Posts made by Autumn

@Cobaltasaurus: I like Lords and Ladies, and I like that the setting opens up such a huge amount of imaginative possibilities. I also like the extended family feel of the setting, which (and this will sound funny to anyone who knows the books) I think works to soften some of the hostility that can crop up in L&L games about less familial groups of people.

@Ganymede: d'awwwww!

@Sunny: I think it would be extraordinarily hard to do DRPG-style character creation in a persistent environment. But I think you could do something to indicate who is "the best", or at least who's among the best. Here's what I have in mind ...

I'm going to take RtA's mechanics -- which I actually prefer to the DRPG for a large-scale game -- as an example; for those who don't know them, there are four stats (Force, Grace, Wits, Resolve) and then a large number of possible powers that may add to your stats in a particular situation (e.g., being a badass swordsperson). When you get in a conflict, you pick a stat, your opponent picks a stat, and you both total up your stats and add appropriate bonuses (plus a random factor), then see who has a bigger total. If you both pick the same stat, then yes, you add the same number twice.

So if you have a character whose high stat + bonuses in one of a variety of areas is in the top X% of the game, that character gets a little tag in his or her +finger that says "this character is renowned as one of the greatest swordspersons alive." Doesn't matter if it's primarily stat or primarily bonus -- although if you wanted to you could have little secondary tags that say 'this person is renowned for their legendary Resolve' or 'this person is widely known to be a skilled swordfighter', when they have a high-level bonus or a very high stat but the combined total doesn't push them into the stratosphere.

This allows the rankings to evolve organically, keeps the number of people ranked as "one of the best ever" in rough proportion to the game's total population, and allows people to be informed about who's good and who's GREAT ... while still allowing players to keep /some/ secrets. Even if people know you're one of the greatest swordfighters alive, they might not know your preferred style (i.e., what your high stat is); and even if you're renowned for your razor wit, people may not know whether you focus more on being a dangerous duelist or an expert in cutting remarks.

You could even have an additional power that you can buy to lower your "effective" ranking, if you want to be one of those people who trains in secret until they're the best in the world: you can do that, but it costs something to keep your actual skill level a secret. The default is that once you reach a certain point, the general public is aware that you're a badass.

I have realized two things over the past week:

1. I miss playing Amber (you know, the Roger Zelazny hard-boiled Lords and Ladies setting) more than I had thought I did.

2. I am pretty much done with the canonical Amber royal family as PCs.

I kind of want to see what other characters will do with the setting. Heck, I want to see the setting itself taken in different directions. When I log in to an Amber game after seven years and it's still Corwin and Eric squabbling over the throne ... I know that there are people for whom this is the essence of Amber and therefore there will always be an audience for it. I'm just not that person any more.

I like autumn.

Also, it's generic enough that no one will ever associate it with my real-life identity unless I intentionally reveal it.

I am all for sphere caps, although it's my opinion that they ought to go hand in hand with fairly low alt limits.

I don't mind having to wait for a spot in my chosen sphere to open up if that means more attentive staff (not even attentive to me, necessarily -- just more attentive generally). I would be a little peeved if I have to wait while Alty McAltface has a character in each of the 18 spheres available in Hypothetical Game #10, though.

(I do not know what SF:PotW's alt policy is; I am speaking in general, not offering criticism, or for that matter praise, of this particular game.)

I rather like #2, and "not cribbing real world feudal systems" makes me like it more. But then I am fond of L&L type games.

#1 is probably my second choice, but I don't dislike #3 -- although if it were me I would push it a little more in a Metamorphosis Alpha direction.

I have mixed feelings when it comes to equipment.

On the one hand, the core book is pretty sparse. I think you could make a reasonable argument that it's too sparse for some concepts that people actually want to play.

On the other hand, there's also such a thing as Too Much. Mostly, what the extensive equipment lists in Armory seem to do is make more work for staff and provide advantages for people who want to dumpster-dive through page after page of handgun minutiae (or whatever). A handful of items in any given category are quickly quantified as the best, and everything else in that category might as well be wasted space.

As long as staff is reasonably flexible I don't think a short equipment list is necessarily a problem. So there's no Lucerne Hammer on the equipment list; so what? Figure out what's closest to it that is on the list, run it by staff to make sure they think it's reasonable, and just call it a Lucerne Hammer when you get into a fight. I think most people will be fine with that as long as you don't try to start arguing that your Lucerne Hammer gives you 8-again even though the Great Ax stats say no such thing.

@arkandel @Ganymede @Cobaltasaurus So, single-Order? Multi-Order?

@cobaltasaurus Well, Reality Stalker is the best Legacy. But I might be biased.

@arkandel Hell yes. They were ...

magically delicious.

sorrynotsorry

@arkandel This is eerily similar to an actual place I used to go to in Palo Alto.

@Cobaltasaurus @Ganymede I will be very scarce today and early tomorrow, but Saturday evening/Sunday/Monday will be good. Or, well! Just PM me.

@cobaltasaurus I'm not dead!

San Francisco

Mage

You have my attention.

A very slightly easier version of #2 for TinyMUSH is to redefine GOD to the dbref of a character you do know the password for -- then recompile and restart. The TinyMUSH source code I have at hand is about ten years old, but it's probably still in flags.h:

#define GOD ((dbref) 1)

This has the advantage of allowing only the specified player to change #1's password; but it makes it even more important to change it back right away, because there's probably some code on your game somewhere that depends on #1 being God.

@derp said in Class/Society Systems, WoD:

Another idea: you could make Resources beyond 1 or 2 chargen only. Same with Status. If you want to be a big mover in a group or super rich, that kind of thing often takes years of work (not weeks or months), and people should have to make some real choices about what their toon's actual focus areas are.

I feel like this would need to be accompanied by a Haunted Memories style timer/justification system for spending XP in general, or it would lead to a lot of awkward questions about why it takes years of in-game time to get a good enough job to buy a late-model car (Resources 3) or a house (4), but over there in a different part of the game people are becoming multiple-degree black belts or reaching Gnosis 5 in a month a two.

I'm not necessarily opposed to going in that direction, mind you; I think that approach has some benefits. It might be challenging to come up with a sufficiently sophisticated approach to handle it well, though.

@czcyk Veilmist!

(I am joking. Mostly.)

Unfortunately I don't have time right now to devote to one of the more central characters. Is there space for people to pick up some of the more .. obscure elements of the canon and be occasional guest stars?

Polar Boy is really a fantastic character. But then that's part of what makes the Legion great; they have so many fantastic characters. Pick a name out of a hat and you're more likely than not to get someone with a wonderful, memorable character arc.

This version of Demon sounds a lot like Mage, tbh. Or rather: if Mage were played as if the Seers were an overpowering threat, and not drawing their attention is extremely important to your continued existence. Since I both like Mage and enjoy it more when it's something other than just a race to demigodhood, this is relevant to my interests.

If you in one breath denounce the "Republican war on science", and in the next talk about crystal skulls, planetary influences, the "metaphysical properties" of the gemstones in your jewelry, and how Trump's astrological chart tells us everything we need to know about the man ... you aren't helping.

I'm sorry. I like rocks and the stars, too. But you're not helping.