Best posts made by Coin

@wizz said in Good TV:

Legion makes me want to play an astral-focused Mastigos so bad ;_______;

Legion is the absolute shit and I sincerely think it is, IMO, one of, if not the best thing on television right now. Fuck, I love that show.

@LWhiskey said in Euphoria - Feedback:

I don't think Ares and I get along. Tried a scene, entered it, got 1 pose in then the host closed it and private RPed with the other person. That made me think TS scenes were more important than general RP scenes, or meeting/helping new folk, to some of the playerbase.

This clearly has nothing to do with Ares itself and more with the two people who you ended up trying to RP with.

@Ominous said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

@Coin Speaking of trailers for new series, I saw the one for "The Boys" today. I had never heard of the comic or the new series until today. After reading the premise - a CIA group of superheroes dedicated to monitoring and stopping out of control superheroes - I now want to play a MU* of that. Considering that I have never been interested in superhero MU*s, this is a big step for me.

EDIT - Thinking about it, this idea and the Wuxia idea are kind of similar. You have a semi-secret group dedicated to rooting out evil in the world with unnatural powers.

Oh man I am so excited about The Boys coming out tonight.

Finally watched A Wrinkle in Time yesterday and How to Talk to Girls at Parties today during study breaks.

Fuck them both for making me feel things. I do not recommend them if you do not like to feel things.

I'm not tearing up, you're tearing up.

@Pyrephox said:

@surreality Of course, then you run into those folk who say, "My character doesn't back down when intimidated, they go crazy and fight with every bit of combat dice they have." Which means that you get people walking around with all RAR I'M TOUGH because they put all their dice in combat, and none in social skills or resistance abilities. Because they know that if it comes to a social test, they can just move things to a combat footing, where no one doubts the effectiveness of their skills.

Basically, there are always assholes. You can't define a system by how assholes will use it, because every system just privileges a /different set/ of assholes. A system also can't stop assholes from being assholes - that job needs to fall to staff, and trying to offload basic game management skills to the system is one of the reasons why game cultures BECOME toxic. If, when someone skeeves on you by trying to dice-force you (and this kind of abuse is often really aimed at getting the /player/ to do something sexual) into TSing with them, then if you don't feel supported to say, "I don't feel comfortable with that kind of play with you. I don't mind if they get seduced, but we're not going to play it out, and my character will feel guilty in the morning, not fall in love with yours." and know that the staff has your back, then that's something wrong with the /game culture/. Because that sort of situation is not what any social resolution skill system is meant for. For that matter, you should be able to go to staff if someone is stalking you around the grid and /constantly/ rolling combat dice at you. "What my character would do," is not an excuse to be an asshole. "What the rules will technically let me do," is not an excuse to be an asshole. But as long as we keep trying to build and run games with the design goal of "not having to confront assholes with their asshole behavior", then game cultures are going to continue to be toxic, no matter what system is used.

This. All of this all the time forever.

@Taika said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

Ours is mostly automated in similar vein to how equip code is. You pitch it, it gets a skim, and an approve/deny/discuss. When you fulfill the asp, it pops up a request and you can approve, deny, discuss, and upon approval of the job, it doles out a beat automatically.

I would SERIOUSLY suggest automatic approval if staff takes more than X days (3 is my preference) to process a fulfilled aspiration.

At worst you're giving someone a beat they may not merit; that's far preferable to making people wait because staff is human.

@three-eyed-crow said in Good or New Movies Review:

Super belatedly.

"Wrinkle in Time" was an interesting watch for me, because it didn't work but it's one of those things that didn't work for reasons I find kind of intellectually interesting to take apart. Its failings are as much as on me as on the movie. It wasn't really the adaptation I-the-reader wanted. It wasn't really aimed at even as broad an audience as something like the Pixar movies was, but lived firmly in the realm of being first and foremost for kids. My expectations were for something different when Ava Duvernay was attached to the project and were calibrated incorrectly, not in terms of quality but in terms of the movie she and the studio (who knows which, a lot my issues were script-level) were clearly interested in making. I didn't love it but am certainly not sorry I paid money to see it in a theater.

It is probably as good an adaptation as we'll ever get and a lot the performances and visuals were fun (loved Zach Galifianakis' Happy Medium cave).

I get that.

I tend to try to divorce myself from the source material as much as possible when watching adaptations of things I really like. I put my expectations on the same level as I would going in to watch something new. It works for me--I tend to enjoy things a lot more than I have when I have NOT done that. I didn't do it (initially) for example, for Keanu Reeves' Constantine and left the theater really irritated. I watched it a few years later and, I mean, other than Shia being annoying, it's not a horrible movie. It just isn't the same Hellblazer as in the comics. That's fine.

@Macha said in MU Things I Love:

MUing Karma

The vaguebooking is real, yo.

@toreadorfool said in CoD Ancient Rome game...:

Wolf is IN! Now, onto Changeling. I haven't decided if I will come up with new Courts or not. I just find the normal seasonal Courts so -iconic-, and I love them, so I am probably just keeping them in as-is. So, minimal changes needed for Ling, thankfully.

Man, honestly, I really wish you would do custom courts for the game. The new edition is a lot more versatile and kind of built for that sort of customization; seems like a wasted opportunity.

@Luna said:

@Coin Good luck with that! I have some friends who like that look. So there's that.

But do you sleep with them, is the thing!

/snicker

@thesuntsar said in MU Things I Love:

@Coin said in MU Things I Love:

@thesuntsar said in MU Things I Love:

@SinCerely said in MU Things I Love:

Made the horrible mistake of starting the new Netflix series 'Haunting of Bly Manor', 

I THINK YOU MEAN GREAT MISTAKE

I mean if it's a mistake 'great' just intensifies the mistake-ness of it.

I'm just saying.

Don't run me over with a car @thesuntsar .

<.<

I'm getting the car

@Ifrit come be my shield

@L-B-Heuschkel said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

@Coin Agreed. I'll play any codebase if the story grabs me. And none if it doesn't. I prefer codebases that emphasise roleplaying and writing over experience grinding and gold chasing, but I think I lost the right to complain about non-roleplay-oriented systems about at the time I did a five year stint as a guild leader on a WoW roleplay server.

I mean, sometimes a system will kill your interest in even the most interesting story and sometimes the most interesting story will override your dislike of a system, but in the end, it's the story.

If what you're looking for in your RP can only be represented by system or code and cannot, by the power of imagination and cooperation simply be accepted as existing and being important within the narrative, then you are playing an OOC game.

@Misadventure said:

WhatsApp or any chat app like it that lets me text my loved ones overseas without texting fees.

India, why are you so far away?

WhatsApp is totally a thing in my country. Everyone uses it.

@thesuntsar said in MU Things I Love:

@Coin where is my re-match

in your imagination.

it's not my fault you keep losing.

<.<

@faraday said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

I'm not sure that I'd call it an "OOC game", as @Coin suggests, because these systems assuredly drive RP. Either in a direct way (posing in-between combat actions) or in an indirect way (doing whatever crafting stuff leads to a RP scene about the shiny new sword you made for someone).

Many MU players are happy to dip in and out of narrative/system as their mood suits them.

When I say "they are playing an OOC game" I don't mean the game as a whole, I mean that, in that moment, that player is, within their own bubble of context, playing an OOC game. If what drives me is exclusively getting the shiny object or stat, then I'm playing an OOC game. It's not an absolute thing, but rather a fluid thing we can slip in and out of, liek you said, often without even realizing.

The difference is: you can have a game that is purely these "OOC" things (tons of video games, etc, like @L-B-Heuschkel mentioned above) and you can have a game that is purely narrative, without any code beyond something to type in (in the case of online). The difference, IMO, is that the former is not actually roleplaying (despite, again like @L-B-Heuschkel said, the highjacking of the term), and the latter is.

I mean, we can play semantic games all day (not saying we are, just saying we could) about what the word "roleplaying" really means, but that's what it means to me: narrativity, if the characters and story are the point, those two things are enough to make it roleplay (whether you enjoy that barebones type of play or not notwithstanding). If you don't have them, it's not. It's something else that has, for some reason, been conflated into the same term.

@Luna said:

Lack of motivation. I'm just not motivated today. Kinda blah feeling. Ugh.

/shakes you into productivity.

@surreality said:

@surreality said:

@Ganymede said:

The key word is: acceptance. The problem is: most players don't accept what happens to them.

That, and the Doors system seems unnecessarily complicated given that there's a perfectly-viable, single-roll system available.

The single roll isn't great, but it's much better than social maneuvering. Single roll has resists, and takes the target's stats they spent on -- like iron will/etc. -- into account. SM doesn't. It completely ignores the stats of the target save for in setting the base number of doors. I can kinda see why players don't accept outcomes from a system that only takes the aggressor's stats into account.

Edit: ignores modifiers, too, and that's just bad.

What? No it doesn't.

Social Maneuvering rolls can be Resisted and Contested, depending on the type of roll and what you're trying to do. In fact, if you have Iron Will, for example, and someone is trying to do something that you would resist or contest with Resolve, it would absolutely count.

There is nowhere in the books that says 'Social Maneuvering does away with resisting or contesting rolls'.

This is literally in the second paragraph of GMC p. 193 "Opening Doors":

As Storyteller, be creative in selecting dice pools. Change them up with each step to keep the interactions dynamic. Similarly, consider contested and resisted rolls. Most resisted actions or contested rolls use either Resolve or Composure or a combination of the two. But don’t let that stand as a limit. Contested rolls don’t require a resistance trait. For example, Wits might be used to notice a lie, Strength to help a character stand up to threats, or Presence to protect and maintain one’s reputation at a soiree.

Single roll isn't better, because single roll accomplishes things and it feels like "magic". One roll and done. With Social maneuvering you actually have to put your Skills and other stats to use, figure out how to properly engage your target from one Door to the next, etc.

@faraday said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

@Coin said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

I mean that, in that moment, that player is, within their own bubble of context, playing an OOC game. If what drives me is exclusively getting the shiny object or stat, then I'm playing an OOC game.

I would agree with you about the shiny object/stat thing, if it's motivated for OOC reasons, but what if it's IC reasons?

I'm playing a Firefly ship captain. My character's goal is to keep the ship flying. I do lots of RP about this. Some portion of that RP is supported by coded systems, whether it's a haggle die roll to get a good deal, or a coded econ system where I have to spend some measure of my playtime running cargo from point A to point B. Is that an OOC game? I, as a player, don't give a crap about virtual cargo or imaginary money. I'm just abiding by the game's framework that lets me tell stories about them.

Combat is another instance. My poses are literally influenced by what the combat system says - was my character shot in the leg? OK, RP that. Did they just blow somebody's head off? OK, RP that. Bob is getting piled on by Cylons? OK, RP going to help him. These just really don't feel like OOC games to me. They're just as much a part of the roleplaying experience as the rules and dice in a TTRPG.

You're deviating from what spurred this topic of conversation into an aergument that's pointless because we agree, you're just interpreting my words as meaning something they don't. I am specifically referring to the type of distinction Ominous made here:

@Ominous said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:

I think these desires are mutually exclusive. Plotting and intrigue needs something concrete to plot and intrigue over and that concreteness comes from game mechanics. Otherwise you're just stabbing each other in the back over the color of the draperies. I mean, I guess you could plot an assassination on your brother, so you can inherit a pointless crown that doesn't mean anything, but that strikes me as just being mean to the player of the brother for no reason, because, again, the crown is pointless. Kind of like kicking a dog, because it was sleeping and no one was watching, so you could get away with it.

I do not need the crown (or your spaceship) to be backed by a system mechanic in order to roleplay either being important, because to me, narrativity is what's important and the rest props it up.

That's it. That's the whole thing. Everything else is discussing in circles.

@Arkandel said:

@Coin Pay zero attention to weight. Zero, weight is meaningless most of the time. Pay attention to how you feel, and how your clothes fit you.

Well, I meant 'weight' in the 'size' sense. I know that as I develop more muscles instead of fat, I'll probably not go down in actual weight as much.

@Ganymede said in Is this a really dumb theme?:

@bear_necessities said in Is this a really dumb theme?:

Except the Savage Skies is WW2 era alt history with dragons and high-tech and magic. I don't think it sounds very similar at all.

Well, yeah, but swap the dragons and magic for sci-fi alien stuff, and --

And you still have 1950s atomicpunk aesthetic instead of 1930s dieselpunk/dragon aesthetic.

It's similar in concept but it would prove to be wildly different in practice, I suspect.