MU Soapbox

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Muxify
    • Mustard
    1. Home
    2. Coin
    3. Posts
    • Profile
    • Following 7
    • Followers 8
    • Topics 17
    • Posts 4026
    • Best 1803
    • Controversial 42
    • Groups 4

    Posts made by Coin

    • RE: New Comic/Superhero Themed MU*

      @Runescryer said:

      @Entropy

      I think that the issue you're having is in trying to discover the logic and reason behind things that are the antithesis: bigotry and prejudice. one of the reasons that the old Star Trek episode 'Let That Be Your Last Battlefield' is so powerful is that is shows just how stupid, blind, and unreasoning bigotry is.

      Before I start getting into things, let me say that while I talk here about serious and tragic real-world examples, I'm not comparing them to the fictional Marvel Universe and the mutant situation to cheapen or lessen the severity of what has happened and what is going on. I'm simply showing how mass media hysteria fuels similar behavior in the real world.

      Now, with that said, there are some things to consider as to why such anti-mutant bias exists in the Marvel Universe.

      1. It's not always the mutants that are the 'enemy'. You mentioned Hulk as an example of a metahuman that causes destruction, but Hulk doesn't get a free pass because he's not a mutant. On the contrary, for most of his existence, Hulk is feared as much or more than the 'mutant threat' by the general populace. Even Spider-Man has to deal with mistrust and a bit of hatred from the general public sometimes thanks to JJJ. So there's not a 'mutants always bad, other heroes always good' mentality. The perception of the general public towards an individual or group is the main factor.Which leads to...

      2. Presence in the media. For most of their existence, the X-Men had no media presence. There was never any mentions of them existing, much less there being a group of heroic mutants. Professor Xavier, for good or bad, decided to keep the existence of the X-Men a complete secret in order to keep the school safe. So, the first time the general public ever heard the term 'mutant' was when Magneto and the Brotherhood of Mutants first took over a US military base and began making public demands, back in X-Men #1. Even though the X-Men saved the day, Xavier kept all mention of the team out of the press. All anyone knew was that there were these people called mutants who almost started a nuclear war; there was no knowledge that it was mutants who stopped the threat also, just some costumed folks, could have been the Avengers or Fantastic Four. That's something very powerful when the only mention of an ethnic group comes in conjunction with terrorism and near-global annihilation. And it wasn't just in the US. Magneto publicly captures a Russian nuclear sub and steals its missiles, placing them in orbit. No word in the press as to who stopped him. A mutant goes on a rampage in Edinburgh, killing a prominent politician (the first Proteus storyline). Again, no mention as to who stopped the killer mutant. And on, and on. The first time that mutants got any good press or publicity in the minds of the average citizens of the Marvel Universe was in the mid-80's when the X-Men publicly sacrificed their lives to save the city of Dallas from annihilation (leading to their rebirth and hidden years in Australia in the late 80's/90's). Up until then, it was nothing but politicians and talking heads holding up Magneto as the sterotypical mutant with no public counter from the good guys other than Xavier, who everyone thought was human, talking about morality and how genetics don't define someone as good or bad. A very hard sell when you have Magneto, Mystique, and the Brotherhood acting in public as terrorists for the 'mutant cause'. Think about the first time you heard the term 'Muslim' or 'Palestinian'. If you're a child of the 70's and 80's like me, chances are good it was in connection with some form of terrorist act. And that's how you start thinking of them because that's how the media only ever shows them. Later on, of course, you learn that things are not exactly that clear cut or simple; that much of the news we get is condensed for easy 'understanding'. One only needs to look at the wave of Islamophobia washing over us to see the mirror of how the media portrays mutants in the Marvel Universe. There are horrific, barbaric acts being carried out in the name of Islam, and the general public wonders why the moderate Muslims don't speak out. The reality is that they do speak out, as loudly as they can each time, but such things aren't shown by the news media because there's no ratings in it. So, in a great twit of irony, Xavier enforcing a silence surrounding the existence of the X-Men actually fuels the anti-mutant hysteria.

      3. It's about the children. Mutant powers emerge in adolescence, when parents are still protective, sometimes overprotective, of their children. When Trayvon Martin was killed, millions of African-American parents saw their own children facing that fate. Parents in the Marvel Universe face something similar in having fear and paranoia of their children suddenly gaining powers or turning into something 'other'. There's a certain 'there but for the grace of God go I' sort of mentality when the news talks about some kid suddenly manifesting powers and nuking a school. Or a mob throwing stones at a child who now has lizard-like features. It's another way the media fuels the paranoia and fear, when every instance you see of mutant powers manifesting on the nightly news is either a monster being unleashed or a ticking time bomb waiting to go off. Even if the truth is that the majority of mutant activations happen quietly with no visible side effects, all the media reports about, much less knows about, is 'Lizard Boy terrorizes classmates, film at 11'. With the constant barrage, Marvel Universe parents start worrying about their children becoming 'freaks'. Parents already freak out about normal teenage surliness and rebellion, wondering if drugs are the cause of the change in their sweet child's attitude. Now it's "Johnny just told me to shut up and that i don't understand him....Is he becoming a mutant?" Parents do stupid things and jump to stupid conclusions when they can't understand what's going on with their kids, or forget what they were like when they were that age. Wild, outlandish theories become plausible. I lived through the 'Satanic Panic' of the 80's, when heavy metal music was a path straight to the Devil, never minding the fact that my grandparents' generation had already labeled Elvis and the Beatles as Devil's music during my parent's generation. And let's not even go into Role Playing Games. While it seems counter-intuitive, the sad fact is that desperate and confused parents often do things that harm their children when faced with situations and behaviors beyond their understanding. Children sent to rehabilitation centers that employ torture and brainwashing techniques to cure all sorts of 'behaviors' are all too frighteningly common in the real world, and I have no doubt that the parents that send their child to one of those facilities truly loves them and is trying to do what's best for them in their own minds.

      4. It's about the fear of extinction. Most people understand the concept of evolution. And they understand the idea that at one point, Neanderthals were out evolved by Cro-Magnons and became extinct. Now, here come mutants which are the next step in evolution and humanity sees the fate of the Neanderthal as it's own fate. It also down't help that in terms of origin, mutants outnumber other metahumans by a significant margin; at a high point, I think there were an estimated 15,000 mutants worldwide compared to a few thousand of all other metahumans. And then there's predictions on the news like 'the last human will be born in 2025, all children born from then on will be mutants', or whatever the storyline in Marvel was. Marvel citizens aren't afraid of being replaced by metahumans because most everyone knows that it's kind of a pain in the ass to become a metahuman in general. Exposure to radiation, take part in a secret government program, build yourself a suit of high-tech armor, be born an extra-dimensional god...these are no everyday occurrences. But there are millions of babies being born every day. And any one of them can be a mutant, just by chance. It can't be controlled, it can't be predicted, it can't be stopped. It's a different set of defying the odds: 99,999 times out of 100,000, being exposed to massive doses of cosmic radiation is going to be lethal. It's that one freak occurrence that grants powers. But any of those million babies born today could have won the genetic lottery, and there's no way of knowing which until it's too late. To make matters worse, they are told by scientific experts and mutant terrorists that mutants will replace humanity; it's only a matter of time.

      Well, this has probably gone on too long already, so we'll leave it at: Marvel mutants are the subject off irrational hatred and fear because humans as a whole are susceptible to hating and fearing things that are different, and the hatred and bigotry are fueled by the mass media.

      Of course, it's your game idea @Entropy, and if you want to skip it, go right ahead.

      That was a really good explanation of how mutants are an adequate (if often misused) analogy for minorities.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Previously Mutants & Masterminds MUX, now a Question! DUN DUN DUN!

      @Thenomain said:

      @Coin said:

      anti-heros

      I do not think this word means what you think it means.

      Sure it does. They were heroes, they just weren't particularly nice about being heroes. Some of them might have swung towards anti-villain, too, admittedly.

      Also:

      @Coin said:

      When I played Black Adam on UU, I teamed up with Amora the Enchantress and we raised a magical pyramid in Shiruta, re-established Khandaq as a world power

      You played on a game where world-changing events were allowed? What, were they mad?! Do they care nothing about the Status-Quo? Hippies.

      I also ended up running that game for like a year after all of that wernt down. So that might explain things. Lex Luthor became president, even! I ganked the former one in a mutant attack... and Magneto ripped Genosha apart and remade it into Asteroid M... oh and we crashed the helicarrier and people roleplayed about there being a huge fucking helicarrier half-buried in the middle of Central Park for like two months. It was pretty fun.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Coming in 2016 - Bump in the Night

      I'm looking forward to a game where the PCs charging head first into the antagonists is probably the worst idea.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: RL Anger

      @Misadventure said:

      As psychologists say "You know how stupid the average person is on the internet? Remember that 50% are more stupid than that."

      What psychologist spouts thisd sort of fallacy?

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Previously Mutants & Masterminds MUX, now a Question! DUN DUN DUN!

      @tragedyjones said:

      When I played Doom on, I want to say Heroes Dreams, I got a lot of RP. I often crossed paths with heroes when we could come up with reasons, but I also formed my own damned supervillain team AND adopted an evil daughter/apprentice.

      I think my most memorable scenes were taking the Princess of Latveria to a US Mall, and visiting the Xavier Institute to discuss Magneto.

      When I played Black Adam on UU, I teamed up with Amora the Enchantress and we raised a magical pyramid in Shiruta, re-established Khandaq as a world power, and had a whole team of anti-heros ready to go in case Thor or Captain Marvel came over to make a fuss.

      It was loads and loads of fun and I played him tons.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Previously Mutants & Masterminds MUX, now a Question! DUN DUN DUN!

      @Lithium said:

      I'm not doing a story only game. There are plenty of those already, where people can go and write stories with other people playing characters that are their own or not theirs at all. I don't personally have anything against such a game, it's just not my cup of tea.

      I like system.
      I like rules saying that someone can and cannot do a thing.
      I like characters with limits other than writers fiat.
      I like the risk and the reward that comes with /not knowing/ the outcome of a thing until the dice (Or whatever system it is, playing cards, whatever) say so.

      This isn't a knock on consent based games, it's just not what I want to build. If M&M doesn't work for what I want (As it may not with the 3rd edition changes) then I will use a different system. Maybe I will use Savage Worlds, or maybe I will hack Fate, or maybe I will hack old school Aberrant (That'd be a major hack) but the game I am building will have a system to determine outcomes other than mutual consent.

      There's plenty of game systems that can be used, and I will find, alter, or create one (if I have to) for my game.

      Part of this is because while I am using a super hero theme, I am not building on the DC or Marvel continuity where people seem to never stay dead because I believe that it leads to storylines lacking gravitas if there is no permanence.

      Just my opinion.

      Honestly, just from my experience,. M&M just has a steep learning curve. It may not be apparent to you because you know it and can't see the difficulty for people who aren't familiar with it, but it really, really does.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: New Comic/Superhero Themed MU*

      Someone get Entropy set up so s/he can live and die by the sword like the rest of us.

      WHAT IS BEST IN LIFE?

      To crush your players, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their butt-buddies!

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Previously Mutants & Masterminds MUX, now a Question! DUN DUN DUN!

      @Arkandel said:

      @Coin Fair enough, but then the character is a glorified NPC. I mean if I'm logging Magneto on once a month for that event it doesn't feel like he's my PC, you know? He's a character I occasionally play to achieve a certain effect, not one I log on any time I want to roleplay and have some fun for my own sake.

      Basically I'm saying it's the reason I wouldn't play a villain rather than that he wouldn't get to win.

      Then you don't want to play a comic book villain. That's fine. But there is a way to do it. Also, Magneto is a horrible example; he has tons of stuff you could play. Doom was a better example.

      @Runescryer said:

      @Coin

      One idea I've had for a superhero game is that all players have a player bit to log into. When folks want to RP a random scene, a player can attach a villain sheet to his player bit and got provide the action. So, the majority of villains would be unattached to any single player. Just the mastermind villains would be apped.

      I've pitched this before. Including having villains be temporary characters for people based on stoylines. Oh, you want to run a Knightfall-style story and play Bane? Okay. You claim Bane for that story.

      I actually did this with Azrael once in a DC/Marvel mix-game (Universe Unlimited). I managed to generate some actual suspense because I mixed and matched and gave him an adamantium chain mail...

      ... and then Talia al Ghul's player was like, "fuck that!" and got herself an adamantium knife and shived the fuck out of him it was amazing. So much fun. I had the least scenes with Batman--spent most of the time terrorizing Gotham crooks and villains and heroes. It was great. But once that storyline was over, I hung Jean-Paul Valley up. No one else took him up after, but they could have. I was done with that story.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Previously Mutants & Masterminds MUX, now a Question! DUN DUN DUN!

      @Arkandel said:

      @Runescryer said:

      not because there's a lack of players that like playing the bad guys, but because playing a villain means that you have to accept that all your planning ans scheming will pretty much mean nothing in the end. It's not an easy thing for role-players to accept.

      We're probably getting ridiculously off topic for the thread at this point but it's a fun debate so... if MSB's admins want it moved elsewhere I'd be fine with it... only I don't know what our topic is. 🙂

      In ANY CASE! Personally while I'd love to play a megalomaniac villain my problem with it wouldn't be the lack of a chance to ultimately win at the end. I wouldn't want that, since by definition such a character's plan would involve some manner of absurd paradigm shift for the world, so it'd be more of a roleplaying hook than something I'd actually want to see happen.

      No, the problem is that playing such a character on a day to day basis would cheapen the concept. You can't - and shouldn't - have Doctor Doom or the Joker walking around regularly for people to meet and have chats with. They should be reserved for large scale events or specific stories built around them to move things in a certain direction, not bar roleplay.

      Usually, if a superhero game has an acitivity requirement at all, the villain requirements are much, much more lax.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Previously Mutants & Masterminds MUX, now a Question! DUN DUN DUN!

      @Arkandel said:

      At this point my assumption is shifting towards the difference being a cultural one rather than systemic in nature.

      I.e. it's not that superhero games due to their mechanics, sheets, etc cause less issues with people needing to win, it's just (?) that the WoD crowd many of us are used to takes IC defeat more personally.

      Maybe? But I suspect the overlap is larger than anyone thinks.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Spying on players

      @Ganymede said:

      If we agree that MU*ing is collaborative, then we should promote policies that foster collaboration and minimize third-party interference.

      That third partyy (staff) is also part of the game and can also be included while still keeping to a collaborative playing scheme.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Spying on players

      @Ganymede said:

      @Arkandel said:

      I don't see how you don't see the timing issue. I explained it above, how did it fail to meet your criteria?

      You could meet the criterion of actually raising a timing issue to start with.

      To give an actual example, back on HM I had a couple of players spying on me. I don't know - to this day - just what means they were using but staff asked me a couple of times to detail what my character was doing "between 4 am and 5 am last night". I had no honest idea, so I erred on the side of caution and assumed a scene I actually had two days earlier happened in that time frame so that my answer wouldn't sound like a cop out ('Theo was watching cartoons on the TV').

      First, "I'm not sure" is an answer, and a reasonable one. Second, most methods of spying have some sort of resistance or contested roll. Third, the players could have, and should have, come to you first.

      In fact, that would have been my approach as staff. Like this:

      Spy: I want to spy on Arkandel. I'm using my Goggles of Google to do it. What do I roll?
      Me: Did you tell Arkandel that you intended to do so?
      Spy: No. I don't want him to know I'm doing it.
      Me: Well, not knowing what Arkandel has been doing or what protections he might have against spying, I cannot advise you as to what to roll. Maybe you should talk to him about it first?
      Spy: But I don't want him to know!
      Me: Too bad. His PC won't know, but you could save yourself time by just going to the source.
      Spy: You're missing the point.
      Me: No, I'm not. I understand your point. If you don't trust Arkandel to not mix OOC and IC awareness, then what makes you think you can believe anything he tells me about his PC's activities?
      Spy: Uhh ...

      Like that.

      Staffers can also ask Arkandel if he wants to know who is spying on him OOC. He might not want to know for fun's sake. Staff as a middleman can be more than just how to resolve a conflict; it can be a way to uphold immersion or whatever; a barrier between knowing enough and knowing too much (a barrier that is, of course, set in different places for different people).

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Previously Mutants & Masterminds MUX, now a Question! DUN DUN DUN!

      @Arkandel said:

      @Coin said:

      And yet superhero games are universally where I have seen the greatest amount of people being okay with losing as part of a narrative, compared to other games.

      This could be (and it's conjecture on my part, I've very little experience playing in superhero games) because in the source material heroes and villains lose all the time. It's part of the narrative that consequences for defeat aren't that dire; you are knocked unconscious and the villain goes away cackling, or you're caught and put in a super-secure prison you'll break out of next week. No biggie.

      In many games either defeat is followed by a fatality or at least people feel it will be and respond accordingly - which amounts to the same thing, drama. I don't know how many times I've seen some guy in a WoD game pick a fight at a bar and follow it up with spending willpower, all out damage. And while PKs are usually rare in actuality, the communal impression remains.

      I dunno. Maybe that's partly the cause?

      I doubt it, but I couldn't tell you why.

      Edited to add: actually, I suspect it's because when playing superhero MUs, people are much more concerned about the actual narrative. This is by far a generalization as there are both attitudes in all genres, but I see it more in superhero games, especially those sans dice, where the story and consensus are, by far, the ruling factors.

      I wonder if on XP games (like WoD) it would make a difference if letting someone live after a beat down got them XP (as some of the new rules in the actual books suggest) and killing another PC *cost * them XP. In a game where XP doesn't rain from the skype, PKing might just not be cost effective--but you can still beat the living shit out of someone.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Previously Mutants & Masterminds MUX, now a Question! DUN DUN DUN!

      @Runescryer said:

      @Misadventure said:

      Dice are by far not the only way to make decisions be other than whim and petulance.

      Bidding, hand/trump building, deck building, resource/outcome trading, resource use, asymmetric goal setting, asymmetric resolution are just a few, and each comes in many forms.

      It's not all I win/lose, and people would do much better to see both their source material and their own enjoyment outside that false dichotomy.

      This is true, but I think that superhero games, especially ones set in published universes, are a special case. There's two components to superhero players that you usually don't find in many other games. First, you have the love of certain characters; players choose them because these are their favorites. Many times, the players have loved these characters from a young age. The second aspect dovetails with the first almost perfectly: a sense of 'I can do better'. There's a great sense of dissatisfaction among most superhero gamers in regards towards how these beloved characters of theirs are being currently portrayed in comics. So, a great proportion of superhero gamers are trying to prove how much better they are at telling the stories of these characters than the writers of comic books. So, this leads to a greater amount of 'I must win all the time and suffer no setbacks' than in other games, IMO.

      And yet superhero games are universally where I have seen the greatest amount of people being okay with losing as part of a narrative, compared to other games.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: SPOILERS - The Force Awakens

      @Glitch said:

      I'm curious where they got their number. "People who read their site" is vague as shit.

      Which is only part of what makes this so hilarious.

      posted in TV & Movies
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: SPOILERS - The Force Awakens

      AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAUSHFASLKJGHFVKEJASHFADFASDFDFC FDC

      posted in TV & Movies
      Coin
      Coin
    • 1
    • 2
    • 132
    • 133
    • 134
    • 135
    • 136
    • 201
    • 202
    • 134 / 202