Best posts made by Ganymede

@Macha

I hope it works out, I truly do.

@faraday said in Social Systems:

5. Agency. I have one job on the game, and that's to decide how my character acts/reacts. When you start enforcing social behavior, it's like you're taking the controller out of my hand and telling me how to play the character. That bugs the heck out of me. I do not feel the same at all if you tell me that my character got shot, or missed their shot, or anything else external to the character's thoughts and behaviors.

I want to hook on just this.

Obviously, my response was pretty tongue-in-cheek, but it was meant to highlight what I believe the issue to be: the temperament of the players involved. I'm one of those players that honestly couldn't give fewer shits if you want or don't want to roll something, mostly because I think I am forceful and clever enough to manipulate you and your PC without rolling anything, if that's what I think my PC would do.

(Pro-tip: Part of this also means adhering to my stats, which I try to do as hard as I can. That said, I simply can't RP as a doofus or brick wall.)

But, as for agency, I think the best way to encourage people to use a social system is to put player agency on both sides. For the aggressor, the option to use a social mechanism should always be available; for the target, the option to opt-out of the result should always be available. To that end, I really like RfK's system, where a player could roll to affect another's PC, but the target PC's player could: (1) pre-emptively accept what the aggressor PC's player wants, and gain a beat; (2) see the result; or (3) negate the result, which gives the aggressor's PC a beat. Regardless of the outcome, the aggressor PC cannot attempt another roll to the same effect for the rest of the scene.

@Ghost said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

If FCs are no different, even stats-wise from OCs, then why differentiate between the two?

The staff are talking about treating them equally stats-wise, but Luke Skywalker is different than OC-nimnob.

Don't get me wrong, I love my partner.

She's kind, good-humored, and intelligent. She genuinely loves our children, and goes out of her way for them constantly, to the point where I have to harp on her for being so damn forgiving to the little monsters. Want to know how to make spoiled children? Do what they ask.

But, for fuck's sake, woman, the baseline for any relationship is taking care of yourself.

This is kind of important. You see, she is missing organs -- thyroid, uterus, an ovary, soul (former lawyer) -- and, as such, her body doesn't regulate itself very well. She's on a number of vitamin and mineral supplements to go along with the synthroid, all of which combines to keep her important ion levels (K, Ca, etc.) just so. This also means that she should be checking these levels constantly, and essentially be drinking nothing but fucking Gatorade or Pedialyte all day.

Last night, she had two minor cardiac episodes due to a drastic potassium deficiency.

Like, come on. Bitch, please, you ain't allowed to die until the kids are in college. I wouldn't be half as irritated if I weren't constantly pressing on her to eat better (she still eats like she's in college, which is to say she misses out on meals constantly), or exercising some (not that she's fat or overweight, but she's definitely not healthy), or am actively taking steps to make sure that I'm alive over the next dozen years (because, to be frank, I want to die most of the time because I feel that life is that good).

So, I'm probably the selfish git who is upset because she landed herself in the hospital.

But, I don't think so. The fuck I am. The least that anyone could do for their loving partner is to fucking take care of themselves when they know they have a health issue. Inside, I am beyond pissed at her because I saw it coming and I've been telling her for months to get her levels checked, but I'm not the health professional in the family; I'm just Chinese, which makes me one by proxy and destiny.

Da fuq.

Oh, and school sent both our kids home today because they "didn't seem to be feeling well." Fuck you, bitch, if they aren't burning up, you let them die in a closet for all I care. (Boy was just fine, just a bit cranky; girl has major allergies that makes her hack and wheeze and be a grouch.) I realize it's a Catholic school, and God is good and all that bullshit, but I expect a school nurse to take a more scientific approach to determining whether you need to make me re-arrange my schedule thus pissing off my clients.

Oh, and I'm the unhealthy asshole because I drink and smoke.

@thenomain

How about something like "major project coding"? Because there are things that I'd like to have built from scratch (which you can use elsewhere), and your pricing structure doesn't take that into account.

@Coin said in Marvel: 1963:

For example, in the Marvel universe, mutants suffer a lot of persecution (let's ignore the fact that Average Joe and Jane seem to have a special radar and are always able to tell when someone is a mutant, and thus worthy of persectuion, and when they aren't, and thus worthy of trust because superheroes). Meanwhile, in DC, most metahumans (many of which are essentially 'DC's mutants' since it's basically just 'born with these powers randomly') are not.

The Kingdom Come series portrays an interesting setting where metahumans are, actually, sort of persecuted. By other metahumans. I'm a huge fan of it.

I figure that metahumans are treated with suspicion and wariness, regardless. People probably don't fuck with them because Superman appeared, and everyone was, like, wtf how do u persecute that dood???

@surreality said in Social Systems:

Question: do you think it's necessarily relevant whether someone is telling the truth or a lie when it comes to convincing another character about the story they're telling?

@apos said in Social Systems:

No. Only how sincere they seem. Someone that's telling the truth but looks nervous probably seems insincere and are thought to be lying. The actual truth doesn't matter imo. I'd just make a check on how sincere they seem in regards to how convincing the pitch is.

I concur with Apos here. L5R even has the skill "Sincerity" to reflect appearing honorable when you are actually being honest or you are attempting to deceive. In that system, you can oppose the roll with an Investigation check. It can additionally be rolled when you're trying to convincingly flatter someone or are trying to be political about pointing out how much someone is a fat ass (that's the example in the L5R 4E book, and it is hilarious).

@crusader

What Admiral said.

The sentiment is an interesting one. I'll admit that I'm actually intrigued to play a Bone Gnawer. What I'm concerned of is that the local Get, Fangs, and Lords might start being "sympathetic" to my plight, and that sort of ruins things too. It's really hard to play a character that is marginalized for nothing more than being part of a tribe when everyone's singing kumbaya and shit.

@Tinuviel said in RL Anger:

I'd also like to vehemently object to the idea that strippers and prostitutes need to "clean themselves up and fly straight." Those you associated might well have done, but let's not tar entire professions with the same brush.

That was not my intent, no. They elected to do what was necessary to do what was, in their minds, "cleaning themselves up and flying straight again." I concur with you that there is nothing wrong with being in the adult industry.

@Coin

Tiered-spending costs reflect the measurable social phenomena of diminishing returns. This is the part of GMC that I don't like.

That said, I think twinking, as defined, is tolerable. Most of my PCs are not maximized in one direction, and have other "outs."

@Tinuviel said in Fear and Loathing:

They're NPCs. Glorified NPCs. What is the point?

Some people want to play powerful elder characters among neonates. This is way to enable it.

@Auspice said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

get your asses over to my house. I have food I need to clear out of my pantry so I can justify changing my diet over.

i has food, beds, and children

@faraday said in Encouraging Proactive Players:

Even good players while and complain sometimes.

I guess I don't agree here. I've met a lot of good players, and the single, consistent aspect they have is that they do not complain on a consistent basis about the game on the game itself. Complaining about not having enough time to play, or about life, or about being a Maple Leafs fan is not the same as complaining about a game, its staff, and its policies when you are connected to it.

Even I whine and complain sometimes and I'm one of the most "can't we all just play nice and get along" crusaders on these boards. I think people need to be mature enough to take complaints with a grain of salt.

I think you are far too critical of yourself.

Now if it's bordering on abusive or being so constant and obnoxious that it's causing a disruption, that's different. But kicking someone off the game just for whining? Come on.

Maybe we differ as to what we consider "so constant and obnoxious that it's causing a disruption." I think our lines are different here.

In my opinion, if you've a problem with a game take it to a +request or @mail or page. I've had long, long, long conversations with people about decisions in the past. I don't mind engaging. But if you're taking to the Public Channel as to how you disagree with so-and-so or this-and-that, I may very well pull you aside and say "stop that shit." And if it continues again, I don't remind removing a player for not doing as they were asked because this demonstrates a general disregard for what I consider to be a reasonable request by staff.

I have been called harsh and draconian, and this is mostly true when it comes to staffing. But that's also why people have asked me to be staff, because I'm okay with being harsh and draconian.

@Carex said in Fear and Loathing:

No, I'm saying it's a system which needs constant monitoring and is likely just to break down over time. It is inefficient, overly complicated and a waste of staff resources.

So, you are saying that you don't like playing in a fully-constructed, operational, thematic-to-a-T Vampire sphere.

Cleveland v. Turner.

Also, Mayor v. Wedding.

@faraday

I have edited my response slightly. I'm talking about complaining about the game while on the game, which is what I think Apos is getting at.

We're two different people! If we ran a game together, you'd be the good cop, and that's okay with me. But, as I said, I don't mind complaints or whining as long as they aren't broadcasted because I think that has a very negative effect on a group of players.

@Wizz said in Fear and Loathing:

Nnnnno, I'm the one actually being aggressive-aggressive, because I find your behavior here shitty and I'm directly calling you on it. You're the one constantly rephrasing events and trying to play it all off to place your actions in the thread in a better light even though they're literally one page back. But whatever, good day to you too.

You're not helping.

I've made countless of applications, and thereafter waited. In some cases, I didn't come back because I do get busy from time to time on other games or in real life.

I didn't read @magee101 as a knock on staff at all. There's no obligation in starting a character to complete it. Waiting 72 hours is arguably unreasonable for a response, but it happens -- and I don't see @magee101 going on a campaign about it. In fact, @magee101 seems to have made another character that was approved rather quickly.

Don't lose sight of the forest through the trees. It makes no sense to rag on a player that seems to be happily playing on your game.

I mean, I applied there, played for a bit, then had to ditch because life was busy and I had to make some cuts. That has nothing at all to do with the quality of RP or staff on the game.

@hedgehog

Okay.

Whitesnake -- Slide It In