Does Lucifer have Mazikeen in it, and if so, how does she deal with the whole half-rotting-face-mushy-garbled-speech thing?
They don't. It's probably a good thing as well. I didn't read many of the comics, but I can tell you that Mazikeen is part of the entertainment factor of the series.
@kanye-qwest said in How to: make your poses less repetitive:
do you actually type the word "Break" in your poses to indicate a pause? Personally, I think it's TOO much of a pause. In the example it definitely took me out of the flow of what was being said. Beat works, break doesn't. For me, at least!
Yes, I do.
As you point out, there is a difference between a beat and a break. A beat is a short pause; a break is much longer one. It is a rare thing to use because simply writing 'break' indicates no movement or action other than the break itself. Still, a break ought not last longer than two seconds.
And, yes, the intent is to interrupt the flow of conversation.
@Warma-Sheen said in The Basketball Thread:
I've been rooting for the Raptors for a while. They have the best mascot in the league (no, not Drake) and that's enough to earn my support. Who doesn't love dinosaurs!?
The Raptors have Nav Bhatia, the owner and president of Mississauga Hyundai. I grew up watching the man's commercials locally, and he is the Superfan of the North now. His story is inspirational and worth reading about.
One game down. Three to go.
The Warriors aren't going to win a game in Toronto if they can't defend the paint. Siakam and Gasol had their way with them.
@rdc said in Requiem 2e Bloodlines:
I'm super into custom local flavor. That said, unfortunately, most of the local stuff I wrote for NOLA 1 didn't get read by...basically anyone. We had precisely one person not on staff significantly interact with one Mystery Cult, and that was about it. Benefit vs. cost doesn't seem to work out when you try to alter what people expect too radically.
To be honest, when I was playing on NOLA I felt as if staff wasn't running anything. It felt very DIY -- which is fine -- but that turned me away from things like Mystery Cults.
@Apollonius said:
tl;dr Sorry for the thread necro, DA:I was okay.
I hated DA:I. And not just because it was clearly made for higher-gen consoles, yet Bioware made and marketed a buggy version for lower-gen consoles.
Oh, sure, there were parts of it I liked. I liked the crafting, I liked the open world, and I liked the ability to explore. I got killed quite often tackling Rifts that I wasn't ready for.
But it wasn't a good game. The Knight-Enchanter build was OP'd to the point where tackling the greatest dragons was a meh activity. The NPCs were boring, one-sided, or pathetic. I would gladly take Fenris from DA2's story over just about any of the DA:I NPCs -- except for Dorian's, maybe.
It was an anti-climactic, disappointing installment for a wonderful world of politics and intrigue. It really opened up the "dark fantasy" world to me. I just wish it was more polished from a story standpoint.
It should be noted that I played The Last of Us after this game. So, no prejudice from that.
@kanye-qwest said in How to: make your poses less repetitive:
It makes me want to run down the court and wait for the pass.
You play basketball?
It makes me want to swing back towards the hash marks on a slant.
@Jaded said in Good or New Movies Review:
The consistent reasoning I'm finding is because the lack of storyline and better developed human characters.
It's almost like humans can't stand it when there's a movie focused on something other than humans.
Except Wall-E was reviewed very highly.
@kanye-qwest said in How to: make your poses less repetitive:
I mean I don't play much NOW but I sure did. I am very tall.
I wasn't into theatre much when I was younger, but I am now.
I suppose the word "break" more often than not makes me start singing Linkin Park.
@Sparks said in Fandom and entitlement:
Similarly, both Rick and Carol have been known to wield a cat (or flerkin) as an impromptu tool to frighten off enemies. This has led to a joking fan theory that Carol is a descendent of the O'Connells, like their great-grandchild. Which I find a delightful thought.
Or that people still enjoy the idea of hurling pussy at a problem to take care of it.
@tragedyjones said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:
Also at least in Requiem 2E you can attempt to resist the blood bond. But you will probably fail and/or end up a vitae addict.
That's fine, but in Requiem 2E the blood bond is also represented as a substantial penalty to resist your domitor's whims, and not a fiat to do as he/she says.
I hate people who conflate "I deal with difficult situations with humor, even dark humor" with "omg you're a fucking asshole."
The empathy boat goes in two directions. On one hand is the listener; on the other hand, there's the speaker. The listener ought to be as sympathetic to the speaker, right?
It's helpful to know that many stand-up comedians are very, very broken.
@thenomain said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:
This is not a trick question: If we can rely on playing the character sheets with each other, why allow one player character to be physically antagonistic to another?
Because, as a player behind a screen, I can out-think you and persuade you to do what I wish through my writing, scheming, and planning. I usually build my PCs to be able to do that, so that I'm not cheating. But, no matter my sheet, I cannot jump through the screen and punch you in the face, so I have to rely on my PC to do that.
@seraphim73 said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:
I agree completely. I also think that NPC influence should be more readily used on most games, both as a way to drive friction (conflict-lite) and as a way to theme-correct.
I think that staffers these days are hesitant to use their NPCs and power to make the PCs' lives difficult. I can understand this reluctance; we talk so much about staffers using their influence and power in a bad way to make playing unpleasant. But in the World of Darkness, there is to be expected, I think, a bit of NPC antagonism. Friendly antagonism with purpose, of course, but antagonism nonetheless.
That's why, to this day, I still think it is better to have an NPC Prince and Court. If the Court abuses its power, then the players can take steps to work against it. It puts the players and their PCs in an environment where collaboration is the best way to ensure that "what is right" remains right, and that the Prince is left twisting his moustache and brooding about how he longs for an autumnal mead.
@mietze said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:
Given the nature of mushes, the interactions you have between PCs are very much as if you are sharing the responsibility of GMing/working it out amongst yourselves so why would it seem or be weird to engage each other in that discussion piece?
This is an important, crucial question.
My answer: because it is for some people. If I recall some of the MUSH/MUD discussions, this is a point of argument on the issue of what is "better." Do players prefer to share the responsibility of GMing and/or working matters out amongst themselves, or do players prefer to have the installed code resolve the issue? And when expectations or preferences do not match, there is a super big problem.
(Goddammit, now Super Why is infecting my invective.)
We should stop treating other players like they are NPCs in a tabletop game, but the Chronicles of Darkness system is structured that way. And the thing is that "normal" players (y'all muthafuckas not normal, shit) have different, equally-valid playing preferences or styles. Even were a game to make it absolutely, objectively clear what players should expect, I do not believe, from my experience, that this will solve the issue.
It never has.
There have been a lot of suggestions made, all of which I have examined and written down. I really like the way Requiem for Kingsmouth handled social interactions, but I'm not wedded to it. It has become clear to me that if a code or system could be created or implemented, it may be complex, cumbersome, and undesirable. But it could provide that third-party resolution (as a GM would) to a situation that would make those less-willing to discuss resolution prior more comfortable and validated.
WHY DID NOBODY TELL ME THE EXPANSE WAS THIS GOOD
I think I might drop What We Do In The Shadows for The Expanse.
I mean, I like dry comedy, but it is painfully slow.
@auspice said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:
All of these still come down to one thing in the end:
Physical stats trump all.
Which is sort of the crux of the issue.
I disagree. This isn't what I'm asking about at all. It is, however, a very large concern.
If we want to delve into "reality," the vast majority of potential violence is sidetracked by concerns about consequences. People generally don't try to shoot me in the courtroom because there are bailiffs with guns around, and because I'm the Mistress of the Tae-Kwon-Leap. In a MUSH, however, the consequences to the player are substantially less, which makes physical violence a more-available option to resolve conflict.
Maybe I have this all wrong.
Maybe the solution isn't fewer social stats, but giving them more power. Maybe a successful intimidation roll would result in a Condition that would bar or reduce the ability to engage in a fight. Maybe a successful seduction roll would result in a Condition that would bar refusal of simple, non-Breaking-point requests.
So, let's flip the question:
Would you make social stats in the World of Darkness more powerful? If so, how?
(Note, I'm not talking about powers that rely on social stats.)
I dissent your dissent
That's not how this works.
Just saw the list of voice actors for the Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance, and nearly wet myself.
Not with urine, mind.
I don't think I've seen a finer cast assembled ever.
@arkandel said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:
The more a social system tries to do the less successful is poised to become.
I whole-heartedly disagree with the statement because what I think you mean to say is:
The more a social system tries to do the less likely players will want to use it.
We should probably add to this the following truism:
The more complex a system is the less likely players will want to use it.
And that's fine. I never said that players had to use a physical, social, or mental system if they do not want to. I've been in plenty if IC sparring matches that did not become a full-out physical contest. The fundamental focus of both the initial and subsequent questions is whether there should be a system, and, if so, what would the aims be.
In the morass of comments, I have made a couple of conclusions that are guiding my thought processes regarding the system I want to create, using the Chronicles of Darkness' Storyteller system:
Players want some parity between physical and social combat insofar as its effectiveness in role-playing.
Players do not want a social system that is empty or powerless.
Some of the ideas arising out of these conclusions are as follows:
Make social combat on par with physical combat, going so far as to adding advantages to the system like "Social Initiative" and "Social Health" that can be affected by social attacks.
Have concrete results for victory in social combat, which as physical combatants must declare their intent prior to engaging in physical combat.
Make clear rules for the victory results, such as using Conditions.
Award players for electing and abiding by the victory results.
As an example:
Arkandel is sick of Ganymede's shit in public, and decides to engage her in social combat by delivering a cold, icy stare to make her shut her damn trap. Arkandel declares his intent, and he and Ganymede roll initiative. Arkandel rolls a 8, and adds his Dominance (Social Initiative), and ends up first, so he takes the first attack by delivering the stare and telling Ganymede to sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up.
Rolling his eyes, Arkandel finally turns to look at Ganymede with an expression and gaze of steel. "Why don't you have a seat now? No one cares what you have to say, you glorified pencil-pusher?"
Arkandel rolls his Presence + Intimidation pool. Unfortunately, Arkandel is seriously milquetoast, and can only roll 3 dice: 1, 4, 8. Ganymede takes 1 damage to her Nerve (Social Health). With some Nerve left, Ganymede isn't fully convinced, and returns Arkandel's stare with a cool one of her own, along with sending along a witty remark about his mother's expansive waistline.
The lawyer blinks at Arkandel, and puts a hand over her mouth for a moment. "I would, buddy, but -- " She sighs. " -- I think the last person to use this chair was your mom, and her ass done up and broke it, son."
Ganymede rolls her Manipulation + Intimidation, which is exceedingly high given that she is a world-class lawyer, and rolls: 6, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10. This thumps Arkandel's Nerve hard, reducing it to zero. Ganymede chooses to give Arkandel the Cowed Condition as a result, which reduces Arkandel's Intimidation pool for the rest of the scene, and requires him to spend a Willpower point to engage in any other kind of combat.
Something like that.
