Posts made by Bananerz

@thenomain said in Halp Me @ Arx:

No one punches wolves like Gaston.

For there's no man in town half as manly. Perfect, a pure paragon!

Likability
I find on most MU that it is a pretty binary scale on likable/unlikable with players always choosing to act at the fringes. You see them in every single game. Tropes and the way they’re interpreted, mixed with the dosage of whatever the marketing departments of particular cinema/music/etc is chucking to be ‘popular’ at the time and voila, there are your characters. You see players moving from one game to another, and you can see that ghost of the other game's character there in the new game. Mainly it isn't about the character, it is the player behind it that other players will more than likely gravitate towards and that's natural; we are playing on a virtual tabletop.

Incompetent
You might grow out of one of a pile of initial weaknesses, but you’ll more than likely acquire another weakness. The weaknesses of mythological characters comes to mind; the vast majority might have done epic deeds and overcome a weakness/adverse situation but then don’t see the true weakness in the foundation of their soul as they fail.

I rarely see people playing to the weaknesses of their character sheet and intentionally/unintentionally transfer their Player stat to the Character stat (meaning the player really is the one speaking by its proxy character). Which is why you see the same characters interpreted quite differently by multiple players who play them as each go for their schtick. It’s rare you see folks play up to their weaknesses as it leaves them vulnerable for an immature player to take advantage of the situation which then leads to good player leaving or not showing a weakness again. Dumb.

That said, I don't want to play with the village idiot who is eating their shit. That is just weird RP that doesn't interest me, but hey, it worked for Black Adder.

Inactivity
Every character will at some time go inactive just as every game will die. It’s just natural. I get less interested and active in a game for all sorts of reasons, many which have nothing to do with the game itself as I might be playing some other game (like RDR2, ACO) or traveling, etc. Some games I just play to offer PRP or whatever, some games I’m more engrossed in and so can devote more time. If I can’t find RP in public spaces or events due to me being not very active, problem is probably me and not the game. YMMV.

Really flaky player here, and a bit interested in at least helping you. OCs are fun, and flourish really well on Arx if you have some backup plans. I’m thinking an arms trader/dealer with possibly a Tybaltesque streak. Or something.

The video doesn't really do it justice, at least not for me. But good golly, there's $50 from me. I can't wait, this will be good.

That inner voice inside of me though is saying with a scowl "I do wonder the legality and binding of terms on the bottom of the description page on a Kickstarter in which no one has to actually read/confirm before they purchase."

Shut up, inner voice. I've already given them our money.

@roz Saying someone can't use a PB because you're using it, when you're using it without actual rights to it. Yes, that's hypocritical.

@sunny said in Respecs.:

I don't mind it. We're here to have fun, and if someone wants to readjust their character for WHATEVER reason, I don't see a problem with it. Pretty much everything can be explained in a reasonably IC fashion. The only thing I really care about is that it not happen every week/month -- having some sort of 'you can do this 1 time per 6 months' or w/e, just to keep the work involved low and to keep it from going from 'redo the character to make needed changes' to a way to actually play (these stats for one month, then those stats for another month, etc.).

^ This.

Also, allow folks to take NPC's out of the closet to try new things!

Player A gets on the game first, takes PB A because so dreamy.

Player B arrives later on, has another great concept that is approved and takes PB A because so dreamy.

Who is in the right here? Are you saying that because the prior person claimed the PB that they did the right choice for casting? Because I can point to a lot of movies and shows where actors were terrible.

Are you saying that having the PB means you own some type of right on the PB when you actually don't have the copyright to that image and/or likeness? That seems hypocritical.

*edited, swapped around words

@arkandel Not just the rules, but the mechanics and calculations behind the rules aren't usually published and players get to find out sometimes in trial and error.

I honestly don't care if someone wants to respec. I'm creative enough that I can handle hand waving prior scenes, especially when the player is a positive presence and losing them is far worse than a character joining the hundreds rotting away on a roster.

It is skeevy. You're using an image of a living person in a way they haven't accepted or approved.

To put it in another way, would you be fine with your image being used by strangers with no control, perhaps in ways that truly go counter to your own personal beliefs?

Just because someone is in the public doesn't mean you have a right.

@arkandel All games die. Here are my thoughts on respec.

Viewpoint 1: We're here to have fun.
Fun is the primary and overarching reason why we play games, and when you aren't having fun then there's no reason to keep playing. If a player is no longer having fun on a character and doesn't want to abandon the game, they should be allowed to respec. When you say "It breaks realism", you should step back and see that this is just a game, it's fake and pretend where adults spend time/effort to play a fantasy. Why does it matter if a player who is contributing positively to a game wants to respec the character? Why can't you hand wave inconsistencies on this while you hand wave inconsistencies throughout every game? We should focus most on player happiness and the pursuit of fun for as many as possible, and there is no game that will last forever. Remember that. No game lasts, so why not get the most fun while it does last? To put it in another way, if we were sitting around the table and someone went "I'm getting so bored but I love playing with you all, can we do something so this character can be respeced?" I'd be nodding yes, just as long as it wasn't simply temporary to overcome one challenge and then they go back. I want them to have fun.

Viewpoint 2: It's not fair!
A character purchases and invests XP into their character based on rule sets, using said advantages (perceived or real) to have fun. When another player suddenly is able to abandon choices they no longer wish to be stuck with, it can create a sense of being upset or jealous by other players who for whatever reason desire to stick with their spec. In this viewpoint, I'd rather see the player roster their current character and make a new one. Or, let them create an NPC to try out these new respecs just to see how it feels (like taking clothes out of a closet, or try before you buy). Folks on this might also agree that if game mechanics change then players ought to be able to adjust accordingly.

That said, I absolutely hate the vote XP system on any game. Every character should have the same XP given to them as a pool. GM's who make a roster system shouldn't punish those characters who the playerbase say aren't as relevant and hence not picked. Those players who can spend significant hours in a game, can effectively win at the social/political aspect of any game by getting popular can all benefit far more than others who might not be able to do these things. Is that fair? Not really. I haven't heard a reasonable viewpoint as to why any vote XP system still exists but now I'm derailing your thread!

@arkandel I just deleted my few images. Bye! There's one original artwork still on the character.

And yes, it's all weird. Very skeevy when you think about strangers using your photo/name for some undead werewolf slash game.

I find that with PBs, folks tend to have preconceived ideas as to the characters based on that PB, you see the same PBs across multiple games, people getting very precious about said PB (but it'll wreck immersion if we have 2!). TBH, you probably don't have the rights to use that image and likeness either, but that's something entirely different. Imagine though complete strangers taking your image and likeness, plastering it across the internet in weird text fantasies. You probably wouldn't like it, and it probably isn't treating them like you'd want to be treated.

This is a fantasy fun time, I get it. But ultimately it's a text game, and personally I wouldn't mind a game without PBs so I focus more on the text of the game. Or, I should use historically accurate public domain images.

I'm guilty of all the above. I'm going to change. No more.

@shincashay said in Rosters: To PB or Not To PB?:

Almond butter. Stuff is like crack.

Or Nutella.

The only PB I like is the stuff on the spoon. Say no to PBs!

@coin I've heard the best way to write about a hero is to first understand and write about their nemesis.

The thread was on a suggestion for anonymous messengers and has been answered in the OP's mind.

All of this should probably be on a new thread or on the main Arx Boogaloo thread.

@scar Grr. I just want to send gifts, hidden praises, threats, dead birds. To use it as a tool to create RP, not to shove some player off the game. This is why my idea sucks because it'd just in the end be a tool to be abused.

Be limited to one praise and one condemn a week. I had to be so damn choosy with Driskell, he had like 1 a week. Social combat represents an investment of resources and time, if you had only one to give you probably would be more choosier. The actual fluctuation and power behind it would of course be determined by stats and things that I don't know.

Just as folks pile on with condemns, there is pile on with praises too. I see that happening.

@thenomain said in @Arx: Anonymous Messengers (Answered):

This is too bad, because PvP between trusting people is pretty goddamn fun.

It is!

@thatguythere Ha! It's okay to double-check!