@Auspice said in MSB Peeves:
I have to get this off my chest.
It's a long time coming.I fucking hate nodebb's search function.
+10000
Or the fact that it defaults to the search function when I hit control-f to just find something on the damn page. STOP IT.
Just figured that I'd drop in here and post an update.
A few of you probably know already, but in the next few weeks, we'll be opening up the Mage sphere for play.
The code is mostly in. It's waiting on me to do a bit more work on the wiki, and get the Signs of Sorcery stuff in (the parts that I'm keeping in, anyway -- not all of it is gonna make the cut, I don't think).
There are a ton of players already getting sheets ready. We've opened up the chargen a bit early so that people can start to tinker.
Please DO read the wiki, especially the application requirements, because these are a bit stricter than the others spheres. I'm being very careful about how this all gets rolled out; I've seen how Mage spheres fail in the past, with players not knowing what they're doing or not caring about the theme that magic should be used judiciously, just rolling over everything in their path.
Which is why some reasons for caution are now baked into the mechanics and theme, moreso than even paradox.
Hope to see some new faces soon! I'll keep you updated on the official open date.
@Ominous said in 2E Mage-focused Game:
Scientists claim there are four fundamental forces of the universe - gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. As they try to zoom in and understand how these forces work, their unintuitive behavior results in theories like quantum mechanics, chromodynamics, and string theory, which, when one thinks about it, seem like black mystery boxes that scientists are shoving things that they don't understand into. How can two identical particles end up behaving in different manners? Because they chose to. Particles and forces behave the way they do because they have a will - they are spirits. Spirits govern both the natural and the supernal world on a fundamental level. Those who follow Maestros know this and beseech these spirits to control not only the spirits themselves but the fabric of reality that drives everything.
Other mages may talk about the Prime as the source of magic, but those of Maestros smile and laugh to themselves with the secret knowledge that that too is driven by spirits. It's spirits all the way down.
Other mages talk about Prime as the source of magic, the arcanum that governs the nature of Universal Truth. To the Maestros, this notion is naive at best, and more likely dangerously reckless.
How can magi talk about "universal truths" or "fundamental characteristics" when every Order acknowledges that the Fallen World can change the very nature of these ideas in the Supernal? How much of a "truth" can something so mutable really be? The idea of some grand, unchanging law that governs the truth of all things may sound good on paper, but when put into practice, it breaks down easily. Predictable behavior is predictable, not pre-ordained -- the particle collapses down from a wave function because it helps mankind acknowledge its existence, as all spirits seek, not because it must. Prime is the arcanum of tearing apart magic because of the flaws in these so-called truths, trying to overlay an imperfect idea over something to the point where it collapses.
Where the Obrimos will tell you that there exists the idea of a triangle, three sides whose internal angles always measure one-hundred eighty degrees, The Maestro draws the triangle on a ball, and says 'measure now', showing that this isn't always the case. While this 'truth' might be convenient, following it without knowing its limits can lead one dangerously astray, as sailors have known for centuries, despite the best assertions of academics.
You ever go back and read something you wrote, or think about a conversation you were having, and realize that only in context does something not sound hilariously weird?
That's what this thread is for. Those things that make perfect sense in context, but taken out of context, just sound ludicrously absurd.
Which is why you should not be putting the context in there, either. Just let people's minds go with it.
I'll start:
This gazelle is sexier than a cartoon gazelle has any right to be. The bull, too.
@Ganymede said in What MU/RPG opinions have you changed or maintained?:
@faraday said in What MU/RPG opinions have you changed or maintained?:
MUSH games are not very good about setting expectations of what kind of game they are, and players are not very good about respecting those boundaries even when they are established.
I concur, but write to add that most players are simply unwilling to learn the rules of a novel game, and would prefer to twist it to suit their attitudes rather than adapt.
^THIS.
It's like pulling teeth to get people to read the core books of the game I run, much less the wiki or news files. They just assume they're right and that I have no idea what I'm talking about.
I think that the further you spread it out, the more work you're going to have to do when it comes to gating people into certain xp ranges. So really it's up to you. How are you going to stop everyone from apping in an Eighth Year Faculty-In-Training PC? What incentives do they have to play First Years? What does plot look like for a Fifth Year? A Seventh Year?
I more meant that 'if every student takes a certain number of credit hours per semester, and the course is adequately structured, then they're all gonna be learning roughly the same thing', which results in uniform xp.
This does not rule out independent study because they are naturally more adept at certain things than others, leaving them more time to explore the things they want to study on their own (whether they should be or not).
This has been the premise of nearly all the 'magic school' stories. Harry Potter, the Magicians. They're all learning the same stuff in class. Some of them are learning stuff on their own, too. Which is where your plots and such come in.
If it's a structured curriculum, xp should probably go up in even increments per year.
Faculty PCs being 40 seems sensible, maybe even a little underpowered, depending on what level of faculty we're talking about.
@Coin said in 2E Mage-focused Game:
I would want to know more about these new five Watchtowers. What their Realms are, what their Arcanum are, etc.
If it's the same as the presented Djinn in the Sixth Watchtower, it'll be Forces/Spirit with an inferior of Prime.
@Aria said in Random funny:
I had to see it. Now you have to see it.
So wait, wait. Hold the fuck on.
Those maps that said "Here there be dragons" were accurate?
For everyone who was discussing the Wheel of Time casting choices, and the problems some Twitter mobs had about them, this is a good read to share.
I have a very big issue with the casting choice.
Nynaeve.
That girl is too damn tall to be Nynaeve. Zoe is 5'8. Harris is 6'0.
Nynaeve is short in the books. Like, WoD wolf-blooded girl short. She barely came up to Mat's shoulder.
I want a short, tiny, dark-haired, dark-eyed firecracker of anger and magical firepower.
I feel betrayed.
ETA: And Rosamund Pike as Moiraine?!? At 5'9, when she's even shorter than Nynaeve in the books! This is an outrage!
@Arkandel said in What MU/RPG opinions have you changed or maintained?:
Another example is games which simply copy house rules or policies from other MU*, a tactic that can result in perpetuated systemic issues, mixed signals and conflicting goals if other aspects of those games don't match them.
Tangential peeve to this one: when people have been playing under weird house rules for so long that they insist that they're the actual base rules.
For instance one sphere can be ran very liberally ("spend your XPs, y'all!") while another in a draconian fashion ("to buy Renown 3 you need to cut yourself and show me the wound") or treat PrPs as an afterthought or even a net negative - and all of that results in isolationism, not being able to create any kind of sustainable culture not to mention - quite often - a revolting door of staff who come in and go right back out.
Here's where I disagree with you, though.
In a multisphere game, you're actually running overlapping games. Because those things aren't created equal, and we've seen that time and time again.
A vampiric discipline, for example, is a discreet thing. It has a set, fixed purpose to it. The same with a devotion.
Renown, on the other hand, touches on so many aspects of werewolf and gives so many benefits (increased rank, increased 'status', free gifts, larger dice pools, the list goes on and on -- Renown touches on literally every part of werewolf) that you're not talking about buying even remotely the same kind of thing. In that case, 1xp does not equal 1xp, and treating them like they're the same thing, or should be the same thing, is a ludicrous way to unbalance your game very fast.
Not all things are equal, and therefore you shouldn't try to treat them like they are. Some things have a hell of a lot more bang for their buck, and those things should be gated appropriately.
@wahoo said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
Why are you posting pics of you AND YOUR MATES on Bumble when your MATES ARE HOTTER THAN YOU.
For the potential group sex options. Obvs.
Double posting because, I'm just gonna leave part of the definitions here for you to peruse. These are being left here as general information, and should not be considered legal advice:
***=Spammy law stuff***
@Macha said in Health and Wealth and GrownUp Stuff:
@Derp If they were going to prove it was an undue hardship to set me up for work from home, they would have to remove the option for everyone.
Hey! So sorry for the delayed reply. It's not showing me notifications when people use @mentions, for some reason.
So in regard to needing to remove the option for everyone -- no, not so much, really. This is part of what I was trying to say before. These cases are very fact-specific.
They don't need to remove the option from everyone, because everyone is not a valid comparator in your case. Only the people who hold your exact position (or an incredibly similar, only marginally different position) are, and whether this creates an undue hardship or is a reasonable accommodation turns very heavily on what the employer defines as the essential functions of your position. (Which, by the by, is determined by the employer, within certain guidelines, and absent an argument that an 'essential function' is pretextual, judges and the like don't question whether a function listed as 'essential' is really essential or not).
IF they argue that your on-site presence is an essential function of the position, then they are not required to grant a work-from-home accommodation, since you would technically be asking for an accommodation that negates an essential function of the position. Therefore, they can claim that a reasonable accommodation would not be possible, since negating an essential function of the position makes it an unreasonable request.
It's all very technical, and again, highly dependent upon what your actual job description is, and everyone else receiving a remote work allowance may not be a valid comparator.
TL;DR -- press for it, so that you can at least have them engaged in an interactive process, but don't assume that you're entitled to such a thing, because that's just not the way that any of that works.
ETA: This is not meant to discourage you in any way. Just trying to make you aware of what all goes into these sorts of things, so that you can go in with reasonable expectations.
@Sparks said in The ADD/ADHD Thread (cont'd from Peeves):
if I am in that mode at work and you bring me something new, I will shift to work on that and then return to the original thing afterwards. Unfortunately, I often then find it hard to return to the original thing.
The way I deal with this? The post-it program on my computer. Someone brings me something, it gets added to the list. Things get done in the order they were brought. People now know that if it is super pressing, they may just want to do it themselves.
Because I am an assistant working for four people, not one, and I will not prioritize one over the other unless there is a super compelling reason to do so, like a short deadline on something for the court.
@surreality said in What MU/RPG opinions have you changed or maintained?:
"You're sometimes the hero of your own story. You're ultimately also its principle villain."
I'm stealing this line.
My big thing is, I used to think that players should have more say in how things go on the game. That they, as invested citizens of a MU, should have a much larger voice in how things go down.
Now I don't. Or at least, not nearly as much as I used to. I realize that was a dumb way to look at things when I repeatedly saw the consequences of that.
I strongly feel that many of the staff on games are incapable of just telling players 'no' in the face of popular-but-terrible ideas, but sometimes there are very good reasons to do so. Because it's against the rules. Because it's against the theme. Because it frankly interferes too much with the story that you're putting in a ton of work to tell. You have every right to tell players 'no', and they can either accept it or move on to a different game. (Yes, there are some times when negotiation is probably the better answer, and I engage in those too -- but frankly, I'm not having a three-hour argument with you every time you disagree with a decision I made. Deal. We both have better things to do with our lives.) Sometimes, you just need to say 'no'.
And that includes things that players think that they're entitled to, and I used to agree with. Like -- leadership of entire groups. You think that your characters should be able to get there to give them something to 'strive for', or whatever. Except, in almost every case where this has actually happened, they sit on those positions and do nothing and enforce nothing, and everything goes off the rails and dies, and you can't do jack about it because you've effectively neutered your own staff bit by ceding power to the players in the first place.
So now? Now I care much less about 'what players want'. I'll listen, I'll take suggestions. But the ultimate decision is mine, and if I think that an idea is destructive or counter to what I'm trying to build, I'm going to tell you 'no', regardless of how popular it may be.
@Macha said in Health and Wealth and GrownUp Stuff:
Handed the accommodation letter from my doctor to my boss today, about a work from home accommodation. (The company has work from home employees, so this is completely feasible and doable). She tells me she will talk it over with her co-CEO and they will decide if I can be an 'exception', since they like the 'local area people' to come into the office. -- uh, I don't think she knows that isn't how it works.
I also didn't get the job I interviewed on Friday, so I'm stuck waiting to explain that they don't get a choice on medical accommodation if they have the ability.
Well, depending on what you do, they actually do have some choice in the matter. Just as a fair warning. Reasonable accommodations cannot create an undue hardship on the employer, for example, and depending on what they define as the "essential functions" of your job (which is largely decided by them under CFR 1630.2(n)(3)), they may deem that to be unreasonable. It's super-dependent on the specific facts of your situation, but many people expect that a doctor's note is a magic bullet that makes an employer do something, and the reality is -- it's complicated, and it depends, like most things in the law.
Still, I'd take it up with the EEOC. They're forbidden from retaliating against you (though they still might). Just be aware that this isn't a 100% certainty.
Protip: Get a written copy of your job description. You'll thank yourself later in the investigative process, if it comes to that.
@TheOnceler said in How to pronounce FYI?:
Let's say I recently suffered a traumatic brain injury and decided I needed to pronounce FYI in some way other than the letters.
Why in the hell would I ever pronounce it 'fwee' or 'fwy' instead of 'fyee' or 'fy-eye'? It's not FWI.
Anyway, someone pronouncing FYI as anything other than eff-wy-eye' is almost certainly someone's way of signaling that they've been kidnapped and we're really letting them down right now.
So if I had to make an argument --
...we have Y in our alphabet to stand in for the greek letter upsilon, which historically had a sound like the modern french u or german ü, sort of a rounded 'long e' sound in english. Putting this before the actual long e sound normally represented by the I there forces it into a semivowel/glide function, thus making 'fwee' the most accurate pronunciation for the historical sounds of the letters in the Latin alphabet.
