Best posts made by Ghost

Advice: MUers are habitual.

SuperMUs are a double-edged sword.

ON THE PLUS SIDE:

• SuperMUs have a regular audience
• SuperMUs have a large casting call and general appeal

ON THE DOWNSIDE:

• SuperMUs using anything other than the "describe your traits and argue with each other whether they apply" approach do not do well. SuperMU players are habitual and seem to prefer this system
• SuperMUs have a LONG history of players playing specific heroes, which includes a laundry list of creep issues flagged to X player and Y character.
• I personally disagree with the "everyverse/multiverse" approach, but this seems to be possible.
• Some people are diehard OC players, but when some of these players make an OC (Original Character) using a "trait-based" character system, some tend to make very overpowered concepts with vague wording that ends up being a sort of fish-hook after CGen. Example: An OC with "the ability to make and control iron" will likely not just bend metal and bend bars. Within days they tend to want to instakill things by sucking all of the iron out of their bodies. I've seen this with gravity, gold, etc.

By all means, make whatever game you want, but in my experience the built-in crowd of 20-30 players who habitually play SuperMU games will not necessarily join a SuperMU game if it means learning a new system, not getting their OC, etc. Point in case; you're already being asked why Rhost and not Ares.

@faraday I think what @surreality was saying was that she agreed with me, and wasn't saying that my stance was entitled.

Like a side note, she was saying that demanding someone make a requested monetary change to a game runner's free entertainment service was an entitled thing to ask, and that her approach would be "I'm doing this my way, with my level of comfort, and if I'm not comfortable opening up IPv6 on my home router you have no right to demand it of me."

@reversed said in Spitballing for a supers Mush:

If anything, instituting changes to "the usual" that might make "the same 20-30 players" not want to jump on board instantly sounds like a positive move to me.

It could be! I have my own personal opinions on repetitiveness that I gained over the years that aren't really conducive to the topic, but change is never an inherently BAD thing.

I think an "Original Theme" game could be really great, to be honest. Doing so would nix the following "traps" that could free the game up to be something really special.

• Existing Theme (Marvel, DC, etc) tend to have characters played as "locked in" to their canon stories, romances, etc. This can be intimidating to players who don't know what happened in "Spider-Man #201", but also discourage making a character their own
• Original Theme wouldn't be limited by specific characters being in charge, limited character availability, etc. Fighting over character availability, "sitting on PCs" etc

LOL.
Jesus christ, this place can be bizarre.

@ZombieGenesis I know there are some people that don't want to do FS3, but honestly I think it's the best system altogether for the MU crowd. Here's why:

• You could take the FUCKOFF HUGE AMOUNT OF TIME required to code in anything from Cortex to Modiphius 2d20, which would probably feel like progress, but in my experience a lot of players don't give a fuck about dice because they never consent to much of anything, don't like their characters dying, create a new post every 4 months about how "social dice enable rape rp", and none of the system stuff is required for the revolving door of "in-character(kind of?) romance roleplay" that seems to be the target of most players on most games
• THEN once you've coded this new system, you become subject to people finding vulnerabilities in your code (that they exploit) or you wind up with people min-maxing and hacking the system. As a staffer you will spend a lot of time either fielding issues with people breaking the game with their unbeatable dice combinations, leading in players from the previous bullet point having issues with the min-maxers and "dice intimidators"
• Both of the prior two bullet points will result in people getting upset with speed of character approval or "complaints" about staffers either giving favoritism to some players by the system where others have their character's denied due to a ruling on how the +sheets are run, resulting in the ever-exhausting "but if you don't approve this my character is unplaaaayable and I'll be incapable of playing anything else because my spirit will be crushed." Boom. Your game becomes a topic on the ever-progressive and inclusive chat board run by nice people who wield bullying in the name of riiiiighteeeousnessss and you've just spent 1 year coding for a game that's going to be cooked and abandoned in...5-6 months?

Anyway, I don't mean to be negative, but now that I really think about it, I don't think coding a dice system is worth your (or anyone's) time in this hobby, anymore. The average shelf life of any given game is less than a year/year&Half. Why spend an entire weekend in the kitchen preparing a gourmet meal for a bunch of people who will complain about it or not even notice it? Then, in the pure spirit of so much online roleplay, it will come down to "sure, but can I use it to write fuck scenes?"

Just use an existing code base, add your theme, and spin up a wiki. Being realistic about "Effort-to-Output" will keep you Sane. Ares provides that framework in a way that'll work until it doesn't.

@Lotherio said in Getting Young Blood Into MU*'ing:

Old hats are good doing away with multidescs and lots of those who have been around end up focusing on PB. Forgetting part of our own draws into this hobby. Instead of defining the target audience and shooting into the dark, perspective from young blood might go a long way too I think.

Bravo. I think about this from time to time. Note, I still think the social issues need to be focused on as the true issue BUT I think it should also be asked: "What exactly IS this hobby, these days?"

You could say that it's about writing, but people interested in actual writing know that the style of roleplay isnt exactly writing. It's like...taking turns writing, which is fine but also not the way you would write with a joint author. And then (as you mentioned) scrapping descriptions for PBs, which is a step again further from writing and focusing on writing ability to flesh out the theatre of the mind sense of things.

So, I get this sense that the way someone would describe the hobby to a prospective player(s) would vary from person to person. Something to ponder.

Advice: Don't make a Carnival Row MU.

It's a setting where some of the major themes are:

• Refugee/Poverty Caste
• Racism
• Brothel as a social hub
• One ruling faction keeping the other faction down by means of racism

All of this is stuff the greater MU community is into. /sarcasm

History has shown that prostitution and poverty/oppressed caste rarely go well in MU, and racism (even fictitious racism) has a very high likelihood in resulting in OOC issues, upset players, etc.

Just make an alt-reality WoD changeling set in a gaslamp setting, instead. Trust me.

Tyche didnt really seem to have interest in interfacing with anyone constructively on the forum. He mostly just haunted political threads to ruffle feathers using superskeeeery alt-rightisms to watch people's reactions. Not surprised to see this, but ultimately I question why he wasted his time to begin with.

@Auspice said in Getting Young Blood Into MU*'ing:

Who do I trust to Staff? (and before you open your mouth, @Ghost, trusting someone enough to Staff with them is a whole other bag than roleplaying with them)

(With mouth stapled shut)
hhrrrrIIII hrrrrrGreeEEe

@insomniac7809 said in Tyche Banned:

@Kodiak said in Tyche Banned:

But @Tyche kept telling us he wasn't a racist!

And that he'd never heard of any of the places he posted his alt-right poop from, and that it was just a weird coincidence that he kept linking to "news" sites that have "ISRAEL DID 9/11" on their home page, and that all his funny memes about what dumb bitches women are were just random jokes he felt like sharing.

Tyche should've been banned a year ago, but better late than never.

God it's terribad, the way some people act like they just stumbled over a stone and found some perfect news article that frames their political argument du jour. The ramp up is always some kind of fake pastor story, like when a pastor goes "I was at a comic shop this weekend and someone asked 'Hey, do you think theres room for cyborgs in heaven?'" THIS CONVERSATION IN NO WAY FUCKING HAPPENED.

Anyway, I digress, but it's like: "I ACCIDENTALLY came across this One World News article about Hillary Clinton..."

C'mon. Bullshit.

@Ganymede said in Getting Young Blood Into MU*'ing:

@Auspice said in Getting Young Blood Into MU*'ing:

While ignoring the social points that @Ghost brought up.

I ignore Ghost's points because they are an inevitability for which he has no solution.

Improving the technology on which we play is something which a number of people are engaged in, and it seems to be improving our access to the games we want to play. Improving the technology therefore is a solution within our grasp.

Making people not be assholes is not, and therefore not worth much, if any, consideration.

Well, sure, if people come to these games for the technology and not the interaction with people. However, it's the people who drive the environments more than the actual tech; people have been playing on these games for decades despite using some of the same tech they did 10 years ago.

@Ganymede said in Getting Young Blood Into MU*'ing:

I ignore Ghost's points because they are an inevitability for which he has no solution.

au contraire, I have solutions in mind, but step one is in identifying the problem. Step two is agreeing that a solution should be found. Step three is implementation.

There's little point in discussing a solution to a problem that people don't want to tackle, which is why I'm currently in "pointing out the problem" mode and not "HERE'S WHAT WE DO" mode.

@saosmash said in Review of Recent Bans:

since more than ten years had passed your behavior might have changed and that you might have grown out of some of your patterns.

Macha is not required, nor responsible for, your opinions on their "behaviors", which are doubtlessly filed under do what I want and behave what I want or I will publicly show concern about how everyone thinks you need to do what I want and behave how I want.

Alas, this contretemps is demonstrative of a disinclination to find a conclusion bound in mutuality.

Here's some suggestions. They're maybe not perfect or polished, but I think they're fair in terms of "how can we better address the social BS in the hobby". I don't want to be the annoying guy with opinions who isn't bold enough to throw down some potential solutions.

1. Make it regular that staff will considered screen-shot logs from chats/discord that amount to bullying/whisper campaigns of other players as actionable items for "warns/bans" on games. Likewise, bullying on the Hog Pit/MSB can be actionable on games: The stance that "if it happens off-game it's not a game problem" isn't exactly accurate. These side-zones are just the arenas where mistreatment of players happens, and it's no different than the concept that a "fight behind the church isn't a fight on school grounds". Just because it's being taken off-site doesn't mean it's not a problem on-game. If people had to be responsible for the shitty things they spread about other players (in the game(s) they play together), then they would reign in their shitty behavior a bit.

I get that staff aren't your parents and in many cases they're just fellow mushers who are dedicating their time, but I believe most of us are keenly aware that the bullying in the hobby that takes place server-side is usually performed by dumb motherfuckers who are creeping. I think we're all very aware that the smart people who bully take that stuff offline to other locations where there's no current standard of them having to answer for their behavior towards other players.

Constructive critique is one thing. Character assassination is another. I've stated many times (and will again!) that I have learned FAR too many personal details of players that I should never have learned due to another player simply telling me out of anger to fuck them over.

2. Implement a X-strikes rule where page/chat logs of someone being sexually harassed by other players (with 'please stop' dialogue) will result in being escorted off of the game: Due to excessive bullying, harassment, and stalking I know players who have decided it's better to mitigate the problem rather than deal with it staff-wise as to not make it a "staff problem" that could result in mistreatment or avoidance by staff. This may not be the absolute solution, but is a way of handling it.

3. There IS wrongfun: Take the stance that there are things that the "RP" games don't want crossing lines with. If you don't want the lines blurred between pedophile havens like PenDes bleeding onto your server side? Be vocal about it. Put up notices that this kind of behavior and RP expectation is not desired. Don't "ehhhh" it and let the players thrive until they break a rule because being upfront about them not being welcome could affect login numbers. If you say 'no rape roleplay' and someone complains about rape scenes? BOOT. If you say 'no characters under 18' and players start making characters who 'look' 18 but have 15 year old PBs acting as if they're hush-hush not 18? BOOT. Staff has a responsibility to keep their environment clean and safe for the players who want a clean, safe environment to RP in. Fuck the numbers.

4. Mission Statements: I know these can be just blabber, but there's something to be said by being up-front about things like "We are a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural group that will work to respect each other for our differences". Sure, it may just be fluff, but if you openly state the ethics of your game and staff, and the ethics your players are expected to follow, you may lose some players who are like "whut? I can't make fun of people behind their backs and be judgy?", but IMO? Good riddance. There may be some influential assholes in the hobby, but maybe if their shit wasn't allowed to take so much root it would be less of an issue. Because ultimately: What corrects large social problems in groups of people is deciding WHO you want to be and WHAT you want things to be like, and then committing to it. Sometimes stating that by agreeing to play you're going to commit to trying to follow those good-friendship type values helps make it happen, and you just might find that if people begin to love those values, the people who fail to agree to those values will be on the outs.

@Prototart said in Getting Young Blood Into MU*'ing:

how can you even sit there & imply that "let's make a version of mu in a minute that works" isnt a viable solution to "the actual reasons normal people refuse altogether to mu or drive them off after a short time are entirely due to a culture of acceptance of horrible behavior & mediocrity" w a straight face

I went to the Alan Rickman school of sardonic straight-faced line delivery; that's why.

Anyway, the above suggestions may not be absolutely perfect in wording, but they're ideas. Ideas get the ball rolling and get people talking.

@ganymede said in Review of Recent Bans:

The way I see it, if my reputation ever meant anything to anyone, then maybe they would have reached out via PM to discuss the matter.

This.

@ganymede said in Review of Recent Bans:

And I now believe, after 20 years, that the idea that public shaming will cause a change in behavior is pretty vain,

This

@ganymede said in Review of Recent Bans:

So, we are going to be better and kinder, and have knitted this idea into the fabric of the forum.

Thank you.

I have 2 cents about the whole matter but I'll keep it to myself and simply say that I didn't envy the position you found yourself in, support you in standing your ground against bully behavior, and think you're a nice person.

But also, let's not gloss over issues the MU community needs to try to solve (to help keep new blood) by generalizing that all online cultures have problems, or by confusing the issue by claiming MUCK, MUD, MOO, MUX, etc all have entirely different cultures.

I kinda feel like this topic is heading off in a tangent that is avoiding focusing on working on solutions.

I'm pretty sure "people being creepy, elitist, stalker assholes" is a unifying concept most online hobbies deal with. Perhaps one could look to see how some of those communities deal with similar problems to help find good policies?

Then again, let's be fair. Having good policies is one thing, but having staff who enforce policies on MU despite their friendships or agenda to keep the game running and populated is another.

Super crunchy games with no experience levels like Shadowrun and Cyberpunk have taught us that inventory/economy bases games are pretty easy to break.

With the right influx of cash, a starting player can have god stats through their equipment. Why bother worrying about their 2d6 stat roll when their equipment enhances it to 5d6, for example.

It definitely is a rabbit hole, and so the balancing of this has to happen if you're allowing items and economy. People need to build these systems with balance in mind.

For Example, again, Serenity.

That game had HSpace, great, but with that came equipment economy, etc. People learned fairly early on that the starter pistols and armor at the vendor were outright garbage. At some point, Mal and Inara started making new weapons and armors by tweaking the stat systems on those items. Those items were then given to their friends. Before long everyone knew that the only way to get equipment that mattered was to join an org that had been supplied by Mal and Inara...only people eventually left those factions to start new ones outside of the Mal/Inara favoritism umbrella.

So...then people outside of the Mal/Inara/Pirate favoritism umbrella then had guns/armor comparable to them. Thus, the arms race escalated. They didn't want people who opposed their PCs to have comparable equipment, so new waves of equipment were created that were better than the last wave, and those weapons were given to their friends.

None of these items were available at vendors, and the price of these items was so astronomical that no player could ever afford these items without direct involvement of these orgs.

So....keep this story in mind if you go the full coded ship, space, equipment route. Things that alter the way the game is played need to be carefully balanced, as well as the economy/availability that purchases those things.

This is ultimately why I think low-object RPG works better for mushes. These complicated economy/item systems are easier to keep an eye on at a tabletop game with 4-7 players, but on a mush with 30+ players there's gonna be a lot of wibbley-wobbley in terms of zeroing in on items.

@Tinuviel said in Getting Young Blood Into MU*'ing:

There are too many incredibly smart people here, and too many smart people gathered in one place don't make decisions, they make arguments.

No. This isn't what smart people do, and perhaps as a culture it would be better if we didn't apply presumed genius to a group of people who can't get along. Smart people who are invested in a hobby are smart enough to ultimately understand that the hobby would work better if people weren't so constantly distracted with OOC PVP infighting and drama.

It's healthy to question whether or not you like hearing that you're smart or if you're actually using your brain. In this case, we are discussing why new players dont often stick with the hobby. I can ensure you that it's not because the people are just so smart and I was okay with the social issues because everyone was so smart and that's just what geniuses do; they argue.

If you ask me, the social issues have less to do with dogmatic scientific community discourse and more classic high-school territorial pissing contests, but the pissers often liken it to their intelligence or talent because doing so makes it sound less ego-driven than it usually is.

@Auspice Dunno what you just said, but in my brain it looked like Nic Cage in Mandy with a keytar and a soundtrack by Europe

@Wretched said in Consent in Gaming:

So I'm reading this thread and I'm finding my perspective might differ when I Rp than others here. Even if its a bad situation, I'm still there, playing my character, who is the protagonist of my show, as I imagine other PC's are the protagonists of theirs, reacting to stimuli and responding, in character. What is even the point of playing if to avoid any conflict you cannot dominate? Sometimes you get yelled at, or face consequences. You are still there, RPing right? How does this reflect on yout he player? I love it when bad things happen to my PC's... thats the most fun part. Conflict, and playing that character within that conflict. Right?

FYI this is my personal ethic, as well.

The point of roleplaying is that it isn't me. The damage, the horror, the tears remain inside of the story and a problem of the character. Not me. I will manage just fine, because I'm just a puppeteer with strings on the ends of my fingers.