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: Rewards in WoD

      @Arkandel
      Naw. I probably wouldn't even allow psychic/supernatural Merits (without some serious drawbacks, if I did). I've said it before, but I would love a Hunter-only game that was less about the division of Compacts and Conspiracies and more about how people organize themselves organically. You would have TF:V and Union and even Network Zer0 analogues, obviously (maybe even called that), but I would de-formalize it, at least at the beginning.

      But yeah, basically being outclassed. I'd probably also just straight up state that we expect high PC turnover and to be ready for some DEAAAAAAAAATH.

      @Tempest
      Make XP gains based on Conditions/Aspirations/etc., with minimal passive gains, if any at all, and then just make it fucking brutal.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Rewards in WoD

      @The-Tree-of-Woe said:

      Things that give you significant bonuses on dice rolls are not that difficult to get.

      Just remembering to mention that you've lit incense and/or that you did the LBRP before you started occulty-stuff can give you +1 or +2 dice on rolls.

      Also, honestly, unless you're a damn good shot you're probably better off throwing that gun at a werewolf or vampire. You might surprise them long enough to run away.

      I would really love to play on a smaller Hunter-only game where resources were so scarce that Good Time Management was an exceedingly useful Merit for occultists because that one fucking incense stick needs to last you through several rituals! Hehe.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Rewards in WoD

      Kind of the wrong thread for this conversation. Hardly feels like bitching.

      In any case, on the topic of "omg, someone ran a plot and now someone else has a bunch of guns!!!" On Eldritch we pretty much reserve having to have things approved for like, military-rate hardware and weaponry, or supernatural stuff. That said, if I'm storytelling and you have a stash of illegal armaments in your basement and an NPC cop ends up down there, it might be an issue IC... but... yeah?

      Equipment, especially long, pointless lists of what equipment a person has access to, seems ridiculous.

      Actually, I would probably be totally into it if it were a low-Resources (i.e. most characters don't have much money to spare) Hunter game. I could see that game benefitting from a character having all their important shit in +inv and being super protective of their +1 Laptop or whatever.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Good TV

      @Wizz said:

      @HelloRaptor said:

      @Coin said:

      @HelloRaptor said:

      @Cobaltasaurus

      Eyeballs are a squick factor for me. I cannot deal with eyeball mutilation.

      The Strain is made almost entirely of squick factor, and eyeballs do figure, so... yeah. You do not want. >_>

      I ❤ it though.

      It's so bad, but I keep watching. I even made a Requiem Devotion for vampires who want DAT TUNG.

      You shut your mouth, there is nothing bad about The Strain. 😞

      I'm about halfway through Season 1 and it is FANTASTIC. I missed scary vampires.

      That's the thing though: they aren't really scary. The show fails to be actually scary.

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @Miss-Demeanor said:

      Coin: It may be a fact to you, but its not to me. I don't know that you would act the same on both bits. In addition, that separation exists in part because of a point you yourself brought up earlier. You don't want to be bugged about 'staff stuff' on your characters. The same works in reverse. Don't make 'staff decisions' on your character bit.

      I went into more detail on all of that later on, so I'm not sure what else I can say. In point of fact, you do know that I would act the same way, because it's still me. This idea that we can separate ourselves and what we choose and the decisions we make depending on what bit we're speaking on is silly. It might color it, we might be more or less polite, speak with more or less authority, but the person behind the screen is still the same one.

      Your comparison doesn't work, at least in my case, actually, because of a bunch of reasons I already typed up!

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @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.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @ThatGuyThere said:

      @Coin
      Ahh see here is where the it is just a game comes in for me. I will gladly sacrifice functionality for chasing the ideal. After all worst case scenario game ends and hopefully some people had fun along the way validating it's existence.
      I would rather see a game end striving for a goal then last last indefinitely as a tribute to functionality.

      Except it's not just a game. Not really. We like to say it is, but it's our hobby. One we put a lot of time and effort into. Further, it being less important than real life, etc., or "just a game", to use your words, means that I am more inclined to drop idealism and head straight for functionality. That's why I'm in favor of running games as dictatorships rather than democracies, for example.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @ThatGuyThere said:

      @Coin
      I admit true complete objectivity is not likely possible but I do feel it should be the goal.

      Assuming a functionality based on a goal rather than the present capabilities of the people who are actually doing it is a great way to run smack into a brick wall. If you expect objecitivity because it's your "goal" (which I, by the way, disagree with) then you're going to find "ethical issues" where there aren't actually any. Knowing that these things cannot be objective but wanting a functional level of objectivity means allowing for subjectivity to be mediated by other viewpoints. If you can avoid a circle jerk, you'll be fine.

      @Sunny said:

      @Coin said:

      @Sunny said:

      since historically alternatives to XP haven't yielded very good results

      I can't say I agree with this; games without stats still get PRPs pretty frequently.

      There is a key difference in that there not being stats or XP at all creates a different atmosphere regarding plots and running plots than when there is. We can like it or not, but the attitude the players take is different. When no one is getting XP because it's not a thing, then it doesn't become a 'these people get it and these people don't' issue. So it's not really a good comparison.

      (Boy, I am with the nitpicking of comparison lately. I apologize only a little.)

      Geez, man. Nitpick, nitpick, nitpick. I forgive you, but only because you're right. It is an entirely different ball of wax. But so is TR, and we're making lots of those comparisons.

      Well, I haven't. Because I'm better than you. NEENER.

      No, I get it. I just honestly have tried to avoid comparisons with other games and instead focused on game design styles precisely so I can avoid this sort of thing. I think I've compared more to my own game, because it works on the principle I'm in favor of. The Reach was a clusterfuck for many reasons, and most of them were way more important than "staff got XP for plots".

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @ThatGuyThere said:

      @Coin
      Oh I understand what you are saying i just reject the basic premise., that staff persona and player persona should not be separate.
      As a player you only concern need be following the rules having fun and not being an ass.
      As staff you have to concern yourself with a lot of bigger picture things.
      To me is is less about trust and proper division of roles.

      Also for the record in no way affiliated with the game just commenting in general.

      That level of dissociation is painful, even for people in our hobby, and it often leads to greater stress. I run my game and I play in it. Period. I don't--and I can't--turn off my "staff brain" if something comes up and I made aware of it, just because I am on my PC bit, much less switch on the fly when I change windows. It is ridiculous to require, and it's ridiculous to think it's even possible. Like I said before, I think it's not viable to expect complete objectivity. Sorry not sorry!

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @Sunny said:

      since historically alternatives to XP haven't yielded very good results

      I can't say I agree with this; games without stats still get PRPs pretty frequently.

      There is a key difference in that there not being stats or XP at all creates a different atmosphere regarding plots and running plots than when there is. We can like it or not, but the attitude the players take is different. When no one is getting XP because it's not a thing, then it doesn't become a 'these people get it and these people don't' issue. So it's not really a good comparison.

      (Boy, I am with the nitpicking of comparison lately. I apologize only a little.)

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @ThatGuyThere said:

      To me staffing is a job granted one taken with out pay and you kinda have to be a little crazy to want to do but a job none the less.
      Second you said about decision it was the same person anyway., how is paging different? Either they are different for both or the same for both.
      Now I would never follow up on Skype or any out of game channel that is just crazy,

      I... just explained how. I'm not sure how much clearer you need it to be, but I'll leave it to someone else to clarify.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      First of all: you're conflating your job with staffing, and they are not the same thing. One of them is responsible for you being able to sustain your way of life and, you know, eat (and possibily feed your family), whereas the other has the much less severe responsibility of... processing a few jobs on an online game. So if you're doing something your boss told you to even though you're against it, it's understandable (to an extent), whereas no one can actually force you to do jack on staff and if something is that ethically dubious, you can always say 'no' and not do it. Seriously, this comparison has got to go.

      Second of all: The division between a player and a staff bit exists for the reasons I stated above in my earlier post; but to further expound: you shouldn't page me about staff shit on my PC bit because I am going to have to use my staff bit anyway, and you are likely spamming me on my PC bit. Yes, even if I am in the Quiet Room. I page other people while I'm there, and keeping conversations separated on different screens helps me help you. And as stated before, I'm probably going to have to look at a job or something anyway, so I'd have to go to my staff bit. If it's not on, that means I'm not doing staff stuff. It's a clear indicator I am off-duty. Paging my PC bit about it anyway--or following up on Skype or whatever--is rude. Yes. But not because I see some internal division between my staff-persona and my me-persona. It's just a matter of common courtesy.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @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.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @Miss-Demeanor said:

      See, you say that... but I have no reason to believe or trust you in that. See where the difference is? You can 'guarantee' all you like... my experience has shown me that when allowed, its ends in abuse of power, and you've given me no hard evidence to support that you would be different. Why -should- I trust you, in other words.

      This isn't about trust, though. It's a fact. I am one person, I will make the same decision regardless of which screen I am looking at.

      Now, whether you want to trust me in that that decision will be a good one or one you agree with, sure, that's about trust, and maybe I should have to prove it or maybe not. But that's a separate issue.

      If you're asking do I let my being a player affect the decisions I make as staff, that's a different question, which you didn't ask, but to which the reply is: absolutely. Just like I let being a staffer affect the decisions I make for the game. I sit there and ask myself, "Would I, as a player, mind doing A, or B? Would it feel shitty if I had to do C, or if D happened?" etc. Now, do I make decisions that I wouldn't otherwise make because it favors my character bits? No, but whether you trust me with that or not is up to you, and there's no quantifiable proof for it other than playing on the game and deciding for yourself.

      You should trust me because, uh, otherwise it's a really shitty relationship and why are you playing in a game I run if you think I'm going to fuck you over? And if you don't trust me and still want to play there, that's fine and it's your prerogative and I'm sure you have your reasons and I'm happy to have you. You, specifically, because even if you don't trust me, you haven't proven to allow that to make my running a game miserable. Other people in the past have.

      That said: trust is a little like faith at first; the only difference is that after a while, the former either justifies itself... or it doesn't.


      ETA: I think it's impossible to be entirely objective about something when you're knee-deep in it, which is why I try to get opinions from people whenever I am going to make a decision like that. Hell, there are entire threads here (at least one) in which we asked for input about policy decisions. The decisions were ours in the end, but we asked for opinions to get different viewpoints.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @Miss-Demeanor said:

      So tell me, then. Why do you still keep a Staff bit on your own game? If you feel SO strongly that it makes no difference whether it comes from a staff or player bit... why do you have one? Why not do away with them entirely and just use your player bit for everything?

      Well, for one, tradition and cultural expectations. I've run other games on other mediums and people just used my real name when they wanted to talk to me OOC and stuff. MUs go about it a certain way, and I'm fine with conforming to those norms. It also has to do with things like job spam, and being able to be in a scene while still available to talk to people in a staff capacity on channels or the OOC Lounge, which I do regularly. It gives people an immediate, visible representation of my duties. I guess I just find your phrasing off. My decisions are always going to be the same; I would probably not post about them or expouse them from my player bit, because people would expect it from my staff bit, and I respect that. It's convenient and is good for allowing me to multitask, which I do a lot. I also like the shiny name. It makes me feel like a pretty pretty princess. But I can guarantee you that my opinion and decisions don't change depending on which screen I'm reading something on.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @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.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @Miss-Demeanor said:

      @Coin said:

      I just don't see having inside information or more things to mine for plots as a reason why they shouldn't get XP. It just don't work that way in my head. But hey, if it works, good!

      It isn't even completely about the XP. I wouldn't want staff running the -major plots- for the sphere/game from the character bit that they absolutely should -never- attempt to make staff-level decisions from. Separation of church and state, man. Use your character bit for YOU, use your staff bit for the GAME.

      Edit: Though I still feel giving a staff storyteller xp for running a plot, the thing that is what they signed on to DO, is jank. If you aren't going to hand out xp to all staff for doing their job, then don't make staff storytellers an exception. They signed on to do something specific, just like every other staffer. Why should they be special in getting xp for doing their job when no other staffer gets the same bonus? Every staffer accepts the responsibility of taking time away from their character(s) to help the game as a whole. Whether by running a sphere, doing jobs, mediating between players, storytelling, whatever. If every other staffer that is taking time away from their character to help the game as a whole isn't getting xp for their character bits, Staff ST's should be no different. Players CHOOSE to run plot. They aren't required to. They never accepted storytelling as one of their responsibilities by joining the game as a player. THAT is why they originally got xp for it. As a way of saying 'thank you for taking time to fill up the space between huge sphere/game plots to keep everyone interested while we cook up the next round of insanity'. Staff ST's accept that as a responsibility, a requirement of their position. Not a choice, not a perk, a -requirement-. That is their sole responsibility as Staff. They can still CHOOSE to run other things from their player bit to get xp. But they are by no means -required to do it-. And if they choose to take that time away from their character? They get xp for it, same as every other player.

      Separation of church and state is a bad comparison to make; it's not the same thing thing at all, even a little. But further, I find it dumb to drive storytelling on a game down into bureaucratic "which bit are you running this scene from" nonsense; it's irrelevant. Also, the idea that players "choose" to run plots and storytelling staff don't is bullshit, because no one is forcing anyone to do anything here, and storytelling staff chose to sign up for plot running, and separating these two as if one is different from the other in any sense other than which or what type of plot the person gets to run is pretty silly. Converting a choice into a requirement and changing its meaning just because of when the choice was made doesn't lend credence to your argument.


      Honestly, maybe it's just the roleplaying culture I originally come from, and the one I moved on to afterwards that shaped the way I storytell. Before I came to MUs, I played in places where it was perfectly fine to have your character in plots you ran, use them as plot hooks, ways to further the story along, and hell, I played entire families before, posing siblings, parents, etc., some of which were fully fleshed characters in their own right. And everything was copacetic, because there was enough trust that it wasn't an issue. I understand why it's an issue in MUs, but that doesn't change the fact that skewing hard in the opposite direction to the point of saying "staff storytellers can't get xp for staff plots because they're staff and staff is staff" sounds like utter crock to me. And it's what it essentially boils down to. Staff having access to metaplot information doesn't actually give them an advantage, it gives them added responsibilities, and if you take away a reward or incentive when someone takes up added responsibilities, you're doing the opposite of what common sense dictates.

      In any case, like I said, there's a values difference here that I'm perfectly happy to accept, because I'm for doing it my way, but not against doing it the way @Sunny wants to, because on her game, she does it her way and that's perfectly fine. But that's not the sensation I'm getting from the other side of this debate. I'm getting a little tired of the topic being treated like doing it any other way is ethically problematic. It's not. At most, it needles at some people's ideas of what's "fair" because they've been knee-deep in abusive staff before and are easily riled about that shit. Not everyone's experiences, desires, and enjoyment of the game are the same, which I think we all know, so why we can't have a discussion keeping that in mind boggles my brain.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      I just don't see having inside information or more things to mine for plots as a reason why they shouldn't get XP. It just don't work that way in my head. But hey, if it works, good!

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Coin
      Coin
    • RE: Dust to Dust (Formerly the nWoD grenade thread)

      @Sunny said:

      Ultimately, it boils down to the fact that I refuse to reward staff with advantages over other players. They're there to facilitate RP, not benefit themselves.

      It's not particularly an advantage, from my view point.

      I'm not running more plot because I have access to staff plot and can run PRPs from my bit. I'm probably going to run as much plot as I can and/or want regardless.

      I just don't place the same value on "being on the inside of staff plot" as you do. It's just not that big a deal when it comes down to it. And frankly, having access to it is often a detriment for most people because they can't enjoy the player side of it. And if you're worried about them metagaming with the knowledge, they shouldn't be staff.

      I guess we're just fundamentally on opposite sides of this. I don't really see "staff plot" as inherently better or more important than player run plots. It's a different type of plot, but the effort is often even greater than for PRPs, and the coordination needed is greater, the stress is greater, the level of inclusion you have to put forth is greater--and thus you are effectively saying, "I will reward you with XP if you run stuff for your friends, but for those staffers who bust their asses running stuff for the game itself, well, no. Because it's staff plot. And it's more special."

      I mean, I enjoy the debate, but that's what it boils down to: I don't think being staff should take away from the rewards just because it's staff-related. Especially since staff don't get perks for doing apps, completing jobs, etc.

      If it were a tabletop-style game? I would agree. Because my mindset going in would be different, the game would be different, etc. But I don't staff as an ST; I ST on top of staffing. They're different things.

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

      I'm just happy to see that lions in Africa are important to people. Not like those people in the States who come from Africa. Those can be killed with impunity.

      /sarcasm, just in case.

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Coin
      Coin
    • 1
    • 2
    • 156
    • 157
    • 158
    • 159
    • 160
    • 201
    • 202
    • 158 / 202