Posts made by BobGoblin

I personally think Hx in the Mu setting is already dealt with largely in the way that a lot of games have people who try to connect their characters to each other prior. This would simply be a more direct and codified way to do it. As for implementation, I'm sure someone with more spare mental time than me could come up with a way. Off the top of my head I'd lean towards histories perhaps being a bit reworked from RAW and to allow them ebb and flow a bit more as incidents on game occurred (as they're supposed to in AW).

As for your scenario above, I would presume the Story Teller would be the person implementing such things.

In the DW game I have been a part of in the past, the story teller rotates every week or two depending on the mood and flavor; much like a MU. So I don't really see how that's an issue in the least? That's sort of how most games I have seen already do it. Someone sets up event, runs said event, they get to decide such things in said event?

Apocalypse World (Dungeon World)

@surreality

This is bordering off topic so last statement regarding this tangent. But itd be great for games to do that. It would then require consistent admin to stick with it. That is where things fall to shit. Even now I am laughing because an unnamed game has changed their activity requirements 3 times in as many months to try and push players out

If staff can't be consistent neither can players so there's no point in stating what you are. Especially when staff can't nut up and just say what they want and remove people they want to get rid of.

Instead of changing activity requirements just tell the player "we want you to drop this char so I can play it instead and ts people on it"

So to come full circle. I like 7th sea 2nd a lot but the narrative nature may turn people off. Then again if I were making the game I'd tell those people tough tits make your own 7th sea game.

@Thenomain

I agree. I keep hoping our community will adapt a bit. Then again it may be as simple as being firm in saying this game is narrative and meant to be it may not be everyone's cup of tea

@Thenomain

See I was looking at it from the opposite, viewing that 2nd would be a gentler touch for the MU environment where (supposedly) we're narrative people.

@Thenomain
1st or 2nd ed.?

i had spoken to someone who was thinking of developing a pirate game. Dunno where they ended up with things though

@Bobotron

You can... do things to bring it close using a selection @program to choose your dice pool and then the results you want to utilize.

The upswing of cosmic is I think it frees staff to introduce some non canon entities as the cosmos is a bit more expansive. But I'm with gany primarily. You lose a lot of connection with "what we know"

And all this because I said it'd be nice to have a heroes mu with some stats instead of just consent based. And then you communist bastards come in and say all mus must be consent based because statted games have assholes

Go back to 1940 Stalin

@Coin

It's all about what makes you comfortable playing and the people that you surround yourself with.

This right here. Hence why again I'd like to experiment with some variety to see if that would change things up

I don't wear pants. Don't pretend to know my life

Of course. I'm stuck in development meetings for work and bored out of my mind. If I hate my life why not spread it?

HOWEVER, to clarify for the meg

I believe the reason I see this more prominent in consent games is because of the type of player that open systems appeals to. Again from experience, when there is no real risk of negative consequences other than self imposed ones it encourages a different mentality than one that has checks.

To further as I stated I'd like to see a heroes game that used some kind of system for checks rather than solely consent largely in part to see if it would alleviate this problem. So yes. It is a player issue but I believe it's a player issue because the system appeals to that sort of player.

In fact I'd be curious to see how much of our player base overlaps between pure consent and checked consent games.

In discussions with my circle of associates (I don't have friends clearly) about the topic of heroes mu the consensus with them is that the lack of structure system is a problem. This is both from people who play open consent heroes games and those who refuse to. So I'm not pulling this topic from my ass but rather bringing up something that I've had discussions with no less than 8 people over.

Tldr someone should try a system for heroes games that involved some kind of check consent rather than purely open consent

@Meg

Oh shit. Are we about to get into an internet board logic contest? I love these things because I get to spend the rest of my day feeling like I wasted a shit ton of time. We really going to do this? You going to take he bait?

In experience I find it to be more pervasive in purely non consent. This is called anecdotal evidence.

Would be useful perhaps. Although if you don't have people you trust to reach out to in order to look over design documents then that might be an issue in itself right?

I have personally a circle of 10 people I can turn to for design critique and I'm a valid douche bag. Nice people should have more

I'd also find a heroes mu game in which consent was not the system used for resolution of conflict attractive. Every single one is consent based meaning nothing bad happens unless someone chooses it too

Which to be honest most of the time the choice is made only to attain snowflake status for the day.

Due to consent I find a lot of hero mus become a situation of posing over the top of others rather than with others.

Of course it takes time to make a game.

Just like it takes time to do anything else. At the end isn't that the whole crux? Is it worth your investment of time to make a game that may or may not flop horribly (and let's be honest probably will?)

IMO one of the flaws that takes place in this community is not enough planning and design go into the game itself, and too much throwing shit against a wall and hoping it sticks does.

It takes time to make a game.

But a chunk of it is probably wasted time due to poor execution and time management. In the end; I still believe too many games have no plans. This whole thread in fact is a result of a discussion about another game which from the posts there seem to indicate it has no plan beyond existing.

I think that's my drive. I want a game that has something more to it then it exists.

What if we stopped operating under the presumption that MU's should have an infinite or undetermined life span and instead look at it and say 'we're going to have a year's worth of activity' as a goal?

Nothing lasts forever. Except World of Warcraft apparently but I attribute that to making a deal with the great Satan.

In the mid-2000s there was a very (40+ player) successful X-men game based on the cartoons of X-men Evolution. It was limited to just the Brotherhood and Xavier's (although I think unaffiliated were in there as well.)

The more focused the game, the more impacting things can be on the micro level. Too many games are these giant monstrosities where what happens doesn't really matter. I'm assuming this is springing from the United thread. But even marvel 1963 which I've dabbled on is the same. More focused on # of players online then impact of story.

We have enough games where the big picture doesn't change, would love to see something with a new focus.