@Jennkryst said in Alien RPG coming soon...:
Playable sexy xenomorphs or gtfo
Sorreh, this is ALIENS the RPG.
Not SPECIES the RPG.
@Jennkryst said in Alien RPG coming soon...:
Playable sexy xenomorphs or gtfo
Sorreh, this is ALIENS the RPG.
Not SPECIES the RPG.
@Tinuviel said in How to Escape the OOC Game:
@Ghost said in How to Escape the OOC Game:
Respectfully, I disagree
Then you would be rather incorrect. The fact that words on a screen can elicit positive emotional responses would indicate that they could do the opposite. We wouldn't have a Hog Pit if words on a screen couldn't cause some nature of harm.
I agree that some of us are hardier than others, and what would offend you might not offend me. But at the very base level, words have power and therefore one cannot use the "they're just words" excuse when confronted with something that is, rather aptly, confronting.
Oh, I wholly believe words can affect people, but words simply affecting people isn't the issue. My views are more related to the subjectivity of injury and the reasonable level of responsibility any given person should have towards ownership for social injuries and/or emotional states of others in social situations.
Which is a minefield I ain't walking into at 23:31 local time.
@Auspice Gimme a bit and I'll update again.
I got a birthday 2 weeks from now and a tattoo appointment next Friday. Busy time and not a lot of time to spare before Jult. Will have to read up.
If I'm good to go I'll post a notice (if I'm gonna do it) to PM me for details.
@insomniac7809 said in How to Escape the OOC Game:
"Your stalker probably isn't going to find you IRL" isn't as reassuring as you seem to think it is.
I was going to comment on how easy it is with some details, but it's probably just better to say that data aggregation is a thing. No need to chicken little.
@Tinuviel said in How to Escape the OOC Game:
@insomniac7809 I would add, also, that the idea that words cannot cause injury is fundamentally incorrect.
Respectfully, I disagree, but I'm not going to chase this point down.
I wrote a thing but backspaced over it, though. I know good places and bad places to discuss my opinions on mental and emotional states. People take this particular topic a little too close to heart for my tastes. I'm not callous by any means, but this particular topic is a minefield.
@Auspice hah. I know. Lemme look through the book and see if I'm down for it.
I'm attending/staffing a game convention in July that may need extra GMs, so a few playthroughs OTT to polish the session, before the con might be in order.
I would need beta testers. Beta players? Testers.
@Auspice said in Alien RPG coming soon...:
You should uh....
....run an OTT.<.<
Only for people who upvote me.
(Edit: This was a cheap joke for getting upvotes. When the time comes I'll totally ask for PMs)
Update: Like a good Wetland-Yutani drone I pre-ordered. With it immediately included a download of the Quick-Start rules via DriveThruRPG (a gift for preorder).
I haven't had time for a full read, but here is my knee-jerk response...
So far, I'm a fan.
I think the answer lies in the self.
"You determine your own level of involvement in Fight Club"
-Tyler Durden, or is it Cornelius?
In a very Taoist way, I think it's important to understand that many of these fears, claims of damage, and issues stem from a sense of outward-facing vigilance that can feed paranoia and anxiety and turn into something else.
They are doing this. They will not do this. They have harmed me.
In comes the Tao. Realistically, not one single musher has true control over their mushing experience, and I think it's important to acknowledge that. Each person in this hobby needs to constantly revisit their level of enjoyment, their level of drama, their level of safety, and not ask "how do I get people to do this right?" or "Who is ruining this for me?" but instead "is this healthy for me?"
It's a practice that can apply to anything (job, marriage, underwater hockey league which just this year I found out is an actual thing), and I think it's important to revisit this line of thinking whenever you hit a point where the frustration is enough to make you flee. When you say "Fuck this" and turn off your game client, that's your body, mind, and soul's way of telling you that this thing is not making you feel good.
But it's not everyone else's job to upkeep that for you.
It's not "if I quit then the bad actors win". It doesn't need to be that difficult. I suggest this approach:
...Quit the game.
YOU (as in general you) control your level of commitment, obsession, and pain that you are willing to endure on these games. YOU are not entitled to anything from strangers on the internet whom you have no legal or contractual agreements with. You. Cannot. Control. These. People.
Until it becomes about you, it will always be about them. Who They are will always change. There will always be someone upsetting you. There will always be some person fucking around. There will always be people you do not see eye to eye with or who will do things your way.
If staff are unwilling to deal with truly abusive online behavior or if other players are regularly being mean to you, then there's no the bad actors win. The bad actors have won. Reassess your level of emotional investment, and if you're not happy to proceed do something else.
I promise you that it is the only answer with a high success rate, because it's about you taking care of you; which is a thing that none of these fuckin mushers can take away from you. Nor should you allow them.
@Lotherio said in How to Escape the OOC Game:
I have more appreciation for 2 now, 20 years later at least.
...something inside me just hemorrhaged at reading that.
@Auspice said in How to Escape the OOC Game:
P.S. Ghost is not Ben Affleck
P.S. My "Don't you EVER tell them that I'm actually Ben Affleck" clause is seemingly alive and well.
Banana sticker for the day, Auspice.
Meh. Fuck it. I'm conversing.
I like that Gany, Fara, Auspice, Surreal, and others can agree to disagree with me. I like to think that we do it well because they know that when we agree to disagree, it's just that. I still like them as people and I don't see a lot of topics that two people of the internet truly can't walk away from. I'm not going to have a conversation with someone about how great all 3 Matrix movies are (if you don't believe this, you're horrible) and then get (improperly) disagreed with, then turn to everyone else and be like:
"This is a Matrix 3 only party, bitch."
Ultimately? I think people are just people. I think that most people put an idealized version of themselves on the internet, and that when it comes to RPGs you run the risk of so many hours spent roleplaying it's easy to subconsciously adapt that idealized OOC version of yourself into a persona that you have to upkeep.
Which is why I try very hard not to do that, and post a lot of Mac gifs.
Anyway, I digress.
I think everyone, even the people who may not like me, are just regular people. Regular people who hurt their shoulders while sleeping, hate hangovers, and have foods they choose to not eat because it gives them diarrhea. I think that people choose these OOC personas (or don't at all) for their own reasons, but there's really no way for me or anyone to qualify who they are without having existing RL relationships with them.
I could be Ben Affleck for all you know.
I think that some people have lost focus of this. People have good days, bad days, have differences of opinion on what good RP is, and communication between people who actually have actual sex all the time is difficult but it feels like the excepted success rate of communication in the hobby is waaaay higher a bar than it should be.
I think some people have become caught up in their confirmation bias, and on MSB you tend to see a lot of accusations where "Angry person A knows with complete paranormal accuracy the intentions and beliefs of Person B". I think there's some definite arrogance in that level of assumption and/or the assumption that you can actually determine who does or doesn't deserve another chance for...disappointing you?
I believe that there is very little actual real damage that happens in this hobby and that cases of cruel behavior, stalking, and cheating at games are the actual offenses. I believe that you cannot force an open-invitation environment to meet the preferences of a vocal group of people who have taken it upon themselves to arbitrarily keep mental tallies on players. Before long those mental tallies will become: "Well, they said words I didn't like once and they disagree with me on some things. I can't remember roleplaying with them or have any actual bad game experiences, but Fuck em until they own their shit and apologize to me for...a thing? I dunno. Fuck em." So damage ends up this subjective term, and whether or not someone deserves a second chance becomes a topic of public consumption designed to sway a mob, much like Matrix 3 or social rolls in WoD.
I agree: It's a clique, and that clique will always want the right to decide who is or isn't worthy of social hierarchy. What people don't understand is that this behavior is a beast that often comes back around to bite you. Alex and I were bullies in grade school. I was on top. Then Alex started bullying me. People fall out of favor, and others replace them.
Anyway, I'm all for people exercising the right to get on in peace. I think @faraday is 100% absolutely right in the spirit of her approach. My approach/suggestion isn't the utopian or preferable one, but I think it's a means to an end. In the end, though, ths hobby would be best if people played well together and fara's vision would be something unifying.
I just want people to treat each other with respect and if people have to spend 6 months to a year roleplaying in some kind of Eyes Wide Shut orgy mask to lessen the importance of OOC identities as being a major point of aggression? I'm alright. With that.
How corporate execs use synergy...
An actual, decent use of the word synergy...
(SIDEBAR: About 4 months of me exclusively using Mac gifs remain. Cherish this time.)
Fact: There is an Always Sunny in Philadelphia gif for every occasion.
How corporate execs use synergy...
An actual, decent use of the word synergy...
(SIDEBAR: About 4 months of me exclusively using Mac gifs remain. Cherish this time.)
How corporate execs use synergy...
An actual, decent use of the word synergy...
(SIDEBAR: About 4 months of me exclusively using Mac gifs remain. Cherish this time.)
@Ganymede Well...yeah...erm.
Uno mas!
Calling a layoff a synergy is like calling a divorce a re-allocation of tax deductions
Or...
Synergies should be a category on Pornhub, because it apparently means getting fucked by someone who gets paid more than you.
When corporate types call layoffs by a different term: synergies
Aaaaaaaaaaaand go fuck yourself with that.
(Didn't get laid off, but someone was asked about potential layoffs and the exec referred to them as synergies)
Calling a layoff a synergy is like saying that OJ Simpson ended his relationship with his wife.
@silverfox said in How to Escape the OOC Game:
Maybe I'm too quick to think things might not be instantly negative, but I didn't read this as encouraging someone banned to sneak onto a game this way.
We're bad as a collective on giving people even second chances, let alone 3/4/5th. If someone ACTUALLY is able to change then this isn't all a bad list of things to do. If you've changed enough to be able to handle this, then I think they deserve the anonymity.
Just my opinion.
^gets the spirit of my post.
It is in the nature of some very aggressive vocal types to want to control who is and isn't welcome on a game where everyone is welcome so long as they behave.
Thus why I think it is also in the best interest of those aggressive vocal types to not be okay with people simply exiting the OOC Game and just being mostly anonymous (but well behaved) roleplayers. Some of these people are fucking you for disagreeing with them Oocly or not bowing to some form of assumed authority. I think it's alright if people steer clear of that. Others are great people to chat with Oocly and build friendships with. I believe people should pick and choose more carefully who they expose themselves to, as opposed to a Default: On setting.
I will always roleplay with anyone so long as they're nice people or nice to me; even people I argue with here. So I'm going to stand by my advice as OP and say that no questions asked if anyone on a game says to me...
"Sorry I don't share personal information, but am totally interested in fun RP!"
...I'd treat it like a safe word and just think "Alright, not here to get personal? I can roll with that."
Doing what I suggested in post 1 isnt about ducking bans or getting away with cheating. It's about getting out of the negative OOC cycle with an element being nice to people to keep your time in the hobby copacetic. I know plenty of people who are simply sick of the garbage that comes from the more negative parts of MSB or the hobby's vocal and aggressive personalities. This above suggestion is just one way to potentially take control out of their hands and put it back into yours.
Can't fault someone for wanting to get out of the OOC Game, and I'm okay with it so long as they're being nice.
@Thenomain said in General Video Game Thread:
@Auspice said in General Video Game Thread:
@Thenomain said in General Video Game Thread:
Why haven't people been crowing about Divinity more? I've been playing this with @EmmahSue and the level of consideration and interaction of bits of plot and environment is amazing, and chasing one plot can get anyone involved in five others.
I can't wait to start Divinity 2 with friends.
Because it's almost never on sale?
But when it is, it's the best isometric CRPG I've played since Planescape:Torment. No joke.
This is, hands down, 100% accurate.
Divinity is the shit.
@juke I think this is a very reasonable approach.
Also, to add. Mudstats boasts 900+ logins to MUX servers. Shang and CoH top those out right now at 377/165 bits connected, respectively. Those numbers drop sharply to 38 on Tenebrae and then trickle into the 20s until it hits single digit logins by entry 12 of 40 on the page.
Both of these put together (if you factor # of allowed alts and total numbers; right now it's 6pm in NYC.) I think shows evidence that there may not be thousands of mushers in the hobby and that attendance at games isn't all that spread out.
I mean, if Shang allows for 5 alts, and if each player had 5, that 377 comes to around 70 players total. Either way it's highly unlikely that these 377/165 numbers are individual logins.
Regardless, I think it's highly probable that the same mushers share server space regularly.