Posts made by Arkandel

@Kanye-Qwest said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:

That said, I'm interested in opinions. If you play, or even aren't playing, what types of GM events do you crave the most? Small, intimate adventures? Big battles? Grand displays? Just crowdsourcing for ideas, here. Shamelessly.

I think ideally you should aim for plot lines hard to hog by a few select players - that's basically your worst case scenario. For example a story which must be handled and resolved by nobleborn commits too much of its threads behind closed doors, making it difficult for others to become engaged.

On the other hand it all depends on how an event is structured from scratch. Again as an example, a war effort could in theory be very limiting in that it could be offered primarily for combatants to show off their stuff in; however when done right (well... 'right') it can involve spies, diplomats, craftsmen as well as military leaders and actual troops - plus their significant others, of course. All those are very successful literature tropes you could throw at your players.

Basically with that caveat the only type I'd avoid from the ones you mentioned above is small intimate adventures; not because they aren't great or can't advance character growth, since of course they can, but because they scale so poorly - so you're committing staff resources but can only pander the goodies to so a relatively small number of players. Those should ideally be ran by players, leaving you guys to primarily run the larger picture stuff unless of course you're itching to do something different.

@tragedyjones I've been watching Flash since episode 1 but lately I'm less satisfied with it. It gets cheesy and predictable for my tastes sometimes, with characters doing stupid shit obviously to serve the plot ("I won't tell <X> about <Y> although now is a great time to do it so later on they can be pissed off at me for hiding things from them"). It's the kind of writing that drove Arrow off a cliff in the last season.

@Lisse24 Now I'm curious. What do you mean?

@Meg Just to be clear here.

Of course I care about people, but I am not attached (or, more realistically, I try not to be) to them.

That's mainly a defensive mechanism - it used to bug me more when people just dropped out of roleplay but it happens so much it was soon obvious either I'd adjust my way of thinking to it or I'd be bummed much of the time. It's also a practical consideration though since sometimes games begin to suck and I feel I must seek greener pastures which means leaving players I liked behind. So for example I enjoyed playing with @Sunny on KD but I felt I had good reasons for departing.

To use the real life analogy, players I MUSH with - or shoot the shit with on MSB - are kind of the equivalent of folks I meet at my local gaming store. Some I know by sight and we're nodding-buddies, others we occasionally play a game of Magic together so I know their names plus a few more things about them, and we discuss most nerdy things together.

There are also some I've been playing with for years; we have each other's phone numbers and e-mail addresses, and we're aware of each other's life situations a lot more... but it's still the hobby that brings us together. It's the difference between "a friend of mine I play games with sometimes" and "a gaming buddy I also consider a friend" if that makes more sense.

TL;DR - I like you freaks, and I'm pretty fond of some of you. But I can't and won't count on you for anything more than to play, chat and have fun - nor will I ever expect anything more from you, because I know either you or I can disappear at a moment's notice...

... and that's okay.

@Sunny said in The Apology Thread:

But seriously, while I recognize that others have different approaches, I can't quite wrap my brain around it all the same. Why would anyone spend so much time with people that they aren't friends with? It's a foreign mindset to me.

A friend is someone I can rely on. By definition I can't - won't - rely on you guys even for things that are game-related let alone more serious stuff. I don't see that as diminishing the role as to differentiate it, to set boundaries for both your protection and my own.

There are folks online I confide in which is important to me. But I know, and I hope it's known as well, that things happen and they're completely forgivable in ways I wouldn't have forgiven in real life. For example solidarity and accountability matters to me a great deal in real life but far less so online; I've had people I really like flake out on me on characters we were playing together and I didn't hold it against them. In contrast to that I've had a childhood friend I had stood by when his life wasn't going so great who ghosted me completely when my own took a health-related downward turn, and I'll never look at him the same way again. An unreliable friend is not really one but online I consider everyone to be unreliable, if that makes sense.

Basically it's my expectations which are different because what unites and brings us together is a mutual sense of having fun, not a mutual showing of support. I really don't expect that much from y'all; don't be crazy, show up once in a while while I'm around and as long as we're having fun then it'll all work out splendidly. If you disappear on me it's not a big deal - our paths might cross again, it's a small world, and it's not like if we really miss playing together we don't have MSB to track each other down and go 'hey, wanna do something? where are you playing these days?'.

But although that kind of friendship is important I will return what I'm given, too. If I suggest playing together a few times and you decline but don't reciprocate later on I'll take the hint and not ask again. No harm done or insult taken but I'll share my time online with people who like spending theirs hanging out with me. I think that's fair.

I'm starting a new storyline this week, Food For Worms.

It begins with the Werewolves; if you want in, a good way to start is +bbread 14/5 which gives some early information to the appropriate characters, otherwise +event 21 is open to all comers for Thursday (as long as said comers can get to the Shadow).

Please let me know in-game (Richter) or PM me here if you need any special accommodations or need an IC reason to get involved.

I'm not private - I am guarded. And it used to be I didn't vent as I've learned to do now, letting some steam out when I need it, but kept it in; it means on one hand I was more private than now but also that was more prone to burning out than I am these days.

You won't find me easy to upset. I can be irritated but I'm more patient with it; and I use (some of you) as moral compasses often to be better able to tell when my actions are guided by frustration more than situations warrant.

But, above all else, my tolerance for drama is very near zero. If it gets to it I will communicate my grievance in no uncertain terms then one of two things will always happen very swiftly; either the problem will go away or I will.

There is no excuse for being unhappy while playing a game.

Good news everyone! @Bobotron is going to run a MU* where all of those things are playable.

@Miss-Demeanor http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/22721/how-to-play-your-favorite-retro-video-games-on-your-windows-pc/

@Ominous Still, it's an improvement over every other system where research is free. You can literally claim to spend more hours a week working on things than there are hours in a week because who can check?

@Apos Well, shit.

I'll say this, a research system where you get limited resources to do things sounds pretty damn good from where I'm sitting.

"Hey, give me an extended roll for this, it will take 8-hours per roll".
<player rolls 9 times>

Sure, I'm sure you just played a whole week basically doing nothing but stay in a lab. But when it means literally nothing to do so... it's basically just extra dice.

Is it better to ask forgiveness than permission?

Hmm.

@lordbelh said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:

@Arkandel Presently I am judging it both on what it is, and what it can be. The can be part is going to find itself less and less important as we go forward, though. There's only so long that can be an effective lure.

Agreed.

I will say that while there is always going to be a level of OOC in political games, I'm not sure exactly how much of it there is.

For political games OOC relationships can absolutely be a good, even a great thing! As I mentioned above for example, being specifically called out to play something by a faction ("hey dude, I need a spymaster who can pull it off, are you available?") is the exact opposite of what a clique can sometimes be; if factions can treat good players who're not currently playing as untapped resources and pull them into their orbit it's the best kind of win/win - folks feel wanted, the game gains players they don't have and no one is sitting there twiddling their thumbs because there's work for them to do!

But you know what that requires? Work for them to do.

For factions to operate like this the game must give them an absolute imperative to do so; to win today's struggle we need more troops, more money, more information - generating a roleplaying 'arms race' is imperative to me. And to do that, to turn newcomers into fuel to win races thus keeping them involved you need to constantly generate carrots for the Houses to go after.

@Pyrephox said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:

@Arkandel I don't think it's fair to hold a game that was explicitly in alpha testing, where the staff outright said, "No real plot movement will take place because we're mostly testing systems and mechanics" to the same standards you'd hold a fully released game.

That's reasonable, and I've made provisions about the alpha/beta status before in my posts although granted - I didn't do it on the one above. That's on me.

However that's in line with what some people were saying; and since no one can really judge a game on the merits of what it can become, only what it is, that's what I was suggesting solutions and approaches for.

Believe me, it's not because we don't care about Arx but because we do; now, I think it beats the alternative of saying nothing, but if criticism is deemed to be unfair or nonconstructive I would be happy to offer none.

@Lisse24 said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:

To be fair to Arx, this is a problem in any game that is either politically driven or deals with a central plot. Players will naturally circle up into self-made cliques and share plot details with other players that they like. I don't necessarily think that it's a bad thing for players to play with people they like. The only time it becomes a real problem is when it becomes difficult for other players to break into the cliques and find RP and/or interact with plot in a meaningful way, which is why any game inspiring to be what Arx is needs to think long and hard about how to pull people out of their cliques and about how plot gets distributed.

I don't think Arx has this solved, but I would be surprised if it did. I do think they're making positive moves. The task system is still being worked on, but it encourages people to move out of their spheres. I think it could be modified to do this more than it does at the moment, but I know redesign is already being thought about. Also implemented is the @randomscene command which incentivizes each player seeking out 3 random people to RP with in the space of a week.

I think Arx staff would add that anyone can put in an investigation. While this is technically true and something one often hears about during these discussions, a player needs to be involved enough that they know what meaningful type of investigation to run and they need to have a RP circle to share the results with before that is a true way to encourage diverse RP and plot involvement, in my opinion.@Lisse24 said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
To be fair to Arx, this is a problem in any game that is either politically driven or deals with a central plot. Players will naturally circle up into self-made cliques and share plot details with other players that they like.

See, that depends on the political game's setup. The key - and I've seen it sometimes although it's almost always happened organically and not by design - is to make the political struggle such that factions need to branch out because every character they recruit for their cause is a resource they can't be without.

On sandbox games this isn't really a requirement. When you're on a generic MU* where your actions don't affect the environment and your group is doing its own thing in its little island which doesn't affect any other groups' islands who cares about that lone guy who just rolled? He can be very easily overlooked and often is.

So yes, this resource system definitely sounds like a step in the right direction but the game should be gearing itself for its politics to matter. If the result looks rigged or the situation is static then there's no need for constant mobility and recruitment - even the OOC variety, where you go to a good player you know and you ask them to come roll because they are needed. People respond very well to that kind of thing "hey, come play with us, we need you". It's the exact opposite effect of cliques' where, instead of being shut out, you are a wanted commodity.

Plot is also a great motivator - introduce little tensions between factions and see how they respond. It really doesn't take a lot, just nudges are enough to fuel roleplay - but the nudges are still needed. Arx needs to make the move to player-ran stories.

@Sunny KD is nowhere on it!

@Goyim said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:

I played Arx for a month. Felt there was way too much OOC collusion from the player-base and not alot of plot to pursue. I decided I'd wait until the game went live since it'd be easier to inject my character into stuff.

That was...about verbatim, word for word, my experience.

Arx has a lot of potential. It has good staff - by which I mean it has staff who care about and understand roleplay, and they're willing to do the day-to-day work to keep their standards high. That's something few MU* do these days - most just put a wiki and a grid up, wrap it all up in some theme and let it fly on its own with little extra diligence after that. This game is different, you could tell it was a project its people actually cared for.

But there was nothing happening. You could be in one of the few cliques that had things between themselves but even those were islands; if you weren't in one of those groups you might as well not exist at all though. And at least while I was playing there wasn't really a system for players to run plot themselves so I couldn't even do my usual thing and get things going on a smaller scale.

Either way the e-mail account requirement simply never factored into my decision to leave at all.

@mietze To be fair, even the biggest villains we've seen at WORA/MSB aren't horrible 24/7. There's a reason they get to advance to the point where they can poison games, and it's not because they make enemies every time they interact with someone.

Juerg was quite nice to me, for instance.

@Cupcake Roll the dice! What can possibly go wrong?