Best posts made by GirlCalledBlu

This came up in The 100 advertisement thread, but as the MUSH has closed, and I have some questions on this specific topic, I figured... hey, this is what this forum is for...

It has come up a few times that Staff PCs should not be in leadership positions or story spotlights, but I feel like I have a mixed perception on what this declaration means.

So.

I want to engage ya'll in a discussion.

Here's been my perception/notions so far:

1. Staff should not play characters in positions of IC power; by default, they have OOC power because they are staffers, but abuse is always a concern when a Staffer has both OOC and IC power, and that IC power comes through their PC; if a Staff PC does end up in a leadership position, their character should be the minority (i.e. if they end up on the Senate Security Council, they should be easily outvoted by non-Staff PCs on the same council). In general though, Staff PCs should not hold IC positions of power.
2. Staff can play characters on their games, and these characters can have their own story arc that is significant to the character's development as long as this story arc does not violate point #1 or take a significant role in the metaplot.
3. Staff can play their characters in metaplot events, as long as they are there to to participate solely as just another PC (i.e. "I'm here to blow shit up" or "I'm here to get pissant drunk and sleep under the table" [or any other variant]).
4. When a Staffer is on their PC, they are not operating as a Staffer, but as another PC on the game. There should be a clear boundary, and the PC bits should not be used as an arm of the Staffer. If the Staffer has something to say/do, they should say/do it on their wizbit.

Here's where I feel like these perceptions/notions are being challenged:

1. RP from Staff PCs should be solely to help other PCs grow/develop.
2. Staff PC stories should be minimized, and PC story arcs should be mostly downplayed.
3. Staff PCs should not receive any mention in the metaplot (for good or ill). A by ill, this could be an Staff-controlled NPC being an antagonist of a Staff PC, or results within the metaplot actually causing bad consequences for a PC of a Staffer.

Ultimately, I think the question here is... what role should Staff PCs have on a MUSH, and how does their role differ from the roles of non-Staff PCs?

Because this keeps coming up:

No, The Fifth World is not reopening in a public capacity. Some old players/friends are getting together on a closed server to RP.

@Ghost Dude. Seriously. Transform your dirndl into a gown of ice, and sing it with me:

@bored said in The 100: The Mush:

lack of self-awareness

Not denying that. Feedback helps. Thanks.

@ThatGuyThere said in The 100: The Mush:

How you ask the question is very important. Asking "How should I introduce Grounders?" will get you a lot more of an honest answer then "Should I introduce Grounders like this?" especially if asked from a staff bit.

You're right.

And that is how the conversation started. By the time it got to the point in the story being presented here, I had already been given answers to the first question, and was looking for feedback on those answers. That is where this thread is being picked up.

Again, I understand what you are saying, and I agree... and I guess because I had been given pretty blunt feedback from those I asked, I didn't expect perceived distrust of Staffers to impact the answers from others. But, I understand that people have poor experience with Staffers that greatly impacts their ability to trust anyone with a wizbit.

So, there you have it.

@KDraygo said in Fires of Hope: A Star Wars Story:

I personally enjoy Star Wars games without any FCs that belongs to the players. I wouldn't want one as it would feel like too much responsibility to shoulder. To balance it so that the character remains fair and fun, while making sure I continue to build to the story. Especially a darker character, since Force Powers, it will be much easier to be blamed for bullying and abuse.

As someone who is kind of exhausted by Force-User-concentrated games, this actually sounds super appealing. Granted, Staff would have to be "on it" to make sure that said temporary characters don't become mostly permanent, because then what's the point? So, there should be some tracked timeline (i.e. disappears end of arc, dies end of arc, or something).

I also, personally, miss the Force-is-all-mumbo-jumbo games, where the Force can be used as a way to guide story rather than something gifted (through Staff decision or Player vote) to a character.

I've actually been getting a lot of zen from designing wiki's for games. Working on about 3 of them at the moment. If anyone ever needs wiki help (specifically for wikidot), it brings me joy, and I'm happy to do it with or without access to +requests for wiki stuff. @Avarice just hates managing the wiki and doing icons, so I said I was happy to do it.

And yes, I also do some grid work now and then because... it also brings me joy. Must be all those re-watchings of Field of Dreams (if you build it, they will come).

I have no more input than any other player on game decisions.

Just to be totally transparent since it has come up.

@Ghost said in Fires of Hope: A Star Wars Story:

I tried to picture clusters of information as they moved through the computer. What did they look like? Ships? Motorcycles? Were the circuits like freeways? I kept dreaming of a world I thought I'd never see. And then one day . . .

I had the TRON soundtrack playing in my head...