I read this today and it melted my cold, robotic, feline heart.
"Yes, male characters tend to be idealized in form and proportion; but female characters tend to be objectified. There is a profound difference between those two, and failing to perceive that distinction is pernicious. That's why you'll rarely see a male superhero without pants." -- J. Michael Straczynski.
@HelloProject said in Diversity Representation in MU*ing:
Of course it could all be all in my head ...
I'm going to go out on a limb and say yes.
There's two reasons. First, I believe that games seem a lot more inclusive and understanding than even ten years ago. I think that the hobby is mostly populated by marginalized players who at least try to sympathize with marginalized characters. Even the population of this forum seems to have swung away from the machismo of shitposting in recent years, whether by design or not.
Second, even if otherwise, fuck what other people think. You are black, and this is who you are, so you go ahead and you portray what you believe a black character ought to be like. You probably know better than non-black players what this means, even if it might seem to them to be an offensive trope. You have every right to be irritated when you see the same simultaneously. There's nothing wrong with this.
Please don't let the narrow-mindedness of others affect you.
I don’t think you fully grasp the dynamics of women in the workplace.
A tent pole game is one that is really popular.
If there’s a recent dip in activity, it is likely due to the stress of having kids going through school right now, or being in the service industry, or being an essential worker, or watching the world fall apart around you, or feeling demoralized, or —
Update!
The hospital had shitty Internet.
I have spent six nights there. Tonight, my father-in-law stepped in and tossed me back home.
I still went to work when needed. Took care of my boy too.
But, I'm home now. And my daughter will be too, tomorrow.
Thanks for the support.
@saosmash said in MUs That We Would Love To Make (But Won't):
Oh my God the amazing fantasy of a game that ALL of my friends want to play...
... a game set in the world of the Legend of Korra?
It's so beautiful.
@derp said in Sensitivity in gaming:
People use claims of traumas to try and tip the story away from situations that would disadvantage their characters. I think being skeptical is perfectly reasonable, and my general reaction to that is to give players a 'graceful out' to the story if they do not wanna participate.
This is where I sit. If I am running a scene that someone wants out of, that's cool. I'm not going to force anyone to re-live trauma because I want to tell a story.
I do not change the story unless there is a group consensus about it. I, and I'm sure a few others in this thread given some of the previous answers, have been burned by this as a manipulation tactic too many times now.
And this is the result. It is unlikely that I will pause or change a story for any one player unless the other players are okay with it.
That said, if there were a viewable form like the one Carma presented for players or PCs, I don't think it is unreasonable for a GM to look at who's attending an event and tailoring a story or uninviting certain folks based on the intended content. The purpose of this sort of vetting, in my opinion, is to avoid harming people, not necessarily changing stories to accommodate.
Of course, if the participants are all squicked out by the story to be told, then it might be a wise idea for the GM to change the story if they want to run it.
@lordbelh said in Sensitivity in gaming:
There is a point where being sensitive tips over into the death of creativity, and the end result is that the only thing you're either allowed to or feel comfortable writing about is your own little bubble. I think that would be unfortunate.
While this may be true as a principle, I think it is false in practice.
As a professional writer -- lawyers should treat writing as their profession -- one of the tenets is to tell a story that can reach and compel one's audience. If my story offends a jury, my client is fucked. In storytelling for RPGs, the same tenet holds true: you should be writing stories for your audience, which is your gaming group.
If a gaming group doesn't like a particular subject, then the tenet should compel their GM to alter the story. But that said, the opinions of one do not always reflect the opinions of all, so the tenet compels a GM to continue with the story if only a small portion of the group wants to leave it.
Where the argument falls apart in application here is that a GM who tells stories their audience dislikes is not going to be a GM for very long. Also, the analogy between being a GM and an author falls apart easily and quickly given the proximity between the two to their audience. If you want to write a squicky story, go for it; if you want people to participate in that story, you should be mindful of what goes too far.
@insomniac7809 said in Sensitivity in gaming:
Now, TTRPGs were, for a fairly long time, designed for by and for an audience of white men. (The MU* scene has been a lot more gender-balanced, in my experience, which might be an interesting topic to get into.)
Now this is a good talking point.
I am of the unsupported opinion that the MUSH scene is far more gender-balanced than the TTRPG world. Like, far more balanced. I would lay a wager that there are more women and LGBTQ+ folks playing on MUSHes than cis-hetero-men. I'd lay a heavy wager on that.
Why? I think it's fairly easy to figure out.
To me, this is why policing is so very important. Like, way more important than I ever thought it would be. I can honestly say that of my near 25 years playing the past decade has been the most enjoyable. It's not because I have abandoned World of Darkness games -- okay, that may be part of it? -- but it is because the people that I have run into have taught me so much about ... well, everything.
It's important to me that LGBTQ+ folks have a place to be LGBTQ+ without fear. It's important that women aren't stalked or harassed on these games. I may be one of the toughest old birds out there when it comes to bullshit but that does not mean everyone is or should be. On this board, I'm happy to talk and share with people with divergent views from mine because I know I'll learn something new along the way, no matter how dry, acerbic, and condescending I am.
Gaming is good. It's really good. And to keep it that way, taking an extra step towards making the hobby better for others? That's a good thing.
@BobGoblin said:
I've come across a few of these in my days. Been seeing it a bit lately on a few games that are a bit more competitive and wanted to get the communities viewpoint on something.
Is it reasonable to treat the PCs of a couple as alts? Not in the you can't RP together sense but in the can't cause direct benefit to the couple's character sense?
No. Breaking the Fourth Wall is for Deadpool. Playing with a spouse is functionally no different than playing with any member of a troupe, which means you would have to bar troupe members from being a benefit to one another. And then, there's no reason for a troupe.
@Insomnia said in Harassment in VR, there's something we can likely learn from this.:
I guess I'm a misogynist then? I've been on the "Why not, other person did" end of things far too often to otherwise. I'm not being sexually harassed because I'm a girl, I'm being sexually harassed because another woman is encouraging the behavior by using her sexuality. How is that not a problem?
I wouldn't use the term "misogynist," but I would consider your logic profoundly misogynistic.
You're not being sexually harassed because you're a girl. And you're not being sexually harassed because another woman uses her sexuality to get attention or sell products.
You're being sexually harassed because some asshole thinks it's okay to sexually harass you.
Without regard to legality, suppose a woman agrees to have sex with a man for $400, and does so. If that man goes home to his girlfriend and fucks her without her consent, the man is the rapist -- not the hooker. I don't think there's any argument there.
I can understand the idea of "one bad apple spoils the whole bunch." And I understand the sentiment that "floozies on the Internet bring us all down." But let's be very clear here: floozies on the Internet brings us all down because there's a large population of wretched, God-forsaken assholes out there that will make any flimsy connection that seems remotely plausible in order to denigrate a group that they want to subjugate.
They are awful people, and they deserve our ire; the people exercising their freedom to use their tits to sell video games do not.
@Arkandel said:
I'm not in the "there's nothing to talk about" crowd. I'm in the "it's none of my business" crowd.
People will judge for all sorts of really stupid reasons. I'm pretty sure at least one person judges me harshly because my PCs are either teeny-tiny women (Clarice, Ripley) or uber-mensch (Max, Sam (if I finish up that damned BG)). And my PCs tend to be frosty-boxy or incredibly flirty too; at least, I think they've been perceived as such. Maybe not, but I honestly don't give a shit -- I have fun.
If a player is TSing so much that they are not spending time in their IC roles, presuming they have one, then that's a problem that staff has to deal with. If the player is TSing so much because of staff, or boredom, or, fuck, it's not worth dealing with anyone else on the game, then you have a game-wide problem. I'm of the theory, however, that the average player would rather RP through plots, politics, and other events than TS every single night because, like dungeon-crawling in Final Fantasy XIII, it's fucking boring after a while.
If we're going to have a discussion about "sexual themes in roleplay," then let's talk about sexual themes. That's not what you presented: you asked, bluntly, why people do or do not engage in TS. In my opinion, that has very little to do with sexual themes in roleplaying.
Some of the most sexual scenes I've had involved very little mention of thrusting, kissing, or nibbling. There was seduction, character development, emotional moments, and a lot of other roleplaying that was far more interesting than TS. And to me, it was all very sexual.
Then again, we lawyers find the weirdest shit arousing.
I think it depends on what your definition of a love story is.
I really enjoy a good love story, but it's not the getting together that means the most. It's the trial and tribulations that happen during or after the relationship that makes it worthwhile.
There's the fun of stupid moments in public. There's the fun of tender moments in private. And there's also the fun of having another PC and player that you can have one-on-one scenes with doing whatever happens to be within the setting.
It doesn't have to be sexy times all the time. It's nice to have someone that you can RP with from time to time on a consistent basis, and have a reason to interact with.
I miss my relationships.
@HelloProject said in UX: It's time for The Talk:
I don't really understand how I'm coming at it from a position of relative privilege. Considering that for most of my MUing life, I've been a non-coder, which is why it never occurred to me that things could be better.
If you've spent most of your MU existence as a non-coder, then you've had the privilege of enjoying the fruits of others' labor. That's what I mean by "position of relative privilege." My understanding from the coders I have personally known is that coding takes considerable time and effort. That is, they have invested a lot of time and effort into how they've designed, modified, and produced their code.
While my hyperbole might have been a bit extreme, I legitimately don't think that a lot of coders are in a position to think about something like UX anymore than the non-coder creator of the game generally knows what's going on with the code.
You may legitimately think this, but you're also legitimately presuming it. Hiring someone to advise on user experience for a video game that has a budget and is produced for mass consumption is very different than what the average coder does for a MUSH, where they aren't paid and rarely recognized for their efforts. When you're done coding your game, I'm nearly positive you will experience that usual shitting-on that I've heard many coders receive and complain about.
That said, I've been atop of games before, and I try to talk to my coders about what they want to do and if they can improve on things. Sometimes they can, sometimes they can't. It has been said before, but a good game takes time to develop for this very reason. And the coders I know get really fussy when you push them to do something that their carefully-developed code won't handle without a massive overhaul.
I start discussions because I know that, regardless of my decade+ in the hobby, I'm still relatively new. And being relatively new, I think that it's important for me to occasionally bring up things that I've noticed or that I see as problems.
Again, this is not a new problem you're raising. But I've never seen someone describe the current state of any MUSH code as "monstrously shitty," especially when they are actually trying to start an open dialogue on improving code.
I want to contribute to the community, and I admittedly am still trying to improve at how I present myself and my arguments, when to be professional and when to be casual, but I 100% am just trying to help anyone who finds what I say or discuss helpful.
Fair enough. Let me suggest this, then: when you're dealing with a sub-group of the hobby who regularly takes crap and gets crap about their work, it's better to open with "let's work together in trying to pare down some of the redundant, old-fashioned, out-moded code we toss onto game" than with "the current state of affairs is bullshit and you ignorant fucks should have done shit to improve it by now."
People are trying to improve things. Honestly. So, my recommendation: minimize the hyperbole, ask questions, scout around, and take inspiration where you can find it.
@Lisse24 said in L&L Options?:
Obviously someone needs to work on a new option for a L&L game.
Most people on L&L games in my experience do not really want to deal with the unpleasantness that comes with statecraft. They would rather play with their titles rather than take the steps to earn or keep them.
I’ve had more political fun in the average Vampire sphere.
I made that permanent.
Feel free to send complaints my way.
Can't guarantee a response, though.
I know that sounds harsh, but we as a culture -- and especially women -- are often encouraged to 'be the bigger person' and 'find healing through forgiveness'.
The Chinese often promote this as well.
Yet the full lesson goes on. Forgiveness is more than just not holding anger against someone; it also includes forgetting that they exist. That led to many, many odd conversations with my mother, for example:
Mom: Why you still talk to her?
Me: Because I forgave her.
Mom: So why you still talk to her?
Me: Mom, she's my friend.
Mom: No, she's not.
Me: You told me to forgive her.
Mom: Yes, you forgive her. That mean you don't try to hurt or kill her. It does not mean you let her act like nothing has happened.
I still hold to that logic to this day.
@Auspice said in How to Escape the OOC Game:
Remaining the distanced, stand-offish person who gives nothing of themselves only works to an extent. And that extent is: people stop interacting with you in return. Because you're weird. You're sterile. You're suspect. You feel wrong and awkward and untrustworthy.
People interact with me a lot, but I don't really give much of myself. In my 20+ years, I can count on my hand the number of people who actually know me, and I'm happy about that. (I consider Sunny the person I've known the longest RL (what is it, like, nearly 20 years?) from here, and Caryatid as the closest.)
As Arkandel said, I am, and likely will always be, just Ganymede here and abroad. And I'm fine with that. I don't Skype, I don't chat over the phone, and I don't like sharing very personal parts of my life. Sure, I do sometimes, but not enough that people casually remember me as a feline robot.
That aside, it was very nice to receive a compliment from a staffer who knew me only as Ganymede. And I sometimes get recognized as such.
@Auspice said in The Apology Thread:
It's easy to hold a grudge, but it's also toxic. For you. For social circles. And yes, for them. It's never going to make you feel better to poison other people towards someone. It's just a cycle of negativity.
Define "toxic."
There is no way I would knowingly let VASpider or her husband play or staff on my game(s). Their pattern of behavior is demonstrable.
There is no way I would knowingly let Seiche play or staff on my game(s). I haven't interacted with her in over a decade, but I have heard of the games she has ruined.
There is no fine line between "holding a grudge" and "remember that there are certain people who are fucking terrible for a game." There are very few people who I would ban outright from a game, even after they come in without my knowledge, but I would do so again and again not because I hold a grudge against them but because they are fucking bad for a game.
I may have forgiven any personal harm they did to me, if any, but I am not so stupid as to ignore my experience.
@lordbelh said in Review of Recent Bans:
Making them have to come and ask to return is just petty, though.
No one is asking them to do this. I'm certainly not. What I'm saying is that Derp and I are still discussing the bans, which means that there may be some future reversals; however, for right now, we are focusing on a couple of other matters.
I respect your opinion and follow your logic, but I disagree with a number of premises and ultimately your conclusion. I am trying neither to wash my hands nor save face, but to do what I believe is correct for now and under the circumstances.
@apos said in Celebrities that are Dead To Us:
Predatory individuals have relied upon the willingness of others to dismiss something not easily provable for decades. It is very prevalent to many people's daily experiences. This is a backlash against that, and it is a good thing.
Sure, I understand this. Cosby's laundry list is long. Roy Moore's hometown corroborated how much of a sleaze he was.
But Takei? That's a single accuser for an act that occurred around 36 years ago. I'm not so willing to run him under the bus quite yet. I'd like to learn more.