Posts made by Coin

@Arkandel said:

@Coin I'm on a different boat than @Miss-Demeanor although we're headed in the same general direction. When it comes to social rolls my problem is that what gets rolled sometimes doesn't match what's posed.

For example a manipulation roll followed by saying something dumb and transparent - it's harder to go with it than say, someone who rolls brawl then poses a crappy one line about tossing a punch.

You can only screw up physical actions so much, you know? But some of the vampires playing politics I've seen... man, all those aeons of unlife and you didn't pick up any subtlety?

There are only two solutions to your problem:

1. Become much, much pickier about who you play social scenes with;
2. Get over it.

Some people are just bad at it, man. And no amount of you explaining it to them will get them to understand that their pose isn't conveying the emotion you think their roll would.

On the flipside, this is sometimes very subjective. One person might find a pose terrifying while another might sort of yawn a little and be all "whatever". Sometimes you have to accept that the limitations of person's ability to write shouldn't dictate your reaction to what's written. Alternatively, if they are doing things you think their rolls don't support (or that don't support their rolls) you can suggest, kindly, that they try something else.

If they don't agree/can't take the suggestion, then... well... welcome to roleplaying.

@Miss-Demeanor said:

Fair enough... but twice as bad. It really is just like combat now. Everything will take forever to resolve. Its bad enough combat takes forever to resolve, now going to hang out at the local bar can take just as long with less actual posing. Just agreeing to the whatever and avoiding the whole boring mess is looking more and more enticing as an option.

Well, I get the feeling you're equating "one roll, one pose", when it doesn't really work that way. If someone's impression only lets them make one roll an hour to seduce you, then they can roll, open one of your doors, and before an hour has passed, you pose leaving. You can--and should--interact between rolls. And if the person does or says something after a roll that would totally turn your character off, you inform them of such and suggest, "I think this would ad a door," or "I think this would reduce my Impression".

If you can only make one roll a week... well, that's only good for when you're working someone long-term, and hopefully to improve the Impression.

I don't know why you insist that you just sit there while someone else rolls. That isn't ever how I would play it, run it, or interpret it.

@Miss-Demeanor said:

Besides, from what I can tell, it would take someone with low social stats and/or horrible luck rolling to actually -lose- a social contest. Much like with nwod physical combat, it seems weighted on the side of the 'attacker' with the 'defender' simply sitting there being worn down by a barrage of verbal assaults until they either give in completely or do the offer an alternative thing. I have yet to see anything set in the rules for the target to actually fight back, verbally speaking.

Keeping in mind that I generally prefer to keep the Doors system for use versus NPCs...

There is absolutely nothing barring you from countering with your own Social Maneuver, really. For example, if Pushy McCreepy is insisting you sleep with him with a Doors roll, you could counter with your own Social Maneuver in which you attempt to intimidate him into running like a little bitch.

@Miss-Demeanor said:

+1 to @Arkandel. This was a HUGE thing on TR. People would complain constantly that they weren't given their due attention for whichever stat. They seem to fail to realize if that you meet up with Rich Supermodel #842 every day for lunch... you're going to eventually stop being awed and amazed by their looks/wealth/status/etc.

@Coin That's because everyone wants ALL the shinies. Frankly, some of the most fun I've had was playing a dirty, poor, homeless, scrawny, average-looking characters. Then again, I've also found that I largely hate playing bullshit social scenes where you (empirical) try to awe/cow/overwhelm everyone around you with your awesomeness and stats. I'd rather go steal an artifact or kill Monster of the Week and loot their corpses or drag race cars and have the cops show up or anything that could have some potential meaning to the character. And at this point I'd rather not RP than have to attend one more 'charity' function set up so people can show off how pretty princess special snowflake they are.

Syndrome said it best, ladies and gents. When everyone is super... no one is.

Yeah, I agree. I've had a lot of fun playing both rich and poor, etc. But a lot of people use games to fulfill their own little fantasies--and especially try to force those fantasies on others.

How many poor characters have suddenly found themselves the recipients of a wealthy lifestyle because a rich PC felt like it?

Well, yeah.

But if you limit the amount of people who can have those things, everyone pitches a fucking fit. So.

@WTFE said:

Kung Fu Fighting Drills Don't Work

lolololololololol

@Groth said:

The core of the issue seems to be that many players become emotionally invested in their characters success and treat any failure to succeed on the behalf of their character as a failure of their own, rather then a new avenue of RP to explore.

Ugh, yeah. This is the worst. And I know because I have both seen it and allowed it to affect me. I've gotten upset over stupid stuff like that. I try not to let it happen anymore. I don't have the kind of time it takes to worry about that shit anymore, as a, you know, grown adult. But damn, yeah.

Another related issue is that it's hard to make reputation meaningful on the scene level. It's not uncommon for characters to treat the most respected person in the city like street trash, either because they're not OOCly aware of the status of that person or because they just don't like their own characters reaction being decided by a number, it's similar to how everyone just ignores everyone with Striking Looks.

This is also an issue. I think the only real way to do it is constantly remind people, and have staff constantly remind people. But that can get preachy/insistent/annoying, so... It's an issue. Something very visible would help, but then it turns into "I have this color on my short desc because I'm special" and I just... ugh.

JFC, Elfwood...

@Alzie said:

I do kind of want to play on a 7th seas mush to be fair, but i've never actually wanted to code it.

Pretty sure @Thenomain has a 7th Sea dice roller done. Or mostly done. I don't know if he ever made the sheet.

I just don't have--and never have had--the kind of money that sort of thing requires. My country's currency rate re: the dollar kills me in that regard really hardcore.

@tragedyjones said:

What if someone ran a game (nWoD) where the only way to gain XP was via the in-game beats? Would there be rage?

I'm okay with this; I just think there would need to be many more ways to get XP than the ones in the books.

@Gwynn said:

I have em, thanks. The game caught my eye many years ago but my TT group never took to it so back on my shelf they went. I'll have to dig them out tonight and play around.

Another road block, from my POV, is the number of supplements the system has. Could a game be made just from the core book? Are there any "mandatory" supplements you'd have to include?

This is THE @THENOMAIN PRINCIPLE, which states that "any game should be accessible via a single book and supplements shouldn't be mandatory to full enjoy it". I agree--as long as you don't introduce the supplements. Once you, do, tough shit!

7th Sea struck me as fairly balanced. It doesn't have a "dump stat" because the game designer things social stats that have no direct, m,eaningful mechanical impact on a consistent basis are dumb, which I don't agree with, but can accept as a premise.

It might heklp if you told us which parts of the system/mechanics fall flat to you.

@surreality said:

@Derp said:

There absolutely should be some clout for those that came in the door first. They've already been on grid, they've helped to shape things around them, etc. I'm against people who 'just came in the door' having the same amount of influence as someone who's been there consistently for a year. I think that's pretty fair, too.

I do and don't agree with this on one salient point: it depends what they did with that year. If they sat on their ass and did absolutely nothing, "I got here first!" should not count for jack nor shit. And plenty of people do precisely this, making a login on a game early to ensure they'll always be among the most powerful. It's... pretty crappy, really. Active newcomers should absolutely be able to match, if not overcome, the power level of someone who has done nothing but waste the time they have had.

Essentially, you want to get rid of passive XP, since that would be the best way to do that. >.>

@Miss-Demeanor said:

@Coin said:

@WTFE said:

That was the joke.

Shut up. Your mom. FACE.

YOUR MOM'S FACE

Yes, it's really pretty. I have a beautiful mum, thank you.

@WTFE said:

That was the joke.

Shut up. Your mom. FACE.

@WTFE said:

@Arkandel said:

We're a pool of sharks.

Shit! I knew I was doing something wrong. I thought we were a pool of hippos.

Hippos are worse than sharks. By a lot.

@il-volpe said:

@Coin I love the timeskip idea, and would like to play that, too. On some other occasion when it was brought up, there was the objection that when you choose to skip is going to end up being good timing for some PCs and not for others. Still, I really don't think this would be that huge a problem, even for a large game. So long as you're clear about it to begin with, why would people bitch except for the sake of bitching? I'd actually set it up so that the last month or two of the RP time would be 'wrap up anything you need to RP out, folks," time. And be sure everyone knew at the start of each cycle when the time-jump would happen and how long it would be.

Yeah it's really only a problem for people who aren't paying attention. If you know it's coming and have some time to figure it out, it should be fine.

The real issue comes for people who come in late and only get to play a month or two before a timeskip. But them's the breaks. If you're clear and honest about when the timeskips will happen, then that's that.

The timeskips can also be good moments to change the Start XP so everyone can be more or less at the same level. For example: everyone starts with an amount of XP equal to however much was available for spending in timeskips. That way, the only real advantage older players have is XP spends they made during play, which are limited anyway.

@mietze said:

At least, that is how I think it should be done. Most places let you be however old you want within certain parameters, but you don't get extra points for being over 30 (for example) or less for being 18. (But maybe you should, that's a whole different thing though!). It's just a flavor thing, and perhaps a good bg excuse for having more eclectic skills, if that's even monitored (I'm not sure many places do these days!).

I toyed with some age-based Xp shifts at chargen for Eldritch (where you got more the older you were, to a point, but you also got less passive XP during the course of the game). Didn't do it, for several reasons, including "@Thenomain would choke me". But depending on the game, it could be cool.

I'm still waiting for a game that operates on a slightly longer timeline IC, with timeskips! Play 6 months, timeskip 2 years, play a year, timeskip five! Play another year, timeskip ten!

I don't know. I think if it's a small game, it could work. And you could address other problems, too: only let people spend X amount while "active" and any other Xp they make, they can spend during the timeskip--amount based on how long the timeskip is.

This model is obviously best for Vampire, but if you don't over do it with the timeskip length you could run any game on it. I mean, most games have ways not to age, or age very slowly. Playing a werewolf that goes from a young, brash 19-year-old lunatic to a wizened 70-year-old master hunter could be fun...

@Derp said:

@Ganymede said:

@Derp said:

I'm against xp caps, mostly for the reasons everyone else has stated: That is the end of the character's growth, and that's all they can ever learn, ever. It creates an inorganic finish to an otherwise vibrant character.

So, make it movable. Problem averted.

To what end, though? Serious question. "We are limiting the thing you can do arbitrarily for now, no matter how much of a justification you have for raising it more, but we'll up it later, because that's sensical right?' How does this accomplish anything more organic than spend timers?

In fact, while it might solve a problem, it creates a different problem in determining what that cap is and how often it moves.

Gany may have meant "make it movable" in that once you're at your peak, you can shift stats around. Maybe. I would consider that a good compromise.