Lucifer's been renewed for a fifth (and final) season. So, they'll have a chance to end the story the way they want, rather than leaving it on a cliffhanger when it doesn't get renewed at some point.
It's smart. They already had to save it once.
Lucifer was always slated to be a 5 year run, so they are just getting to finish it up like they always had intended to do.
I have a single word to say to that:
Supernatural.
@whirlyturd said:
There is always more to the story then what you think, but knowing this, does this just make pulling the plug a better idea?
Yes.
Does anyone have any thoughts on Jessica Jones S3? I'm debating if it is worth my time watching it or not.
@Jaded If you liked 2, reviews have said 3 is good.
Season 2 lost me pretty quick, it was too meandering and slow to get any kind of hook in there, though I hear the last few episodes really came through, I might just skip to the end.
JJ 3 has better pacing than 2.
@Ganymede said in MU Things I Love:
@Pandora said in MU Things I Love:
Emphasis mine; the amount of side-eye this would get in most places these days is hilariously depressing.
The side-eye was fine. There was supposed to be side-eye. And there was: there were rumors and everything. ICly, he was asked about it. ICly, he faced accusations. But, then, I was playing with mostly adults.
I later played the daughter on another game, where she had grown up. And that, in and of itself, was fun, albeit in a twisted way.
Sometimes playing that sort of family relation to old characters can be really great, yeah.
Is this like a Voldemort thing? We can't say their name or they'll appear?
Seanan. They're talking about Seanan. (Yes, I know you know that.)
I'm not sure I ever got her approval, even when I was in the Pillowfort, but I certainly didn't have the time or inclination to seek it. I was even there the day she was ousted, saw her log off for the last time, even!
I don't think she ever did anything bad to me other than ignore me a lot and, the few times we did play in the same scenes, ignore my character pretty handily. Like, whatever. I think part of it was that she considered me beneath her notice, which, lulz, I mean, okay.
Certainly not going to defend the shitty things she did and the shitty attitudes she's had, but I'm happy she's doing well in her writing career, as it means someone made it and that she doesn't have time or inclination to be in a hobby that clearly calls her to a position of power that brings out the worst in her. Win for everyone.
@Arkandel said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:
@Thenomain said in Difference between an NPC and a Staff PC?:
When does an NPC become a Staff PC?
When the NPC serves a staff member, and they are not a plot device for a specific plot/sphere.
Some signs for such NPCs:
- they are played pretty frequently as opposed to just when it serves plot reasons
- they have special relationships (and spend more time) with some players who often happen to be friends with the staff member
- they are not allowed to switch hands and be played by a different staff member
- they resolve (rather than be catalysts for) plotlines with the PCs helping them rather than the other way around
- they fit most definitions of a Mary Sue even if they happen to be 'tormented' in unique, snowflake-ish ways
As you can tell this happens often enough that it's pretty cliche.
Fuck you, Ark.
I didn't sign up to this board to agree with you, I did it to be a pain in your ass. Stop it. Now.
Garth Ennis is the comic-books equivalent of a shock-jock radio DJ. He's deliberately offensive and gross on the level of a maladjusted teenager, TBH. He and Mark Millar are two authors whose popularity I will never understand, and Amazon made the right choice in trimming down the content of the series. It's still very explicit and dark, but in a way that is mostly not completely cringey and awful.
It's funny that you mention that because I've been a fan of both writers - Ennis more than Millar - so perhaps I can share my perspective.
Both of these guys rely on shock value at times and they can go too far; in fact some of their finest moments are from when they skirt the line. As such they've both created some amazing comics in the past whose serious moments are right there at the top with any other authors; Ennis' Hellblazer run is downright iconic, his Hitman was so fucking good and in my opinion he created penned the definitive Punisher run as well. Millar I'm more torn on; the first year of Ultimates was pretty well done and then he just seemed to get lazy or too carried away - the second year wasn't nearly as good, and then the whole thing went to hell.
But Ennis has a trait I've seen only rarely - in that way I'd compare him with Terry Pratchett. He can write these weird-ass absurd situations and focus on humor then he can flip a fucking switch and blindside you completely, pivoting into really serious characterization and dramatic, intimate moments for his characters.
I describe Katee's character as "Starbuck, if she had her shit together"
I know what all these words mean but what you are describing does not compute.
Ennis is much more palatable, even at his worst, than Millar is. Millar only ever works when he's constrained and toned down, and even then so many of the things he writes need to be cut. I mean just from your example-- Ultimates --I can pick a few things, like actually abusive Hank Pym (way worse than a slap which was anecdotally a misinterpretation of the script by the artist that they just ran with) and rapist Hulk, that the book would have been better without.
Unlike Ennis, Millar is basically limited to having interesting ideas that really should be left to others to develop.
@Three-Eyed-Crow said in Poll: Do I enjoy this hobby more than I don't?:
I would be intrigued to see a breakdown, with numbers and percentages and such, of where particular posters were most active. I would be very intrigued.
@Tinuviel said in Poll: Do I enjoy this hobby more than I don't?:
@Three-Eyed-Crow I don't think that would tell you much without the context of post contents.
Most of my posts are in the Hog Pit. But most of those posts are being snide or sarcastic which wouldn't be evident based solely on statistics.
@mietze said in Poll: Do I enjoy this hobby more than I don't?:
I do think that if the posts were filtered out for being positive/just gifs/off-topic rambling, that the skewing of "omg you people are so negative!" would be lessened considerably. But the venting is always going to be higher than the yippyskippy, I'm sure.
Yeah. I mean, half of my posts are this type of post, and then like a whole bunch are just me saying "yikes x#" and getting way too many upvotes for it.
(Don't stop upvoting it. I love it. It feeds my soul. FEEEEEEEEEED MEEEEEEEEEEEEE.)
Both are fun. If you liked Banshee (talkin' to you, @Arkandel), Warrior is by the same channel and production team.
My head canon for The Boys is Lucas walked into town and he's impersonating the leader of a superhero team.
Reverse it.
Homelander reality-skipped and is now playing up like he's got no powers and is basically just having a laugh in Banshee. (Or being remorseful?)
@Goldfish said in Will it PrP? A place to propose PrP ideas and get feedback:
I was inspired by this trailer from E3 2019. The game is called 12 Minutes and is a thriller about a time loop.
I wanna do a time loop prp. Small scale. One or two people max. It has to have a personal touch to the character or else you don't get the punch of the first loop. Now, I've run only a handful of things so I have no idea how to make this happen, if it can happen.
My setting in mind is CoD or nWoD because it's the only places I play where it can fly. Open to suggestions here.
Find people who are cool with fast-forwarding through things. Time Loop stories are fun but not if you literally have to play every single one out; even having the same conversation again as they test variations can be trying.
Also, stick with the typical Groundhog Day loop (a really good, shorter-than-a-movie example is the episode of Stargate: SG-1). Make sure whatever is causing the time loop isn't obvious or they're going to figure it out too soon.
@tragedyjones said:
Semi-random venting:
Date girl for a few weeks, have slight falling out, remain friends. Feelings grow, she gets a boyfriend. See each other, romance rekindles much stronger. Wait too long, she is afraid to leave her boyfriend and I won't see her while she has one.
Cockblocked by my own morality.
Been there, done that. It blows.
@insomniac7809 said in Alternate Universes, OR, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Fanfic:
@Sparks said in Alternate Universes, OR, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Fanfic:
@insomniac7809 said in Alternate Universes, OR, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Fanfic:
If we're really getting into classical crossover fanfic, though, we have to talk about Jason and the Argonauts.
"Every culture hero from the Greek city-states team up and have an adventure."
Now I just imagine the classical version of AO3, but instead of leaving comments people cluster around the Jason fanfic author to shout that the author is clearly getting this characterization wrong, because Hercules is totally not with Hylas and wouldn't leave the quest for him, because Hercules/Iolaus OTP, no Hercules/Megara OTP, are you kidding that relationship was so unhealthy, etc. And then one person starts screaming "UPDATE PLS!"
"Which poleis get to have their culture heroes on the boat" was a serious political statement for a while.
And if we're going into classical shipper territory, "was Achilles or Patroclus the top" was something 5th- and 4th-century BCE playwrights and philosophers liked to argue.
(Seriously, it shows up in the Symposium.)
Clearly it was patroclus, that's why his name means "Daddy Glory". <.<
@insomniac7809 said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
"House" is a play on "Holmes" being a homophone of "homes."
god dammit
Wow that uh, you uh, that took you a while, huh?
Love you, buddy.
@Lotherio said in Sexuality: IC and OOC:
@Ganymede said in Sexuality: IC and OOC:
@Auspice said in Sexuality: IC and OOC:
...found the backing but not the crumb. It's like goddamn Narnia in there.
Not the time to bring up Spar Oom but crickies a lonely goat man in the closet talking to kids about magical journeys someone dial CPS.
To be fair it's not like he went looking for them; they showed up in the middle of the woods on his daily walk near a lamppost!
Poor Tumnus, those little Pevensie bastards really screwed up his relatively peaceful, if a bit fearful, life.
@Glitch
I agree with that somewhat; I mean more along the lines of discouraging people who don't like someone and then socially go out of their way to mess with their character, just so they can complain about the other person.
I don't like Spider, for instance. I am highly unlikely to try to seduce her PC. I might use the social system to intimidate or inconvenience her PC, if my character would, in a mutually shared social setting--Mage meetings, whatever--but I'm not going to go out of my way.
It guess it was meant more of a: don't seek out RP that isn't going to be fun for you. It will happen, it will always happen and that's unavoidable in MUs, but don't actively seek it out on purpose with people you know you won't enjoy it with, which is common sense, which we all know isn't very common.
Also, I mildly disagree that it invalidates the need for a system. Some people like the randomization; I do. I like to be able to roll dice and let them decide the degree and speed at which my interactions go. It's fun for me. That, I will agree, is subjective; but I don't think it invalidates it.
@Arkandel I think @Coin's first point addresses much of your concern. You don't need it for every social interaction, only those where conflict is expected and dice is the desired way to handle it. You certainly don't need to start rolling dice to buy another PC a drink at a bar and maybe make a nice impression.
Yeah. I mean, if you keep that in mind, it's fine.
@Arkandel said:
@Ganymede said:
Maybe not. I've been a proponent of diminishing returns, and did not like GMC's elimination of it.
Admittedly, this may be a bias.Oh, I agree with you there. I didn't like that part of GMC; not only does it not make sense (you should find it harder to continue improving at something) but it also doesn't follow the theme's own paradigms (Renown requirements are IC increasingly higher, so why not the cost?).
I just don't agree with this particular implementation, I find it worse than both 1.0 and GMC's.
Typically because the actual benefit of an extra dot is not representative of the effort. There's no difference between the jump from 1-2 and 3-4; it's a single die. Same benefit, same cost.
I finally caught up on Riverdale and just...
... so, it's not that it's bad, it's that you have to suspend your disbelief with a forklift. I mean, I get that a lot of people got annoyed because they basically took Archie characters and mangled them, but since I don't care about that so much, I finally decided to let the absolute surreal nutjobbery of this show take me and if you can manage that? It's a nice ride. It might be best for binging, for me, though.
Now for the meat of the post:
Raising Dion is phenomenal and you should all definitely watch it.
@Tempest said:
I flip-flop on liking GMC's style of dots/costs and not.
Mostly, I only dislike it when I get around to going 'hmm, my character should really have XYZ skill at 1-2 even if it's never going to come up' and the immediately following thought of 'fuck that, I could get my fifth dot of XYZ for the same cost and actually use it'.
And then you get a storyteller who looks at your character concept and says, "this character concept should have X, I'll make X a part of the scene" and when you go to roll it, lo and behold, untrained penalty. I'm not saying it's your case, but the amount of annoying bitching this sort of thing has caused in the past is amazing.
