I was like "Hey, cool" when they announced the FF VII remake.
Then I was like: "Hmm, I don't have a PS4."
And then I was like: "I...don't actually think I have the time to waste on that game like I did almost 20 years ago. I wasted so much of my life playing that thing...."
I think you'd have to play up the anti-Witcher sentiment to give the Witchers a downside, but that also wouldn't jive so much with a world where the training and creation of Witchers has revitalized.
I do like the idea of lower-power Witchers as a compromise. Maybe set it up so that somewhere in the timeframe, the Witcher Schools became specialized, so you'd have one specialized in combat/physical augmentation, one specialized in Signs, and one specialized in Alchemy. Not that the others wouldn't have some of it, but only the specialized schools would have the full breadth of their specialty, and so Witchers would now operate in groups of three. Or something. More like "Special Ops Teams" rather than "One Man Armies."
Though if full-blown Sorceresses are allowed, full Witchers probably could be too.
Or conversely get rid of Witchers altogether, but some small fragments of them have survived, leading to lesser-powered replacement monster-hunters of a less mutated bent. Could do something similar with Sorceresses.
Either way, it's certainly a setting rife for exploration.
Well.
Color me interested. Loved the Aberrant setting...just wish it hadn't kind of fizzled out the way it did (with Adventure! barely even appearing by the time all was said and done).
And holy crap, if I'm reading this right and the opening book is basically a "Present day action-adventure genre" kinda thing? Awesome!
Wonder if we can get an 80's-set "One Man Army" splatbook? 
@Three-Eyed-Crow said:
I had a point, but I've kind of forgotten it. We are sometimes weirdly resistant to making social connections on a game that's all about social connections, I guess, and I don't understand why.
Some people seem to have a deeply ingrained sense of "if it didn't happen IC on-game it never happened." It doesn't make any sense to me, but it's an attitude I've come across several times, and it's almost always annoying.
@Derp said:
@SG said:
@Roz Hahaha, I've encountered these types too, but there's another type that I find quite puzzling. When people play hyper-abrasive assholes or complete creeps.
I was playing on shadowrun a little while back and someone poses in being a really aggressive, rude asshole. Then they got bitter on +pub when characters that were better socialized just left rather than be around that. I just don't understand why anyone would choose to socialize with a character like that unless they were trapped on an island.
Is it because I work in the service industry that I have a low tolerance for characters like this? Or have I just not seen 'edgy rp' done well?
I think that this is usually only done well when there is a lot of OOC communication. My characters can definitely be dickish sometimes, and don't hesitate to be rude, but I try my best to be pleasant and cheerful OOC, and to let people know that the player is not the character, and vice versa, and work with them OOC on how we'd like to progress. I can often find ways of resolving the conflicts.
Usually.
Yeah, I generally find that about 80-90 percent of the time that a player gravitates towards playing overt assholes, they usually turn out to be assholes looking for a way to be assholes to other "people" without having to worry about consequences. Not to be confused with people that occasionally play a dickish character for a change of pace. I mean the folks that always play assholes.
Basically the MU* version of the Greater Internet Dickwad theory.
I've often found that I enjoy the process of creating characters as much or more than actually playing them, but I've definitely had the experience of thinking that I've got a really good, interesting (to me) character to play and having it just not quite connect once they're on the grid..
@Coin said:
@Bargle said:
Step the fuck up and...do what exactly? Nothing she did in that moment could do anything but make it worse for her.
This I agree with.
Unnecessary? Yes, absolutely. There were many things they could have done to avoid it if they wanted to, but clearly they didn't.
Gratuitous? No, not really. It serves a narrative purpose, presumably...we just have yet to see what it will be. And it was done about as tastefully/non-graphically as such a scene can be. Gratuitous would have been the camera lingering on the act and not the reaction to the act.
I disagree. None of what it established hasn't already been established. And no, they didn't do it as tastfully/non-graphically as such a scene can be, are you kidding me?
I don't really want to get into spoilers, but nnnnnoooooopppppeeeee.
Considering virtually none of it is seen on-screen, yeah, it really was. If you're expecting a complete cut-away and just leaving it "implied" then you may not be watching the show you think you are.
Step the fuck up and...do what exactly? Nothing she did in that moment could do anything but make it worse for her.
Unnecessary? Yes, absolutely. There were many things they could have done to avoid it if they wanted to, but clearly they didn't.
Gratuitous? No, not really. It serves a narrative purpose, presumably...we just have yet to see what it will be. And it was done about as tastefully/non-graphically as such a scene can be. Gratuitous would have been the camera lingering on the act and not the reaction to the act.
Well, Campaign Cartographer 3 is a "good" map-making program, but it's not free and there's a steep learning curve (easier than learning how to draw maps yourself, though).
Can't really think of any sites that make it super-easy off the top of my head. I'd imagine if they were out there we'd already know about them...but maybe (hopefully!) I'll be proven wrong.
I think I played there briefly. I think. It was a long time ago. Or maybe I'm misremembering. Never got too involved in anything, IIRC.
~Beer Cheese Dip!~
Ingredients
1 bottle (12 oz) of beer (any you like, but I prefer brown ales like Shiner Bock, still I've done it with a leftover Corona and still had it turn out good)
7-8 oz shredded cheddar cheese (I usually just buy a package, prefer extra-sharp cheddar)
1 package (8 oz) Cream Cheese
Chopped Chives to taste
2 tbsp butter (I use salted, unsalted is fine)
1 tbsp flour
2 tsp Worcestershire sauce
2 tsp Mustard (Dijon or plain yellow)
2 tsp hot sauce (I prefer Cholula)
1 dash garlic powder
Throw everything except the chives in a pot over medium-low heat, heat until all the cheese melts and everything mixes together, stirring frequently. Steaming and a little tiny bit of bubbling means you're good. Full-on simmering/boiling is too hot. Garnish with chives to taste before serving.
Great with pretzels (hard or soft)! Also excellent with sourdough bread.
If you want to be extra fancy or impress somebody you could make a roux of the butter and flour before adding the other stuff, but it's really not necessary.
@Ganymede said:
I role-play. Not sure why TS is still considered to be something different than that.
There does seem to be a dividing line for some folks.
That being said, more on topic: Sometimes, if it's a natural outgrowth of the RP and more importantly if I'm comfortable enough with the other player and vice-versa. It can be entertaining, sometimes for good reasons and sometimes for comedic reasons.
I've backed way, way off from ye olden days of yore, though. I had my phase where I sought it out frequently, and it tends to lead to all sorts of problems with some of those clingy players that had been discussed here in another thread, and often the kinds that aren't the relatively benign kind of clingy.
Can't hang with MU*ing on mobile devices, at least not yet. For the same reasons mentioned above. I tried MUDRammer on my iPad, and even with a bluetooth keyboard (which does help, but not enough) it was just too limited for my liking.