Roleplaying writing styles:
I learned a style, influenced heavily by the 'mentors' that I looked up to in RP as I started out my RP 'career' to be something of the following:
I actually think this may be the determining factor for the majority of us. How we learned to play initially or at least where we played the most in our early times seems to greatly determine the style we prefer; people who got their start in chat-based games (web chat forums, IRC, etc) appear to prefer brevity and faster poses, and people like me who happened to play where longer verbose poses were valued have in turned learned to value them highly as well.
Do you folks think that's a fair generalization?
New player (and not just character) integration should be at the foremost of any sphere TL. The distinction is important because it's virtually effortless for a player with existent OOC connections to find a place - plenty of times PCs srtaight from CG end up in a coterie/cabal within the day, if in all but name. So that's the easy part.
The best organic way to do this is through plot. On SHH some people were struggling to find reasons to meet (you can only do so much with bar random encounters) so when I started a crossover plot I got 8-9 players per scene, with several of them brand new characters. The key is to not make such PrPs entirely reliant on having a ST present but to encourage people to do research, network IC, talk to each other... then it gains momentum on their own, they hook each other in.
The easy way is to do it through boards but I've never trusted that. Y'know, that old "Ithaeur looking for pack!" posts. Whenever it can be done organically, it should be. Eventually though you're right @Glitch, it does come down to players accommodating each other and easing up on accepting new people into their fold.
@Seraphim73 said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):
Oh god yes. I agree 100%. I wish very much that more people would keep RPing after the "end" of a GM'd scene rather than just being like, "Welp, we killed the bad guy, and even though we're at the bottom of a collapsing mine, knee-deep in acid, with wounded to carry out and prisoners to rescue, we're gonna log out for the night and not worry about it."
If I run a scene which the PCs see no reason to play about after it's 'over' I consider it a failure.
@Packrat said in Course Corrections:
So history ramblings aside, I can both see why people would 'fear' gunpowder in their games
I don't think it's (necessarily) fear.
If I want epic high fantasy then guns just don't fit in that. It's not that they'd be overpowered, it's that thematically I want magical singing swords, not muskets.
Same thing with post-apocalyptic themes. Maybe I don't want to tell the story of how civilization was rebuilt and humanity claimed cities back, but gritty arcs where they're blocking tiny reservations with debris to keep the zombies out just long enough to not be eaten.
Not all games can be all things to all people, you know?
There's no such thing as a 'better' or 'worse' system in a vacuum. It all depends on what kind of game you want to run.
If @Coin says this is the goal for his game then that's the best system possible for it. Compromises are being made at different parts for any given possible implementation, with different advantages and disadvantages. So he intends to get a game where oldbies are ahead but newbies can catch up with a bit of effort and time; that is the goal. If someone presented him with an alternative that works better with that in mind I get the impression he'd consider it.
Conversely, TR gets to keep its people despite its shittiness because no game has been created yet intending to be as popular. Reno has only one sphere, SHH is invitation-only, @Coin or @Glitch+@ES' games are still not available, etc. It's not (just) the XP system - I can't imagine anyone who's played on SHH would feel short on XPs, for example, as they flow pretty liberally.
@Auspice said in Difficulty of single-player computer games:
Doing one single thing for an hour straight is hard on me. I don't know how some of you do it.
That's how I felt about raiding on WoW.
Although I had 3-4 hours to spare a few nights a week it was impossible to do it straight. When my dog wants out she wants out. If the dishes are sitting in the sink something needs to be done before I go to bed; as much as I'm nostalgic about chasing progress - one of my fondest memories is going out to a McDonalds after we finally downed Princess Huhuran after she took us like, 4 resets to kill - that's no longer possible for me.
Also I suck at FPS. So much suck.