Posts made by Arkandel

It's not a game, but http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/9/10940046/google-drive-free-2gb-space-security-checkup .

Basically complete the Google security audit and grab 2 free GB for your Google account.

@Lisse24 said:

Finally, I always highlight my name client side along with the name of immediate family/packs/coterie mates/etc. It helps me know when I should be focusing on what's being said instead of zoning out.

Yeah, I do that too, it helps a ton. Then again I never remember to make it MU-specific, so I'm playing different games and "Daniel" gets lit up for no reason.

@Ghost To be honest, one of the main reason I hate PvP with dice (at least on nWoD MU*) is because they actually make posing undesirable. It actually gets in the way, which is the exact opposite of what I log on for.

I'm not arguing they aren't necessary, you need the mechanics to provide resolution, but I don't have to like it.

@Alzie I don't see why your suggestions wouldn't go over well. They sound reasonable.

@faraday said:

But if I'm sitting at a table with Bob and Jane having a conversation, my natural inclination in any MUSH environment is to wait until Bob has a chance to react. Sure you can wave the "3 pose rule" banner to permit RP to continue, but if Bob makes it clear he has nothing to add (through a nods quietly pose or an OOC aside) then I'm going to proceed with my pose much faster than if he didn't.

IMHO that's a very bad inclination in large scenes. Their pace is already way off from normal roleplay, the last thing they need is one idle person slowing everything down to a crawl.

Pacing is your ultimate resource when you're in scenes like that. Lose it and it will become a dreadful exercise in patience and anger management, you need to just keep the ball moving and stuff flowing.

The other thing I'd really like to be rid of is the idea that people 'hate' to pose in a scene. If you have nothing to pose you should never have to just to 'keep the flow'.

For instance a scene I was in recently had a pose like this: "Bob has nothing to say now so he will just wait until later to tell Jane some things". I am not even paraphrasing much at all! That basically only adds spam to the scene and offers nothing to anyone else; there's nothing to hook onto or to respond to, it's just... white words on a black background.

@Jaded said:

1. Outline with the players what they think they are doing, and what objectives the feel are needed to achieve that goal.

How though? Most of the time players are invited to the scene, they might not even know what it's about ('Invictus meeting!') and the person inviting them won't know in advance who's coming or not.

2. Determine what is necessary and what is not. Is Bob going only because he has that one ability that they need at this one point in time? Let Bob handle that off-screen or do something with him in a scene separate that runs in tandem. Use this information to break a large group down. Are Bill and Maria going because they are to disrupt communications with their jammer? Let them join Bob in a side-scene.

How do you deal with what-ifs? You know, maybe Bob has nothing to bring up that can't be handled offline or one or one, but Jim has a thing that'll make Bob explode. You can't know that in advance unless you, for all intents and purposes, run the scene OOC and just let the results be known IC afterwards. Not saying this is necessarily a bad thing, by the way, just pointing it out.

3. Limit it to five people per group.

That seems arbitrary. Who do you leave out if they want to be there without making them feel excluded?

4. If a person is non-responsive when their turn is called for posing or rolls, skip them. They are considered overwhelmed IC and unsure about what to do. If the afk was noted ahead of time, consider them delaying their action - if they are smart they told you what they wanted to do ahead of time. But always keep the flow of the scene moving.

Agreed.

5. All complaints with rules calls or other like discussions take place after the scene. Anyone doing so during the scene is removed or welcome to leave. No arguments.

Agreed with the disclaimer that it's not always clear who's 'in charge' of the scene - perhaps it should be - and that it's very complicated to do that sort of thing retroactively. I.e. Bob used mind control on Jim in a contested way, the person running it thinks it's legitimate... and afterwards staff point out the rules clearly state that was a no-no. What do you do, retcon the meeting out? A few hours of everyone's lives there just went to waste.

6. Lastly focus on fun and story over dice.

Agreed, but that's not everyone's cup of tea. Some people want dice, it's not fair to tell them they can't ever have it if they're to have a large scene (especially if those scenes decide on important things).

Many of us dislike large public scenes - for the purposes of this I'd say any planned scene meant for more than five people counts.

So yeah, I dislike them too. But I'd like us to think past our bias against such scenes and consider if there are ways to make them work; that means I'm not looking for "I HATE THEM, LET'S NOT EVER HAVE THEM" replies because that's not conductive to having a debate.

In my view the biggest problems with such events are the following:

1. Spam. There's too much stuff going on to keep track of everything.

2. Lack of purpose. Many of them don't give people things to do, so after the entrance grand-poses they idle away.

3. Spotlight. Some people want to showcase their stuff which is hard to do when there are seven people in the room.

In semi-random order some suggestions to open the floor:

• Places. Either they exist or the scene shouldn't be. Break the big thing down into manageable sub-parts - just like in a real party or meeting. In real life you're not part of every conversation, you're part of smaller clusters of people having a chat, moving on to mingle, etc.

• Very liberal rules (if any) about posing order. Three-pose rule (or even one-pose rule) are mandatory IMHO. You have to account for the fact some people will go AFK or idle a lot, they shouldn't become bottlenecks.

• Someone must be willing to step up and organize the scene a bit IC/OOC. The lines can blur between the two to facilitate its flow - script it if they must ('each of us will get a turn to tell us How To Fight The Orcs') or just address specific people to get them involved ('Bob, what do you think we should do about the Orcs?') but free form leads to madness and boredom since fewer players are proactive than ones who take initiative.

• Pre-set a scene duration. It's fine if it's so great and active it goes over that limit - that means it's working - but don't let it drag on. Two hours is a reasonable threshold, once you reach it everyone thanks each other and goes home.

What would you do to facilitate large gatherings?

@Shayd said:

Also--looking for current games, not nostalgia fueled recollections; hoping to find some good places to play.

There's no way to escape nostalgia. How do you separate how the game was like from who you were at the time you played it?

@Shayd I doubt you can get anything close to uniform answers. People will answer based on their point of view and timeline, naturally.

I'd say my most fun time was on HM in the VampSphere. Carthians versus the world, with several really good roleplayers headlining their respective factions. Cut-throat politics in the total absence of a staff presence (in fact when staff did get into it they usually made things worse). I had a blast.

Other people's mileage can and should vary.

@Ganymede That fucking movie.

@dontpanda said:

Oh! Get a U-lock. No, a thick cable is not the same. Get a U-lock. I can't stress that enough.

Yeah, there are some good locks on Amazon (I recommend the Kryptonite Evolution Series which I own, the OnGuard Pitbull STD is pretty good too) for $50ish which are more than good enough for most people. You don't want your brand new $$$ bike gone because some guy took it off with a single lever (that's what most of them do, just use a piece of metal they find around the area, twist the chain around it and hope it yields).

Also get some apps. There are some sweet ride-finding ones out there, and with GPS you can keep track of where you're going, how far you're riding etc. If you're into that sort of thing it's a blast - gadgets!

@Groth said:

@Arkandel said:

2. Making sure one side doesn't dominate everything. People have and will roll for the winning team until it's invulnerable.

Planetside has an interesting mechanic to deal with this where the team with the least territory actually becomes more powerful. I think it would be worthwhile to add similar mechanics to a PvP focused MU*

It's hard to implement any such thing on a MU* unless you're willing to enforce what concepts actual PCs get to play. Power is very often a matter of active hands on deck - no amount of NPCs or coded bonuses can possibly make up for the absence of actively played characters on each side.

Once a faction gets going and people see RP happening there that is where they'll go. Some will roll new PCs, others will migrate their existent ones over, but it's a pretty well known phenomenon.

The only other way staff can try to work on it is to split the flagship players around. But that, too, assumes such players are willing to do so and/or they'll be somewhat equally active, neither of which is a given.

If we're talking about a MU* PvP is essential. Staff - and even Storytellers - can't scale plot up to meet demand and eventually people grow bored having nothing to do. There should be tension.

There are two keys here.

1. Making sure tension isn't short-lived. If all it means is people get slaughtered in +dice wars it's doing no one any favors.

2. Making sure one side doesn't dominate everything. People have and will roll for the winning team until it's invulnerable.

This is pretty neat. Darth Vader finds out he has a son.

To me it's fairly simple.

In an adult game - and any say, World of Darkness MU better be adult-only - then the expectation are your players can make their own choices. Staff is not there to parent them, they only need run their game.

If any element of the game is actually disruptive to its theme and direction then sure, intervene. If you're trying to run a sober political vampiric sphere and some players want to furry it up, come dressed up as furries and do furry things in your Elysia then yeah, you have the right to intervene.

But let's leave ethics out of it unless someone complains they are being harassed, abused or otherwise mistreated. Otherwise it's not anyone else's business to tell people what is right or 'healthy' for them; if it was then an honest look at how much time of our lives has been collectively spent staring at white letters on black screens would probably call for an intervention, too.

I've plenty of peeves about what people do with themselves. Oh, plenty. Some are personal and some are objective ones backed by science and everything!

For example I don't like smoking, it's an unhealthy habit. Yet the day I start butting in and telling you you need to stop smoking you should tell me to mind my own damn business, because you'd be right. And if I came and told you that you shouldn't roleplay smoking because it... promotes... something? Then you'd also be justified to make fun of me because that's a hilarious thing to say.

@tragedyjones said:

Just an update I don't think we will have a special Storyteller slot anymore, at least not initially.

What's a Storyteller slot?

@Ghost said:

CHUDs

I had to google that shit up. I wish I hadn't.

@Lithium Oh, okay. No, maybe we didn't meet then.

@Lithium WoT MUDs! Which did you play? Who were you? Maybe I know you.