Best posts made by Auspice

Other facets of today may have sucked but my mom sent me a video of my kitty (my now 14 year old cat that I left with her in SC when I moved west cause she's too much an old lady for big moves and my mom loves having a lap cat around).

@Derp said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

@Auspice said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

It also, on platforms like Ares, gives a very convenient place to attach logs.

I hear that on Ares you can have your PC in multiple scenes at once without the need to proxy things over, which is a point in its favor, and I think would resolve a LOT of issues around PC/NPC access.

You can so long as the others are via web portal.

Though you do miss an important factor of the multiple scene factor: some people can't handle multiple scenes at once.

self-gripe: I have a multi-pen, two of the pens (cartridges? whatevers) in it have been out of ink for weeks. I keep remembering to replace them at the most inopportune times.

In the shower!
Falling asleep!
Arms in the sink covered in water and dish soap!

C'mon brain, work with me here. How can I take appropriately color-coordinated notes at work without my pen at full operational capacity?!

@Derp said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

@Auspice

No, no.

Ok. Let me try this again, since this doesn't seem to be doing the thing.

You are a staffer running an NPC. You have, for sake of argument, two people with regular access to this NPC. One person RPs with this NPC almost every night (because, I dunno, they're the PCs mentor or something).

You still need to make sure that you are giving screen time to the other person. The way that you do that is:

1. Either run multiple scenes,

-or-

2. Make sure that they are getting access to said NPC in another fashion.

If you aren't doing one of those things, and just cut the PC off from the NPC for no valid reason, then you are failing in your duties as the staffer running said NPC.

Okay. Yes. We are in agreement on that.

It's just that your phrasing previously used seemed to imply that staffers should be required to multi-scene to give everyone the time they want and I am sort of heeeeeeell no on that idea.

I do not believe in catering to the lowest common denominator.
I understand that training materials are there to help and you need to consider the lcd, but I do not believe in catering to the lcd.

We have someone at work who needs such prescriptive instructions to the level that you cannot say:
'Here is a screenshot of the screen you will be working in for this stage of the work.'
'These are the fields that are required, all others are optional and to be used as-needed.'
^ average person can go OK, great. I can work with this (and every other user in the scrimmage HAS).

She is the type of user who wants:

• Here is a step-by-step slideshow of how to get to this screen in the tool.
• Here is a screenshot with each required field highlighted.
• Here is a detailed example of what to fill into each required field with a reminder that you do not need to save after each.
• Here is a detailed example of what you might fill into each optional field, with extensive details as to when you will or will not need the optional fields, and reasoning why the are optional. And a reminder that you do not need to save after each.
• Here is how to save, even though it is exactly the same as every other screen in the software.
• Here is how to submit, even though it is exactly the same as every other screen in the software.

I have argued against this.
Vehemently.
Because I know people.
I know that this will make the training material so long that most users will take one look at it, go 'nope' and just hassle the support/training team for every single question they have (thus causing more work for everyone).
It will turn 'average capable users' into 'lowest common denominator' users themselves.

This sort of manual is how you end up with companies where there's 'Oh, go ask Bob, he knows how to do all those weird things in the software' and you find out that Bob actually read the document and no one else did and every single answer is in there but no one ever reads it because of how ridiculously repetitively detailed it is...

...because it catered to Karen, who rather than just put the effort into doing her job, cried until someone held her hand and did it for her.

I've tried to bring this up before, but I sort of feel as if the last time I did it sort of delved into a 'but because I was burned by someone I know giving people any sort of leeway is how we end up with Spiders and Cullens' because my attempt to say hey, don't assume the worst of everyone and don't approach everyone as the worst possible scenario was...Apparently instead taken as 'give blanket forgiveness to everyone that has ever harmed you'? (This is at least how it had read to me and was my feel on the response)

Or maybe people do just firmly stand on the side of 'because I've been burned in the past I know I will absolutely definitely be burned again so it's best to just assume everyone has fire for hands'.

I'd rather that not be the case. And I know I can be guilty of kneejerk reactions myself sometimes (it's sort of a human nature deal, esp in those of us with anxiety since our fitefitefite mode is flipped to always on), but damn if I'm not trying to be better.

@Herja I've been having a heckin' hard time getting back into dating myself. Like, I purposefully pulled myself out of it for a while and getting back into it has... been hard.

I don't even know what do this do anymore. And then the fear of guys who are damn creepers god yes.

@Pandora said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

But what it all eventually boils down to is that NPCs are going to play where their player's interests and enjoyment lies. Being someone that gripes about staff not paying them attention doesn't make you fun, interesting, or enjoyable. So you're probably going to live your best life on a game where being fun isn't as important to staff as making sure everyone is getting their turn, deserved or not, in the spotlight.
Serious question though: Why would anyone ever want staff/NPC attention from anyone they had to bully/harass/shame into RPing with them? I'd feel super gross if I thought someone was begrudgingly RPing with me.

I need to point out here that some of the people arguing the points in this thread (or upvoting posts doing so) are people I know for a fact are really positive members of the community. Like Seraphim74, Wretched, Derp.... They've been really strong. uplifting people (ST a lot, help fellow players out, active, don't publicly complain on-game, etc) when I've seen them on games. So I'm not really digging the tone of this post.

I was doing some chores around the apt a minute ago and I think a lot of the issues here are:

we all agree on the bad ethics of 'Staff who spend a lot of exclusive time with just one or two people via NPCs' - that can be agreed on. We're muddying around in other places. The issue is that for so, so many years, it has been acceptable practice to do so. So many Staff on so many breed of games have just done this that it's become an acceptable (if bad) practice. And it sounds like, out of everything else we've agreed or disagreed on (such as whether Staff NPCs should be shared among Staff or can be exclusive to a single Staffer): this needs to change.

Staffers should be available and approachable on their NPCs. Yes, of course, within reason. We all have a limited capacity for how much we can play, but no Staffer should be letting one or two players monopolize all of their time on an NPC. And it's a practice we should all start voting on in the ways we can. If we're a fellow Staffer, speak up/out. If we're a player, vote with our feet. It's not cool.

The only thing I can think of is extensive research into Indiana tax records as research for a novel I never finished.

@Sparks said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:

But if you are running a game in your house, you are not running it on behalf of anyone else. You do not have to sign anything before you sit down to run a game, not even if you post an open invite on the board at the gaming shop and allow people you don't even know to come.

But this isn't running a game in your house. I'd liken that to being a player and running a PRP for your friends.

This is a game full of people, many of which you don't know. It is more like being DM for D&D Adventures. Because there's a whole host of people and when you put up that +event, you might get 4 people you don't know and 1 you do.

We want it to be like a Friday night with our buddies, but when we Staff, that ain't it. When we Staff, we are Staffing for the entire game and the bigger the game, the better the chances that we are doing so for people we don't know.

Fred, the unengaging boring guy who just treats an NPC like a quarter gumball machine of plot might be new enough to the hobby that he doesn't really know how it works and if you just avoid him, how is he to ever know better? Only by playing with him and taking the time to feel out whether he's 'just that way' or maybe still green enough to just need a guiding hand will you know.

Maybe Sally who fusses over feeling like she's always left out between the first +event and the resolution (while you think 'Well, Sally, maybe if you'd actually move your butt!') doesn't know she can put in +requests to do legwork or reach out and ask questions. Maybe she thought every single step of the way was gonna be another public +event and felt like she must have missed some along the way (I've seen this happen! People new to genres or transferring over from MUD to MUSH or MOO to MUSH etc).

MU is unique. Yes it has similarities to TT but it is not TT. TT is a very small, controlled environment. It is just a handful of people and most often the same handful of people week to week. MU is anywhere from a dozen to maybe hundreds (on certain games) of people. You can't know them all, but when you have ones who want to interact with NPCs or plots or spheres you control you can try rather than this tendency that exists to just write them off because they're 'annoying' in some way.

@Tinuviel said in Why We Don't Make New Friends Anymore (Or Creepers Do Creepy Things):

@Auspice The best friend I ever had was my roommate just after university. I worked days, he worked nights. We saw each other for maybe ten minutes a day for two years. That is my ideal living situation.

I had a roommate like that for a little while

that asshole created Fred

Fred was a broom given a face and arms that he left around the apartment for me to find (I worked third shift) when I came in in the dark at 5am

Fred scared the everliving shit out of me a lot

Arx thread has a lot of good and bad.

MU Things I Love was started much later.

Data is skewed. Thesis rejected.

@Sunny said in Good or New Movies Review:

As we watch 'Evolution' for the millionth time in my household (it is a family favorite), I am reminded to tell everyone to go watch it if you haven't, it's hilarious. 2001. It is not -- well, just watch it. It's streaming on Amazon.

P.S. Ghost is not Ben Affleck

and whichever Matrix movie had the weird Zion orgy was bad.

Thread is now 'Should @Rinel bring back the birb avatar'

I will say I've RPed drug use a fair bit but it's always a 'read the room' thing for sure. And I've generally been sure, for characters who have problems with drugs to put it in +finger (if the option is provided) that 'hey this is a thing it might come up let me know if it is an issue'

Only once did that ever present an issue. I recall running into someone who tried demanding that I shouldn't be allowed to RP it, period, (whether around them or not) because they had a family member who had drug issues. Which, I sympathize, but while I'll gladly keep it off screen while playing with you I'm not gonna sanitize my whole char (or be pleased that they kept paging to preach/rant at me and another PC who was similar to mine) because you demanded it.

Anyway. That I guess is my other concern. What would be the reach of such cards on a MU? Just in events? In any RP? Could someone use it against an entire PC concept?

There are many things that work great in tabletop scenarios that just don't extend to MUs (and vice versa). I think this might maybe be one.

@Rinel said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

Idk where else to put this

I JUST CAME OUT ON FACEBOOK. TO EVERYONE. EVERYONE KNOWS NOW. OH MY GOD WHAT HAVE I DONE

I think, unfortunately, part of the reason it's difficult to say 'If you don't like what's being played then leave' is because we are discussing uncomfortable content at times.

Violence. Smoking (as referenced in one of the prior posts). Murder. Sexual content. These are 'triggering' things as discussed. Yes, I very much agree that if it is something where if you realize 'Hey, this is a negative environment for me, the rest of you are enjoying it' ... you need to step out. There are things where the group probably shouldn't be playing it (I'm not OK with on-camera rape, for example: way not OK.... but y'know, uh, that'd probably be where I step out), but not to digress.

The reason it's difficult to discuss is because over yonder in the HogPit we've had people get upset over these things. Scenarios of 'I was in a scene' or 'They play this stuff on this game' and the response has been 'Hey it sounds like it'd be healthiest if you removed yourself from this situation because the rest of these people wanna play this, but you are very unhappy right now. Don't put yourself through that if it's taking you to a bad place' and the response has been 'Don't victim blame!'

... so where do we find our middle ground here? If suggesting someone remove themselves from an uncomfortable/bad situation is victim blaming but we also acknowledge that one person shouldn't be able to force an entire group to change (like another scenario above: an entire plot is themed around investigating a murder and someone is triggered by the concept of murder so....... how do plot?)

This is why it's hard to discuss and why it gets so frustrating to discuss sometimes. I lean to the side of 'it's best to step away' because that's what's always worked best for my health in the past.

One of my issues comes from a birth defect. I go through periods of time in which most foods make me very sick (and can last anywhere from days to weeks). When those happen, all I can do is eat whatever I can manage. If that's just (grilled) chicken sandwiches and mashed potatoes? Welp. A gal's gotta eat.

The concept of staff and their role in things (along with worries of alt-outing) makes me wonder on another idea.

I like to craft plot catered to groups. I also love when plot is catered to groups. What if games had code where players could set their hard limits on a note/attribute that only staff could see? Both for purposes of support and for plot creation ("Okay I want to make a plot for these players here but I want to make sure I don't accidentally trip over anyone's hard nopes....").