@Ganymede ...I dunno. I might play in a game like that? I think it all depends on the culture and population of the game. If it works, then it works, and if it's working, then fuck it, make a character, yeah? All animated gifs aside, I've heard a lot of horror stories from places with less consent and more "get out and roleplay" vibes. Pin me into the column of people who would monitor this project and see how it turns out. I need plot, drama, and action, so if the end project is a more sex/kink-related MU like Shang, then I probably would go for it.
Posts made by Ghost
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
Could work. You'll want the sheet-portion automated and QA'd for checks to make sure point expenditure and certain requirements for pieces are met (X merit requires Y in skill). If you get that down, then you effectively negate the need to worry about the points being off and can focus on the BGs.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
@Arkandel well, I agree that open-cgen won't catch the bad players. Like my above-mentioned example, players like that tend to make fairly normal seeming characters.
I'm banging my head here trying to think of an easy way to get around this. Maybe I'm just so used to long app processes and consent policies that have existed for decades.
Another shoutout to @faraday (who I'm a big fan of), but I think she had the right of it. She had an app process that was based off of her FS3 system. You see, if you want to have a fast/quick app process, you have to have sheets/game/cgen system that isn't bulky. A lot of WoD is horrible for this, but FS3 was great for it.
You will want to automate what you want to see on the sheets, or have a system that is rules-light enough so that you know what's on the sheets won't be something game-breaking. All you would need to do is give the sheets a once-over to look for obvious red flags, and then move on. OR if the CGen was so automated that you could trust in it, then BAM, you don't need to worry about sheets.
The "I agree" section could be a good place to automate consent rules and whatnot, too. Just like an EULA, whether or not you read the "I Agree" section doesn't negate your requirement to follow those rules, so you could throw up a minor "be adult, get consent, speak up if you're uncomfortable" as well as an "I am 18+ years of age" into it. That could make your app process all a bit more agile.
Though, logically, I don't think I can stress enough that the complexity of the expected character sheet really does determine the complexity of your all process.
On the BSG games, I saw some days where 20-40 characters were approved because the sheets were might lifting and the staff was on point.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
I knew of a guy once who had RL issues with a cheating wife. So, IC, he would SHOWER PCs with gifts and praise, and want them to dress all sexy, and then ICly/OOCly get mad at them and call them whores for RPing with other men.
A lot of this stuff goes on for a while before staff is even brought in, because people don't want to spoil the roleplay or cause some huge ruckus. Mushers have a way of shaking victims, just like in real life, and the OOC rumor game is often used against the complaining player, so the abused player tries to placate the aggressor by giving them what they want, making an alt, and trying to get around the issue that way. It's...kind of depressing.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
Well, you definitely started a dialogue, which is cool. I think it's great you're trying to make something for the better.
Let's get back into topic. Are there any particular ideas with this liberal yes-first game you want help conceptualizing?
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
@Cirno or create a thread for people to tell others what that population is and then scold them for not freezing in place at their infinite wisdom on the topic. snort
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
@Arkandel will do. I am trying to be constructive, but I think what's happening here is some people are disagreeing and with differences of opinions inevitably comes some kind of you're dumb response.
I agree that there is a steady decline in the old guard of mushers who are focusing on established IP gaming. There may be more MLP players, but the core demographic of WoD/Star Wars/etc gamers has either plateau'd or has begin to trickle off in favor of other media.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
@Cirno you're just a mean person who doesnt know anything right, arentcha?
ACCURATELY AGREE WITH PEOPLE BEFORE THEY POST DISAGREEING WITH YOU OR SUFFER
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
@Sunny said:
@Cirno said:
@Sunny said:
- It's a much smaller hobby than it was in the late 90s
- I haven't seen evidence of a hobby-wide trend downward
Pick one.
Did you miss the part where I said the population leveled out a few years back, and since then there hasn't been much of the stated trend?
Someone's fiesty today.
Damn, @Cirno , you should have heeled when she told you how everything is.
When someone tells you to french fry, you DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES PIZZA
@Sunny , please answer his question since he asked politely. There's no need to be rude.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
@Tempest said:
I'm not reading all of this. Is 'yes-first' a thing people actually want in a MU?
Sounds like an awful fucking idea. Especially since most MUers are complete and utter, entitled, self-centered trash. Somebody /needs/ to smack the population of this hobby around, even if it means they leave that particular game.
All the WoD games in particular seem to pretty quickly turn to garbage, out of fear of telling people they can't have/do things.
The counter-issue is that telling people no is usually flawed with that staff telling their friends yes, which is a whole different beast.
I couldn't agree with this more. There isn't a button that allows me to agree with this more, so I'll have to find the right wording:
I will gladly clean your toilets.
In all seriousness, though, I agree. A lot of downfall in games is based on whether or not people are getting what they want, even when what they want is selfish, unrealistic, or slyly calculated to give them an advantage over other players by means of begging a staffer to give them special sauce. Then, when they don't get their way, they flame, message, gossip, create WORA drama, and bitch bitch bitch until the game has some negative reputation. Then, the staff tries to save face or squelch the problem, which makes it worse...and over and over again.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
@Cirno said:
@Nein said:
Have we just hit a point in the hobby where we've whittled down to 50-80% people with cluster-b personality disorders who keep things going by swapping games/abuse circles? Because I keep seeing a steady drop in an already long out-dated medium, and it seems like the majority of people holding on are either doing so to maintain social connections with friends, or are just too entrenched in malfunctioning behavior to stop beating a dead horse.
This is a very good post and I would ordinarily give you 100% of my fiat, but this doesn't explain the giant My Little Pony MU* s.
WIN.
I still don't get what the fucking point of roleplaying as a fucking pony is. At least have the self respect to be a centaur with arms that can carry axes and a giant horse dick to horsefuck bar wenches with.
-
RE: Star Wars: Age of Alliances
There are things I like about saga edition, and things I don't.
Needing to keep track of a series of feats and statblocks made the game very bulky; bulky as opposed to agile and easy to navigate.
(Trying to shoot your X-wing at a TIE fighter? SIMPLE! Simply apply your base attack bonus modifier to the fire-linked weapons bonus, add it to the attack rating of the ship, apply any other bonuses from feats, talents, or any of three-to-ten other modifiers. That will give you a number like... D20+3+4+2+4+5+3+4+3+2+4+5. THEN, once you have determined your bonuses to your d20 roll....)
(...roll and apply the total rolled to the agility bonus of the TIE plus the pilot/crew rating of the TIE. If the number is higher than this reflex number, you've hit! Then roll the damage of the weapon (4d20x4) and SUBTRACT that from the armor rating. If your damage exceeds the damage threshold of the...)
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
History has shown that the more times a female player cries harassment, the more she is distanced from, even if the harassment was valid. I know plenty of female players who keep quiet about the people who are harassing them, as they have no want to seem like they're causing drama. If they can't game while dealing with it, they move on, or somehow find a way to tolerate it.
I think @Lithium is right. If we were really all going to get along and played fair, we would have found a way to do it by now.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
@Groth Agreed. ALL I am trying to illustrate here is that some red tape is required, some guidelines or code of conduct needs to be set, and some kind of expected communication-between-players-type behavior needs to be highlighted. Once you highlight that, the liberalness of the game takes a hit, but I don't think that's a bad thing.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
No button pushed. Just playing devil's advocate and trying to point out reasons why I think a liberal, yes-first type game could run into some major staffing/player base issues.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
So if we are all adults and IC rape should be handled by IC means, then I could...say...
Create a character and, over time, focus on law and police contacts/allies and a broad collection of IC patsies that were willing to take the fall for me. While harvesting xp and spending it for the top weapons, physical and combat stats, and an IC army of bodyguards, my character could then, feasibly, rape every single character on grid and use my army, money, contacts, and Allies to either derail the investigations, avoid jail time, send one of my posse to jail in my stead, and through dice, roleplay, and theme, perform these roleplay acts against anyone willing to scene and/or unwilling to log off despite how fucked up the scene is.
...ugh, I felt weird typing that. I would never play that character, but I feel it is an accurate example as to why some things simply can't be held to "ehhh keep it IC" standards.
Staff has a responsibility to protect their player base from predatory players, and the only way to do that is to establish expected guidelines of roleplay, conduct, and some realistic trigger rules.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
@Arkandel said:
@Apos said:
It's very surprising how many players feel pressured to RP out scenes they are deeply bothered by and they really, really need to feel that staff has their back. I wouldn't take it for granted at all that players would think first to fade even in scenes.
That's a fair point. How would you make it more crystal clear that if anything happened they'd be backed? I.e. other than stating the usual stuff (which exists in almost any sane game I've been on) about fade-to-black and whatnot... what else can be done?
I think it's important to remember the high number of MUers who have no RL social outlets and cling to games for social acceptance. This is why so many players will roleplay a scene that makes them uncomfortable, yet just go through with it, because sometimes there is a RL need of a sorts attached to the hobby.
I don't think there is any other good answer other than establishing guidelines as to what is acceptable behavior on any game. Due to the risks of minors playing the game as well, people should absolutely avoid scenes involving rape and other forms of sexual assault.
I don't think that is a lot to ask of a player base.
I mean -- shit -- if you can't ask your player base to not roleplay fucked up things like sexual assault, molestation, or other forms of rape, then this basically becomes a fucked up hobby, right?
I, for one, would never roleplay on a game, even if staff backed me up where there were no rules governing whether or not my character could be gangraped ICly. I don't log in for that shit and it's fucked up. Period.
-
RE: Mush Campaigns
I just want to clarify. I wasn't saying that staff should just KILL a PC to make a point or some quota. I was using kill in the sense that when the dice, or health levels, or situation (was warned OOCly to not eat irradiated uranium and did so ICly anyway) warrants it, that staff/GM allow/rule that that character dies. Doing so maintains an important level of causality in the theme of the game and allows for characters to recycle as needed.
One of my major gripes about MUs is, in some cases, the sheer number of GOD-level characters who have effectively made it to max level with all of the equipment, perks, and power on the game, and they've achieved this mostly through GMing that didn't allow them to die when they repeatedly should have OR by not increasing the risks due to the rewards involved. Sure, all level one players want their own space armada by level two, but let's not allow a single roll to determine that, yes?
Anyway, I digress. My point is this:
All too often, the power balance becomes upset on a game and a small handful of stacked-sheet characters usurp control with seemingly no way to challenge, avoid, or disagree with them due to the constant threat of PK, right? But a game who doesn't enforce death and/or using the combat/death rules per the system the game is designed off often neglectfully allows power players to skyrocket to positions of immovable power.
Avoiding the potential hate-breath of a player upset because you allowed one of his characters to die is simply not healthy for a game, and really is unfair to the characters who are basing their actions on the rules and not their power-gaming ambitions.
-
RE: The elusive yes-first game.
@Roz You put it so more eloquently than I did. I salute thee.