Posts made by deadculture

#WeldTheVents #Ninjamorph

@thenomain Without going too much into that, she's the only person in the world who gets paid 20K dollars to make a (free) Discord channel. That should pretty much tell you the intent there.

@misadventure @Botulism will try out divving people out in factions/crews next iteration and seeing if that works. I like the idea considering the future setting.

@three-eyed-crow said in Horror MUX:

@botulism
Yeah that totally wasn't directed at you. Tho even the softer concept of 'seasons' where there are contained story campaigns and then you shift to another (with mostly the same characters) I've been on a handful of places that have done them to varying degrees of success/failure. I think there's more experimentation in smaller games than the not-so-vast masses see sometimes. This is a cool approach to it and its exciting to see it tried, tho.

I think people get more attached to their characters the more is at stake. Such as: if you've invested a lot of time to get something neat, like a sword that screams and can kill vampires, or if you spent a long time to poise that character for a position of import in the setting. It is admittedly fair to be frustrated if the wrong timing has you lose those two investments in the next 'phase', but I like how tabletop games like Pendragon and others deal with this. It gives you a sense of continuity without forcing you to think your game ends with the death of your character, even if Pendragon is really, really punitive as far as systems go. The wrong 20 in a roll can spell your death.

@bored:

Conrad has tons to do (to the 'I have people griefing me because I'm RPing with someone else instead of dealing with their request' level. I know his player very well.

I have a character whose entire initial personal agenda was to fuck with Conrad. That personal agenda lasted exactly one day/night because everyone is either in it together or they'll have to be the only man/woman on the island. The inherently cooperative nature of a game where the individuals odds are bad for everyone, regardless of their concept or IC connections, is really, really interesting to see play out.

Essentially, you either build a bridge with others or you get stuck and possibly perish. Ultimately, though, I made my own fun and my character, who started out as the odd man out, made connections with people that I think are very interesting to play out.

@faraday TGG was based on war campaigns and the outcomes were already settled. It's an example towards the same thing, but not the best example. @EUBanana knows I love his games though.

@auspice I am still of the opinion that a fantasy game could be made along the same general lines, with each RL season being a different point of the timeline of the setting, even if it's a limited run.

Player actions affecting the setting and then you get to see how that happens quicker than the usual L&L feeling of provoked stasis.

That said, mad props to @Botulism for showing how a serial game can be done.

I think HorrorMUX essentially proves that it's possible to make an episodic game that is enjoyable throughout limited runs. A lot of concerns about making serial games were basically of the 'What if people get too attached to their characters' category, but let's be honest, as long as you have a sense of continuity you don't really need to be playing the same person for 3+ RL years. I'm looking forward to seeing how the next iterations of the game play out.

@cura So you guys are using standard FS3 instead of the Ares release? I think Ares would work great here. Especially since it has support for bigger ships, I think.

@kanye-qwest They're Auspice (moon phase) dependent powers. Full Moon would probably be PMS if it was code for menstruation, tho.

@insomnia Thanks for the cookie. And don't worry about it. If I had an issue with anything you said I'd address it personally. Way I see it, you weren't really attacking anyone nor shitting up the thread and so I think that's respectful and deserves respect in turn.

@insomnia I didn't mean you at all. I think you and I were agreeing on some critical points, and in those that we weren't, you were respectfully addressing your disagreements.

@bored Well, the poster 'since SWOFA' over there came into the thread swinging at conservatives after things were starting to circle around a conclusion to this pointless thread.

If there WAS moderation, they'd point out to her it's the Mildly Constructive area (it is), and to start inflammatory language just because you want to engage with 4 or 5 other logical fallacies (no true scotsman, slippery slope, argumentum ad absurdum, reversing the burden of proof, concern trolling) and break shit down isn't going to make this anymore constructive. In fact, there was a lot of discord sewn just to keep this shit going.

Pointing a finger at people who aren't on your side of the political spectrum and calling them names isn't going to make a conversation constructive. Pulling fallacy after fallacy, moving goalposts when you can't insult them isn't going to make a conversation constructive.

Gaslighting people you aren't doing that when they can just go back on the thread, by the way, isn't going to make a conversation constructive.

I still stand by my stance.

@three-eyed-crow The difference between a Stalinist and a democratic socialist is precisely the emphasis on civil freedoms that the latter has. Orwell not only criticizes Stalin in 1984, but he also points out the inherent contradictions behind the purported intent of would-be revolutionaries and what they really do. But this falls under whether someone has a literal and concrete or a non-linear mindset.

Since I do not disagree that Orwell did criticize Stalinism in the book. Not at all, but I also don't think that's all it is about.

@kanye-qwest Rhetorical question

@insomniac7809

Here's an example of Two Minutes Hate, starring Emmanuel Goldstein. Straight from the proverbial horse's mouth:

"Goldstein was delivering his usual venomous attack upon the doctrines of the Party—an attack so exaggerated and perverse that a child should have been able to see through it, and yet just plausible enough to fill one with an alarmed feeling that other people, less level-headed than oneself, might be taken in by it. He was abusing Big Brother, he was denouncing the dictatorship of the Party, he was demanding the immediate conclusion of peace with Eurasia, he was advocating freedom of speech, freedom of the Press, freedom of assembly, freedom of thought, he was crying hysterically that the revolution had been betrayed—and all this in rapid polysyllabic speech which was a sort of parody of the habitual style of the orators of the Party, and even contained Newspeak words: more Newspeak words, indeed, than any Party member would normally use in real life."

I wonder, if somebody you're taught to hate, viscerally hate, espouses some ideas, would you be more or less opposed to them?

@insomniac7809 They inflict hurt while nominally talking about removing it. What's the purpose of Emmanuel Goldstein, if not to be a foil to the frustrations of a society that is forbidden from engaging in courtship rituals, kept from absolute mastery of their own language by replacing it with a government-approved construct and the careful censorship and disappearance acts of anything that might hurt the party line and allow people to have individual opinions?

@coin That would've been funnier with a gif of a literal dogpile.

Here, though, I'll indulge!

@ganymede Inkjet or laser?

My honest opinion on that is that if you work with a lot of standardized documents (and as a lawyer, you do), laser printers are not only more cost effective but have way less headache potential for you.

@kanye-qwest Fair point. Like I said, I can't drink, so I'm hitting the gas and I guess I didn't see the wall.

@friendlybee You label the words, not knowing that words can be used in any context, including satire, parody and other forms of dark humor/schadenfreude.

The moment you attribute labels to words in the same way people often attribute labels to people to discredit their viewpoints or simply to deflect from them, is the moment that censorship begins. After all, that's what 1984 is about, the totalitarian point of view in which the potential of a word to hurt means it has to expunged from the lexicon outright.

Your next step is to start burning dictionaries and books that have the words, a la Fahrenheit 451.