Best posts made by Coin

@Auspice I really liked VM 4.

@Rook said in POLL: Super Hero MU Gut Check:

@Coin said in POLL: Super Hero MU Gut Check:

@Rook said in POLL: Super Hero MU Gut Check:
I mean I'm a dick sometimes but I try to aim my vitriol and trolling at bigger jerks than me.

Your quoting is messed up. I didn't say what you are attributing to me, just for the record. I don't even know how to spell vitriol.

And your quoting is messed up since it doesn't include @Ominous in it.

OHHHHHH HOW'S THAT CROW TASTE, HUH

[snicker]

@Miss-Demeanor said:

@Coin @Arkandel

One: No one should ever make decisions as staff from their character bit. EVER. I cannot stress this enough. And no, ST's don't get to be 'special' in that regard. Its entirely unethical to make staff-level decisions from your player bit. There's a -reason- you have a staff bit. Even as a Staff ST, you have a designated Staff bit. So you can separate what you do as a player from what you do as a Staffer. No ifs, ands, or buts.

The person making the decision is the same one. I mean I understand your concern, but I find your phrasing extreme. I'm gonna make the same decision when I hop over to my staff bit. It's academic at best.

Two: Coin, I expect you to start giving every staffer the rewards you intend to give your Staff ST's, then. They aren't taking any less time and effort away from their own characters to help out a game as any ST, staff or player alike. So why do they get fucked out of the xp and not the ST's? I can toss down a standard 'damsel in distress' scenario for a group of people in five minutes flat, and I can get xp for that because I'm 'taking time and effort away from my own character for others' enjoyment'. Why should I not be getting that xp for doing the exact same thing in the form of approving others' xp spends and build requests? You're putting ST's on a pedestal for their efforts while telling other staffers 'sorry, you aren't special enough to get this reward that they do even though you're putting in no less time and effort'.

I actually considered it. I ultimately didn't. That said, I disagree that it's the same effort. This doesn't mean I find administrative stuff to be easy or simple or anything of the like; but it's not the same. There's a reason it's relatively easy to find people to volunteer for admin work, but finding reliable, consistent storytellers can be a hassle.

Three: I started out in this thread trying to help clarify something that @Sunny said. I kept going because @Ganymede was asking questions, so I answered. You and Ark continued commentary, so I responded. These are my beliefs about staffing and ST'ing, so what's the problem? Its a discussion that revolves around who believes what when it comes to player vs staff run plot, and that includes ethics. You are welcome to your beliefs about staffing and STing, that doesn't mean I won't think you strange or wrong for having them when they fly directly in the face of my own.

Also... doing it any other way isn't ethically problematic FOR YOU. MY experience has shown it to be extremely problematic. Try taking your own medicine there, sweetie.

See, the thing is, one way makes the other person out to be unethical over a simple disagreement of strategy; the other doesn't. But okay.

I'm actually gonna cut out here, since the debate is pretty moot at this point. I'm okay agreeing to disagree, I just don't really like being called unethical because of it. It's a pretty strong term to toss around, as @Three-Eyed-Crow said before. That's all.

I refuse to apologize, just listen to the rhythm of my heart!

Eventually, Disney will get tired of this shit and just buy Sony, like they did 21st Century Fox. This strikes me as two very large companies calling each other's bluff; except one company is only large in comparison to any company except the one they're facing. Sony wants to believe it has weight and can move at the same financial level as Disney, but it can't.

@Tat said in MU and Data Organization:

@WTFE said in MU and Data Organization:

Question 2

I'm going to come down on an unpopular side, I suspect. MU* servers are UTTERLY FUCKING TERRIBLE for navigating complicated or lengthy information. If the only "news" entry is "our web site at address http://foo.bar/baz contains all game information we have" then I'd be absolutely ecstatic (presuming it's an actual web site and not just "news"-style files hastily wrapped in <html></html> headers).

That being said, the advantages of web sites are lost if you don't make use of their advantages. Inline topical links (not links at the bottom where in news it would say "see also news foo, news bar, news baz") are vital. As is, unlike MU*-oriented information, not chunking the information at arbitrary levels. (That's what "paragraphs" are for, not entirely new pages.)

I'm actually kind of shocked that there are people who'd prefer to read things in their client still.

I am downright fucking apalled and believe such people should be burned at the stake.

I often overreact.

THIS ISN'T ONE OF THOSE TIMES. >:/

@ThatGuyThere said:

Messed up the quoting but @Coin said
Staff having access to metaplot information doesn't actually give them an advantage,

Huh Of course it does, they now know exactly how to tailor a pc to be effective,they also know how the people running the meta plot think so how to interact with it better.
In a game that is primarily about social interaction knowing more about the people you are interacting with is a huge advantage. Now most do not use this in a negative way but that does not mean the advantage is not there.

And neither of these things have any bearing on them getting XP for running stuff regarding the metaplot, not to mention that by general MU guidelines, if they are running it, they aren't in it, and lastly, as I've said before: if that's a problem, then they shouldn't be staffing.

Was reading old logs and got nostalgic.

Kate was an Elodoth Blood Talon at Eldritch. Player got busy and then we just never heard from them again. If you're out there, PM me if you like!

Fair enough.

Of course, Disney just spend 71 billion buying 21st Century Fox; that's a 71 billion dollar investment that starts to pay off pretty soon, not to mention 71 billion dollars they didn't spend on producing content.

I'm pretty sure it's down to how stubborn Sony wants to be and how much revenue Spider-Man actually brings to the table without Disney helping along.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but while Sony Pictures is only part of Sony, it's like, the largest part, when it comes to net worth, by far.

Really, it'll depend on whether or not the ginormous egos up at the top of both mountains can come to an agreement or not.

@tragedyjones said:

The ability of vampires to enjoy sex varies greatly with edition of the game. Masquerade Revised explicitly said they DO NOT gain any physical pleasure from sex. Requiem 1 stated they can enjoy it, but it pales to blood, and that is similar to 2nd Edition. Sex is about as pleasurable to a vampire as it is to a heroin addict - it feels good, sure. But you know of a much better rush.

I generally view it as:

Sex is still sex, and sex is great. But.

But blood is better. And sex + blood is just something good taking its place as the warm-up act for something amazing.

@Sunny said:

@Coin Yeah, whatever. Talk to the hand. I wish I didn't adore you so much. I can't think of something mean to say that I would actually say.

You can call me a jerk. @Eerie does it all the time.

My point was more that the natural storytellers are going to do their thing regardless of whether or not they're getting rewarded for it. That's what we do. Some of us go do it by building games, and some of us do it by running an OTT for a solo friend.

---

Here's a way to put it, I think, that might help clarify my position. I sort of touched on it before, but I'll put it out there on its own.

If it requires you to see behind the ST screen, no reward. If it does not, reward. If it does not require seeing behind the screen, run it from a non-behind-the-screen bit.

I understand, I do. I just don't agree that it requiring looking behind the screen should have that sort of impact, is all. This is just a fundamental difference in the way we design games, and I'm okay with that.

@The-Tree-of-Woe said:

Also man, this post is old. Maybe you did die.

Unlikely. He's like a cockroach.

Or a Twinky.

@Arkandel said in Good or New Movies Review:

All of this isn't bluffing or base stupidity - it's just negotiating. Disney is using public opinion as leverage, making fans' outrage a factor in Sony's decision making.

If Sony believes enough people will be angry enough to not watch Spider-man if the character is detached from Marvel and they expect the diminished sales to be more than the percentage of shared revenue Disney is asking for, then they'll cut a deal. Else they won't.

IIRC, Disney was also offering to front half the cost of the movies in return for half the revenue, which they weren't doing before, so it's not like Sony would be spending the same money and losing 45% more of the revenue than before; the costs would be ameliorated pretty heavily.

@Ghost said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

Blood Drive....

Yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup.

@Jennkryst said in Eternal City MUX Needs Help!:

@toreadorfool

@Jennkryst just pledged his entire salary hoping it'll speed it up.

@Faceless said:

I'm most curious about who you were on Masquerade.

Your mom.

He was your mom.

@Derp Heh. I've seen that before. I also like:

@Ominous said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

I have no idea if it's any good. I have a strong distaste for anything that turns dehumanizing slaughter into a spectacle.

Well, it does that, but it also subverts it by having a protagonist who rallies against it.

Like most Grindhouse-style things, it's steeped in the satire common of the era it's produced in.

@silentsophia said:

@Arkandel Underaged TS in the middle of mage combat.

You can't just cold-mention it. You gotta give deets!

@cobaltasaurus yup