The Hog Pit having the largest number of posts does not in any way mean that the majority of the members are posting there. And I can want for more moderation in a posts where the moderators are asking us to grade their performance. That's not blaming the envelope. That is me saying that I wish their was more administrative performativity. Which is the reason this thread currently exists, from what I am gathering.
If you're a fan of Pathfinder/DnD, try tenebraemush.net. It's got players and active staffers on at basically all times.
Explanation of my 'mostly good' vote:
NodeBB blech. There has to be something better out there somewhere. Make it happen already.
The 'hands off' approach is mostly ok, but sometimes it would be great if there was a bit more actual moderation. Depends on the circumstances, but there have been some less than stellar behaviors that I wish would have been nipped in the bud long ago, Hog Pit or no.
I wish MSB had something more of a mission statement. If it's supposed to be a place for community engagement and connection, why does it feel like we deal with the same catty, cliquish crap as we do on the games? Isn't this place supposed to be above that? I mean, from what I understand, this place tries hard to be Not-WORA, but -- is that what we're really getting out of it?
@surreality said in RL Anger:
That moment you realize someone is never going to stop lying or being a completely shady asshole really fucking blows.
I know this probably doesn't help, but this is where I am with my best friend in RL. He's quickly getting intolerable.
@ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
@surreality said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
The level of ridiculousness is seriously beyond.
Why, I'll bet they also believe it wise to furnish you with handguns, in case there's ever an active shooter on site.
To be fair, if someone wants to -give- me a gun, I am all the way good with this.
It worked on the wizard too.
So, in reading this thread... I think folks are missing an important point.
Generally speaking, you make skill checks when there is a substantial risk of failure, at least in WoD, and you don't otherwise. Those are in the actual rules.
So the question about shooting someone I don't think is entirely apt, because what you are checking for is to see whether you miss. If there is no chance of missing, you generally just follow coup de grace rules and have a weapon inflict straight damage.
Same deal with drive... you don't need drive to drive a stick, you need drive to drive a stick effectively in hot pursuit, since manually shifting while trying to get the fuck away is more complicated.
If we're going to use examples, at least use examples that would actually require rolls. Yeah?
@tinuviel said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
If I have to explain one more time that the Second Amendment isn't a fucking thing in Australia, I'm going to shoot someone. Ironically.
Who are you having to explain this to?
@tinuviel said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
Wait, is that Scary German Guy? Who is that?
Okay, so to crib @MarsGrad's example above and give the 'on the other hand' version of that:
Space Cowboy might be a masochist according to your story, and he might have a deathwish. But in this scenario? His 'Masochistic Deathwish' stat just got beaten by Johnny B. Goode's 'intimidating jerkface' stat.
If you want the kind of character that never blinks in the face of such things, then -invest in the stats that make sure you rarely lose those rolls-, and then when you do lose one, figure out why this time is different.
Super major peeve -- your character doesn't get extra stats/immunity based on backstory. That also isn't the way this works, and we need to be realistic about that. People have crafted the most convoluted backstories ever to explain why they're immune / resistant / not afraid of X thing, but then rock like 4 dice in resistances on their sheet.
Those resistance stats are what should be determining how much of a badass this person is in their backstory. Not the other way around.
@misadventure said in Social 'Combat': the hill I will die on (because I took 0 things for physical combat):
The small mountain of examples up there.
These do not all agree, just examples.
@bobotron said in Social 'Combat': the hill I will die on (because I took 0 things for physical combat):
Conversely, the couple of games where I've been on that had social stats either 1) gave no real backing to those social stats, or 2) suffered from the same issues I have crop up in LARP - I am my character, thus my agency is infringed upon if you use your Lies Stat @ Eleventybillion.
At the end of the day, I don't think that anyone is going to come to a resolution on these things that actually makes everyone happy. My personal opinion is, if you're trying to use an OOC mechanic to justify why your character is not subject to an IC mechanic, e.g. most arguments about agency etc., then you're not playing by the rules of the game. i.e., cheating.
But other people's mileage obviously varies.
I think what needs to happen is that games just need to decide whether they're using social dice or not, and then actually put the effort into making those dice matter. If certain players don't like the idea that there are social dice on this game that could be used to influence their PCs mindsets and behaviors? Cool. Play on one of the games that don't.
I know that if I ever open a game, provided I can find some time in the future (internship is over this week, thank god), it will absolutely have enforced social stats. And I know that not everyone will want that to be a thing, or be comfortable with that. And that is fine. Games don't need to be everything to everyone. They just need to offer an appeal to a group of players that have a like mindset in these matters and make it happen consistently.
I can't draw worth a damn. I probably could if I put some practice into it, because I used to do okay in high school. But I haven't for so long now that I don't know that I'd be able to do what I used to do.
BUT. That said, one of the things that I used to do, when I got tired of drawing off of references, was draw off of references -- but add something, or change something.
At first it was little things. Find a picture, maybe change the way their hair looked a bit. Draw some fruit, but draw a defect on it, or add a branch. A bowl. A sticker. Whatever.
Over time, you can start to draw less of the reference and more of what you see in your mind's eye. Eventually, you'll be able to just sort of draw whatever from whatever.
I know that it sounds like it could be tedious. It probably would be, honestly. But it would also be rewarding, in that you would be consistently drawing, and at least engaging your imagination a little bit.
So find a person you think looks nice, and draw them. Maybe with wings. Or a sword.
Draw a car, but give it human eyes instead of headlights. Make it look angry. Or sexy.
It's another version of 'just draw', yes. I don't think there's any getting around that. But at least it's just draw with both a -purpose- and a -plan-. Which is what is really gonna make this whole thing work for you, if it goes the same for you as it does for me.
So, would you say that it's more 'you want to do it and lack the motivation' or 'every time you try to do it stuff just flies right out of your head so you have no idea what to draw'?
@ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
I was once a victim of a scam. The caller left a message and claimed to be an officer from the IRS. So, I called them back because, well, that's what I do.
Them: Our records show that you owe over $5,000 in back taxes. A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Me: Really? When was the complaint served? I haven't received my certified mail.
Them: pause The complaint was mailed to you.
Me: Was it certified mail? Because, if not, the complaint does not comply with Rule 4.
Them: You have been served, sir.
Me: No, I haven't.
Them: You still owe the money.
Me: Let me speak to Jim Keegan.
Them: What?
Me: Jim Keegan? He's your regional chief compliance officer.
Them: No, he's not.
Me: Yes, he is. I spoke with them four days ago in a separate case, where I represent a receivership.
Them: What?
Me: A receivership. May I speak to Agent Keegan?
Them: There's no Jim Keegan here.
Me: Then you're not the IRS, I have your phone number, and I am a prosecutor. What's your name?
Them: click
Someone tried something similar with me once. I had just moved, though, and they said I had a default judgment in a civil suit. Which is a thing which really might have happened, because our service of process allows for people to just literally leave shit at your listed address basically wherever without ever speaking to a live human.
So, naturally, I was like 'Well, fuck me. When did this happen?' Followed by my knee-jerk reaction of 'Can I have the cause number?' Because I have Odyssey, and can see more than just the shitty public record version of stuff. Yay!
So they provide the ridiculous Indiana cause number, complete with the right county and court identifiers. No such cause number, though.
People here get crazy detailed with that shit.
@faceless said in Dead Celebrities 2018:
They were outside the vehicle for some reason, I believe.
Player was throwing up, yeah. Too soon to speculate as to why.
One of the Colts players was killed this morning. Hit by a drunk driver I believe.
@faceless said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
Yes. I wear a size 16 wide(U.S.)
16 shoe? You know what they say...
waggles eyebrows Howdy sailor.
