Best posts made by Coin

@EmmahSue said in RL Anger:

Dude. Your inability to tetris the fuck out of a 9x9 quilting board is not my fault. :<

ES

Ahem.

@Thenomain said:

@Coin,

Yeah, but in Monsterhearts, life is rough and painful in a way that Buffy occasionally touched upon, but things were pretty much status quo at the end of each episode, as is the nature of TV shows.

One of the MH Playbooks is a Slayer, tho, so.

I kind of diagree. Buffy was actually one of the first shows in which, eventually, "status quo" cease to be a thing. Things changed in Buffy all the time and they stayed changed. Jenny died, and that colored everything Giles did after, how they viewed Angel, his arc returning to being The Ripper however briefly. Hell, even the status quo of Buffy returning to life was always undermined by it having some sort of pathos to it that other shows often ignored.

And anyway, Monsterhearts is a game, and these are television shows. You're never going to find a comparison, consistency-wise. Monsterhearts is still the quintessential CW supernatural beautiful teenagers doing horrible things to each other and everyone else.

@Auspice said in RL things I love:

@Coin said in RL things I love:

On the other hand, Charging Bull is a symbol for the USA and especially Wall Street's "indomitable spirit", which in this case pretty much means (and cannot be more accurately represented) "we will rampage and thrash all over anyone in our way".

That wasn't Charging Bull at all.

http://chargingbull.com/chargingbull.html

"Arturo Di Modica first conceived of the Charging Bull as a way to celebrate the can-do spirit of America and especially New York, where people from all other the world could come regardless of their origin or circumstances, and through determination and hard work overcome every obstacle to become successful. It’s this symbol of virility and courage that Arturo saw as the perfect antidote to the Wall Street crash of 1986."

He made it to sort of mock Wall Street, if anything.
It was made for the people, not for the banks.

Meritocracy is crap philosophy, to be honest. In any case, see @Meg and @Ganymede above.

I can't MU from my phone. I've logged on a few times, like this one time I was drunk on New Year's waiting for the bus and I basically logged on just to bitch about the bus not coming around... but other than that, no.

@Catsmeow said in RL Anger:

I feel like we should all go back to kindergarten. "Keep your hands to yourself." That was a really good rule.

I just don't think that violence is the answer.

Like Nazi (since we are using this) hates all the things not them.
Nazi is violent and does a thing.
It is not the right show (to me) that you put your hands on them.
It is okay to find a legal ramification against them.
It is okay to educate them out of this thought pattern if possible.

I (personally) feel that the only thing that violence begets is more violence. If you are violent against X group, etc. Then you in a way give them an example to point to and prove their point.

This is definitely a naive way of looking at this particular chain of events.

The problem here is that the law doesn't do anything about it. The problem here is a systemic bias in favor of Nazis, white supremacists, and men who engender and foster bigotry against people of color, women, and non-heteronormative people in order to victimize them.

There is no recourse in the law at this time because the law is on their side.

What do you think the law would do if it did something? You think it would be peaceful? In what world are cops peaceful when facing opposition willing to turn to violence? (And, further, in what world are cops generally peaceful at all? Not mine.)

Your proposed solution is just as violent, in the end, as someone who says "yes, it's always okay to punch a Nazi". It's just that your solution looks for backing from a system that is, at this time, categorically unable and unwilling to take those actions.

So it goes.

As for people deciding they get to punch anyone they define as a Nazi, regardless of logic and actual facts, that's just because there are stupid people, and not indicative of a significant problem in a movement (if you can even call it a movement).

If anything, a small percentage of people deciidng they now get to punch anyone they can define as a Nazi based on their arbitrary and non-sensical definition of such is still probably less of a problem than actual Nazis and white supremacists fomenting bigotry, violence, and systemic disenfranchisement of others.

@Darinelle You don't play with me anymore ;______________;

@HelloProject said in RL Anger:

I try not to apply the term "Nazi" too liberally, because I think it lowers the impact. I also think that a lot of people are kind of new to the levels of racism that are currently in the media (even though most of it isn't particularly new). So it's easy to freak out and go "The Nazis are back". This kind of shit has never been particularly abstract to me.

I remember when I was about nine, and I was homeless with my mother and stepdad. We stayed in a shelter in a small town, except it was a town with KKK activity. So I was literally not allowed to go anywhere or play on my own, despite being used to that in the big city I grew up in (Philadelphia). A lot of people in the news, like Richard Spencer, are so fucking many layers removed from the kinds of groups I'm actually afraid of, that to me calling that guy a Nazi mostly shows that, despite everything, the country at large doesn't truly understand how bad things have always been.

People are so new to this kind of shit that what is essentially a rather meh level of racism compared to a lot of the racism in this country, seems as bad as literal Nazis. That's my whole perspective on this.

Now, if you punched Neo Nazis or the KKK, I might think you're onto something. But when you punch actual fucking terrifying groups like that, not some fucking nerd-ass "White Nationalists", you're straight up risking your life. That's why these "White Nationalists" are starting to clash with legitimate fucking white supremacist groups and are getting their asses kicked. These "White Nationalists" themselves don't even realize how racist this country can be, so they think that actual fucking Neo Nazis and KKK aren't going to kick their teeth in when they try to go "Wait we don't want anyone to think we're evil, let's calm down and be reasonable!"

"White Nationalists" and the alt-right are basically internet tough guys and entitled gentrifiers who are now entering into a world they didn't know existed, and I'll be damned if I use a power word like "Nazi" for them. The actual Nazis are kicking their ass.

If you fly the Swastika as a flag, you're a Nazi. if you don't, you can still be just as awful a person: white supremacist, racist, genocidal,fascist. Nazi, specifically, refers to a particular political party with right-wing, nationalistic, authoritarian politics in favor of racial cleansing and racial superiority. If we're being especially technical about it, it also denotes that they have to have the backing of the monetary powers within the territory they operate in, since that's what the actual Nazis had in Germany and was an integral part of their politics and infrastructure as a political war machine.

That said, I don't believe that 'Nazi' is a power word. I believe that Nazi had a specific meaning and that we're perfectly capable of understanding the nuance of what we mean when we say 'that person is a Nazi', even if they aren't flying the Swastika. If I call an alt-right persona Nazi, it's pretty clear why, and how the analogy relates.

This is much different than, for example, the term 'feminazi' which just banks on "joking" hyperbole by attributing something truly heinous (fascism) to a movement that is the opposite (feminism).

So on the one hand, yeah--most people that are being called a Nazi are, perhaps, not technically Nazis.

On the other hand, everyone knows why they're being called that and making a sticking point out of it just makes me roll my eyes hard enough that I can see my synapses firing.

@Faceless said in MU Things I Love:

@Coin said in MU Things I Love:

@Faceless said in MU Things I Love:

@Coin said in MU Things I Love:

@Faceless said in MU Things I Love:

@Coin you don't play with me anymore either. I need a lover. Preferably a svelte pool-boy archetype.

What, you and @Royal have a spat?

No.

Fair enough.

Make sure you clicked the hyperlink. It's important.

Oh, I did.

Man, I love going to the movies.

@Royal said in MU Things I Love:

Sexy important.

You don't get to speak when you ignore my PMs on the book of faces, sirrah!

@Meg said in Date Thenomain:

Also Theno already said he likes me too much to teach me how to WoD??? I think I am in.

this makes me want to choke him because I don't care about your sanity and we could really use another person skilled nad versed in his particular iteration of CofD MU code.

@Faceless said in Roleplaying writing styles:

@Coin said in Roleplaying writing styles:

P.P.S.

Thank you for not writing P.S.S.

Who the fuck writes P.S.S.?

It's post-script. If you do it again, it's a post-post-script...

[bashes his head in]

@Cupcake said in Good TV:

Which makes Michael and Fiona's relationship frighteningly complicated, but on the surface level, that could work.

Michael the Acanthus, Fiona the Obrimos, Sam the...oh, hell if I know.

It doesn't make it complicated. Why would it? CofD werewolves can be in relationships. That got booted in 2nd Ed.

In Mage, it's much better to do it with Orders.

Michael's Guardians of the Veil, Fiona is Free Council, while Sam's Adamantine Arrow and Jesse's probably Silver Ladder (now, he used to be a Guardian).

@Sunny said in Roleplaying writing styles:

@NightAngel12

I used to go with trying to be subtle. I felt it was fair, if I was posing whatever the same way every time, that I could expect other people to pick up on this and whatnot. Then I realized a few things.

• I am not as clever as I think I am
• I am really not as clever as I think I am
• If I can't remember the details of a scene last week clearly, how the hell do I expect anyone else to?
• Players are not characters, and stats like 'perception' and 'empathy' exist

What you think is a subtle explanation for something is likely just too obscure. They're not picking up on it because you are not actually making sense to anyone but yourself. You might think 'looking down' is a clear signal, but those two words in your entire pose have weight to you, not the people you're playing with. How do they know that they should be putting special emphasis on those words more than 'the table' or 'looks at the person who walks in' or whatever? In the example of the leaving the same way every time -- how do they know that isn't your go-to as a player for 'crap, I have to go OOC'? If you don't give the people you're playing with enough reason to suspect there is more there, they will never suspect it. It will not happen. You are entertaining yourself with how clever you are, but no one else.

I'm not actually saying you actually think you're particularly clever or anything, but it's an easy way to explain how seriously, people just don't do subtle in text very well. They don't write it well, they don't catch it well. When you try to play on subtle, you're shooting yourself in the foot. My RP has gotten so, so much more rewarding now that I straight up beat people over the head with things that might be 'subtle'.

While the character is what's important, the player has to at least understand the situation well enough to have their character react appropriately. Their character may not understand the situation as well as their player does, but for the player to be able to make that determination, they have to know that it's there for them to make.

This is essentially why I typically pepper my stuff with nice little metaphors or analogies that might help.

For example, if some guy pisses my character off, I could pose:

He gave [Guy] a look.

From this, you could interpret it is any type of look. Good luck.

However, I might choose instead:

He looked at the guy like he wanted to stick his fingers as far up his nose as possible and then wiggle them with the speed of blender blades.

If you're not sure what I mean by that, feel free to ask OOC, but I feel it's pretty clear.

Other people might choose the less graphic and more laconic:

He gave the guy a dirty look.

This is fine. Not as fun for me, but whatevs, sometimes I don't feel like typing. (RE: character voice vs. generic voice.)

@Miss-Demeanor said in Roleplaying writing styles:

@Auspice In part, you can also blame the asshole GM's of yesteryear for part of that. A lot of people that I know of, have learned to NOT chase down every little thing that seems 'out of place' or 'unusual', simply because of those sadistic fucks from the days of tabletop (and even earlier years of MUSHing) that would punish players for searching every nook and cranny for hidden clues/doorways/catches/etc. You learned quickly that if you 'wasted' the GM's time by investigating every little thing, you would suddenly incur the Wrath of Deus Ex Machina and find yourself facing some crazy shit like a Lich King in a dungeon full of kobolds and spiders.

This is why rolls exist in situations like those. Noticing that the newspaper is out of place requires a roll. You succeeded, so the ST pages you, "dude, that newspaper is way out of place". STs that don't do this are dicks.

@Wretched said in Roleplaying writing styles:

@Sunny said in Roleplaying writing styles:

MAN. I was so clear, the clue was so obvious, but they didn't even LOOK at the newspaper. Why would there have been a newspaper in a high tech building?! Wouldn't they have realized everyone had a computer or whatever to look at the news???

Like, what? Yeah, in this case the assumption itself was very obviously faulty, but even if it wasn't, you just do not know what knowledge/information the players are coming to the table with. They might not KNOW that in places like this, newspapers are rare, for all that you think it's common sense. It's not, and not because your players are dense, either.

I was having a conversation about jsut this thing the other night. Well clearly this thing i keep adding to my poses would be obvious to /ME/, why aren't my players getting it, i'm like beating them other the head with it.

Alternately: Describing a scene and adding detail and players latching on to the most innocuous details, and then putting in jobs and asking to roll for prophetic visionary dreams just because you described a crack in the glass of a toaster oven. I am having to learn to just tell people that no, that is a dead end.

Alternatively, you could decide that the crack in the toaster is a separate plot that they have stumbled into, which could be fun. NOT doing this doesn't make you a bad ST, though doing so does make you an involved one (with more time on your hands than many).

@Catsmeow said in Date Thenomain:

Princess Bride is just from my childhood, though I do try to get everyone to watch it.
I've seen all the Indiana Jones movies (we won't talk about the crystal skull one)
I saw Avatar on a date. I wasn't overly impressed. I mean it was pretty, but that's about it. Oh and it had 'kitties' but yeah.
Gonna be honest, I can't remember my thoughts on Inception -- which probably speaks for itself.

Inception overestimates how interesting its premise is by assuming everyone is going to view it and react to it the way someone who is not versed in science fiction or fantasy of speculative fiction will.

While some people who are versed still really liked it, a very large portion of geek culture viewed it as a SFX-heavy movie about mind-control through dream manipulation, which is hardly a novel concept in science fiction.

That's where the dissonance between "WOW HOW AWESOME" and "it was aiight" and "meh" comes from. The more informed you are about these specific tropes in the genre, the less likely you are to be wowed by it, because the movie isn't particularly original about how it does it, it just has better access to visual effects.

@Arkandel [shrugs]

At that point it becomes a matter of your personal ST style, but I'm usually of the mind that whatever is better for the story works. The problem is deciding who has the last say on what's better for the story.

in general, though, for me, there is a difference between "perception" and "investigation" (even if the former also uses the investigation Skill, in CofD or similar systems).

What your senses garner is perception, what you INTERPRET can fall under investigation/research and should probably be a longer, more thorough roll, with nuance and variety. If the character does well, you may give them a clue (or outright tell them) that their interpretation is wrong and that they discover it's a different thing. If they don't, well, then their wrongful assumption is kind of their drawback for failing.

@BetterJudgment said:

@Arkandel said:
Why is the content indistinguishable from a random WoW thread's? Argh.

There's nothing quite like a grammatical failure in a post complaining about others' grammar, is there?

Actually, "Why is the content indistinguishable from a random WoW thread's [content]?"

Crow: It's what's for dinner.

@Arkandel said in Roleplaying writing styles:

@Coin said in Roleplaying writing styles:

Trying to preemptively think of all possible avenues a plot can take is an exercise in futility - if your players are worth a damn they'll come up with things you haven't thought of. That's basically the point of collaborative storytelling, else you might as well be writing fanfic.

Why fanfic and not... just... writing a story?

Because I was trying to be derogatory about it!

This becomes super fucking annoyingly difficult when people are so worried about supposed "conflict of interest" and other bullshit and set up rules that don't let you have your own character in scenes you run, or come up with super defined ways an NPC can be used, limiting the stories you can tell and otherwise making what you say should be a blurry line into something very definitive.

This is a symptom of lack of trust. Sometimes it's by staff toward the players ("no, I can't possibly release my precious NPCs to those Storytellers who might actually do something with them while I'm busy drowning in soul-crushing workload"), sometimes it's the attitude of players toward their peers ("you're going to use this to advance your nefarious agenda and get Sheriff for yourself, you plot-running asshole"), and I've even seen it be self-inflicted as well ("I've a crime alt, there are criminals in this plot, this is a conflict! sorry guys, I have to step out... it's for the common good").

I am not saying there aren't things coordination will make better - thematic consistency is a big one for example. But a little bit of handwaving can still allow for a lot of plot to be thrown at the starving masses, if they just allow themselves to be entertained.

This is why when I was on Eldritch I basically just didn't care? Like, honestly, if people thought my having a werewolf and running werewolf stuff was a problem that was just not the game for them.

I mean it turned out not to be the game for anyone, but hey. >.> Hahah.

Aw, you guys made me laugh.

@ThugHeaven said in MU Things I Love:

Where are y'all finding all this edginess? I run into a lot of people that start getting uncomfortable with light drug use and some swearing.

Man, where do YOU play? Lol.