Posts made by Derp

So after taking some time away to consider some of this, I think that I partially agree with @ganymede. But only partially.

The moving cap idea is okay, if the cap moves fairly often. Capping things 'per season' of something seems like too much of a hard-and-fast cap for my tastes. But I'm also okay with the idea of capping the amount of xp that can be gained per week, or per scene, or whatever. Eldritch currently has that. You can get whatever the auto-gain is, +10 regular beats for doing things, +10 extra beats per player for running things per week. Which ultimately comes out to something like 4-6 xp a week max, which is pretty high under the WoD system, if you're running at full burn and are willing to do enough stuff to hit that number.

As very few people actually hit that number or anywhere close to that number, it doesn't create unreasonable setbacks, while still allowing for some degree of parity.

The amount of xp you've earned in auto-gains also slows down the more xp you have, so the older people have to do more in order to keep their advantage over newer people, which is also kosher with me. New people don't have automatic equal footing with the people who are already there (in which I agree with @Miss-Demeanor, at that point you're really just sticking it to your existing players). They start with the same things in chargen as everyone else started with in chargen, and have to work their way up from there. That's still equality. Not 'gimme all the stuff too' equality, but 'I have a chance to get there as well' equality.

So, in consideration ... personal per-short-period-of-time caps are okay, so long as it's not a game-wide ceiling that isn't gonna move for a good long while, but I still don't buy this 'new people should be able to do all the same things at the same level that existing people can' mentality, or the idea that those who can't for whatever reason do as much as others should be equally 'rewarded'. You get out of it what you put into it.

It's interesting that you would use that particular hornet, since when they invade a nest of bees the bees swarm around them and all bat their wings furiously until the temperature around the invader rises so high it basically cooks it to death.

Kind of like how some of us here did.

@Ganymede said:

I'm simply tearing at the flimsy, arbitrary reasons why we explain away policies aimed to maintain a benefit enjoyed only by pre-existing players. Once we all come to terms with the fact that it all such reasoning is hokum, then maybe we'll start thinking about adopting different, potentially-better policies.

Have you proven that the reasoning is both flimsy and arbitrary? Because I've not actually seen that, outside of you basically just saying that you think they're flimsy and arbitrary.

@Surreality said:

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.

Long block of stuff about existence RP being the major source of xp even on extremely active players.

That basically shot the 'it's not faaaaaaaaaaaaair that people who can be more active get to earn XP for it!' attitude I have seen straight to hell with no coming back from.

So like... maybe I'm reading this wrong, but that seems to contradict what you were saying. I mean, for certain things yes, what they've done should come into play for it, and I won't disagree with that at all. This is why I'm also not opposed to justifications for relatively high stats, and even encouraged that for Werewolf Renown, since it's all about what you've done, not how long you've been a fixture. But those who have been around longer with average levels of activity should not be outclassed overnight by a newbie with average levels of activity, like some catchup systems promote, nor do I think that newbies should catch up entirely to the older crew if they have the same levels of activity.

Maybe I'm just parsing it wrong? I think that ultimately we're saying the same thing here, maybe. Yes, what they do matters, and yes, how long they've been around matters.

@Ganymede said:

Spend timers are a fantastic idea, but they benefit those who came in through the doors first to the detriment of those who came in later. And for all of the clamor of players that insist that they should have an advantage for simply applying for a PC earlier, I respond with: "that is the most absurd reason for maintaining a superior position."

This is only partially true, though. You're assuming that there is no advantage to being a newbie in this scenario, when there absolutely could be. Spend timers don't have to be equal, for instance. What happens if, after the first dot, you have to wait a month for the second? And then two months for the third? And three months for the fourth? Etc? New people could advance more quickly than older players up to a point. And that point is another side of fairness.

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.

Edited for formatting issues, then accidentally quoted below, because grrrrr.

@Scissors said:

@tragedyjones Doesn't Eldritch have a limited number of slots in each sphere? Technically I would need to wait for a slot to open up before I can make something, no?

Werewolf is still open, for the nonce, though I can't say for how much longer. If you wanna werewolf, though, you can get to makin' one.

@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.

@WTFE said:

A point of order, @Jaunt claims to be posting for his own amusement. Which is why I've been posting all that stuff about booze. We need something to drink for The Game.

Yes, but I tend to take @Thenomain's approach to it. Whether they think they are or not, they are here in an official capacity simply by dint of having thrown out those credentials in the first place, coupled with the current discussion.

@Jaunt said:

We've received both levels of criticism on this thread. The former will be responded to kindly and thoughtfully. The later will be responded to with the same level of ironic vitriol that it deserves.

No, it's not. The fact that you think this is precisely the reason I hope that the far more reasonable @Jeshin cuts you the hell off from posting here. You're making him, and his site, look absolutely terrible.

Do you not understand what the difference is, here? The difference is that you came here. If someone from this site were to go to yours and behave as you've behaved here, we would absolutely respond to them here just as we've responded to you. We didn't go to your site and demand that you change. YOU came HERE to advertise your site, then refused (all three of you) to participate in any sort of actual discussion (meaning give-and-take on ideas, not simple acknowledgement of their existence), which is precisely what this forum is for.

If you don't understand -that-, then you are even more deluded than I thought you were. I didn't have a horse in this race, at all, until you came along starting in with your bullshit. Get a clue -- this is our community, that is theirs, and if you want to advertise -here-, you need to engage the players here on what they want to see and discuss. And yes, DISCUSS. Compromise if necessary.

If you're unwilling to do that, then I have to agree with the others -- go the hell away and stop making Jeshin look bad, because right now you are here in an official capacity for your site, and you're acting like a miserable twat.

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.

I suppose I wouldn't mind bare minimal xp, but really, I think that spend timers are the way to go with things like this. It both helps to ensure that people are growing in a relatively believable way and that there is some diversity to what they're spending things on.

But of course, that system won't be favored by those who want to power their way into a five, either, and argue that 'I should be able to spend xp I earned.' (Which, in fact, under many systems was not earned, but given).

So I don't think there's one 'right' way to do it. Someone's always gonna be unhappy.

@Gingerlily & @surreality : +1

I tend to think of it more as the peer review process, honestly. If someone flames on something posted, it's rarely because they hate the poster. (Rarely, not never!) You then have two choices. You can either defend your idea using something fairly coherent and cohesive, or you can step back and re-evaluate, reformulate, come back to it later.

Either way, what universally ends up happening is a better finished product, if you approach it in this manner. If you approach it with pooflinging and 'nuh uh you shut up about mah shinies' kind of stuff, as most everyone but @Jeshin has done from OR, then yeah, you're going to get laughed out of the room, and nobody will take you seriously.

To @Jeshin -- Dude, you're in charge here, man. Step up to the plate and -do that thing-. I've seen good progress come from your direction. @Crayon and @Jaunt are so laughably bad at presenting your site that you might seriously think of revoking their posting privs, because they're alienating the people you're advertising to far more than anyone else has in your project so far.

@Seamus said:

@Alzie I seriously must have missed that because I do not recall seeing that in the main GMC book. Could you enlighten me?

You're not the only one that missed that. Nobody that I've talked to about it is aware of this either. Can you give an example in the books of where this is located?

VK's pretty notorious for being Princess Crazypants, yeah. She's been the source of a longstanding headache on at least one of my characters, with various interactions on others being basically just as unpleasant.

And no, she doesn't tend to make much more sense IC or OOC in-game than what she's making here. There is no substance to it, it's all about how loudly she can protest and exhaust the other people.

@Thenomain said:

@Coin said:

Not to mention that it's pretty trivial to proctor a hog.

I don't know what you teach, but I can't imagine pigs are that easy to teach it to. They are pretty smart, but there are limits.

Don't underestimate the anglophone world's desire for English to be the ultimate super language, or the lengths they'll go to to make that the case.

But I have seen some people that I would consider to be absolute pigs have very good grammar, so there's that.

@Coin said:

Not to mention that it's pretty trivial to doctor a log.

Dreaded double post to add:

What 'evidence'? What 'verifiable information'? At the end of the day, you're playing in an anonymous text-based medium where anything and everything can be made to appear as easily as moving your fingers across a keyboard. As Coin pointed out, it's painfully easy to make up whole reams of information, and everyone in this hobby has some experience getting into the mindset of a writer and creating convincing characters. Bottom line is, it comes down to a gut check, nearly every time. Do you believe the information being presented? Have you seen something that makes you think that this is likely a legitimate series of events? If so, then act on it. If not, then do nothing, or take some other action that you feel is necessary if you think that the person providing the complaint is overreacting/full of it/missing information/etc.

What more can you really do and hope to get something concrete and irrefutable?

@Coin said:

I'm the only good one in a set of triplets. Trufax.

The other two are chaotic evil and true neutral. I mean, really, you should be getting royalties off of so many fantasy books...

@Misadventure said:

Okay plain english. I think @coin came across as rude, abrupt, and failed to even try move the conversation forward, and when asked to offer reasoning said "no, you."

It would be like someone responding to a suggestion to a group with "You're a fucker." You'd want some sort of expansion on that, if you assumed the person actually has a point. I assume everyone here has a point, trite or serious, cooperative or conflicting.

I don't assume this means @coin intends that, or is a raging ahole. The offense I feel is that uselessness of a post, followed by defense of said post. Maybe i attend too many productive meetings these days.

Other than that, I was off on my own topic, something acknowledged long ago.

Since nobody here actually seems to understand what the hell you were talking about in the first place, and your plain english explanation still offers no relevant details on that beyond "@Coin is a great big dummy who didn't answer my question that was somehow both relevant to the current topic and off on its own little rail", perhaps you should try starting from the beginning, and explain what precisely it is you're wanting to say and how you want to say it. You said something about xp throttling on gifts, and were told that's both not what we were talking about and not how the system works. What more do you need on that? If you meant something else, perhaps an explanation is in order.

@Thenomain said:

Or unless there are going to be more Auspice-locked Moon Gift paths in a planned expansion. Blood Moon? Shadow Moon? Etc.

This is what they mean, yeah. Not that you can buy other Auspice's gifts, but that you can buy other moon gifts within your same Auspice when they release more in the future. Witch's Moon, things like that. Chris Allen clarified this on the OP forums.