Best posts made by ixokai

General Spelling and Grammar: Mostly, I just need to understand. I don't really care otherwise.

Pose Length and Detail: What I need is for every pose to have give me something, I don't care how much detail or the length of it is. That said, people who pose very small are likely not giving me a lot to respond to: but I've known some people who were gems at it. So, too, I've seen people who write novellas per pose and have absolutely nothing I can do with it. Multiple long paragraphs with maybe two words, and none of those paragraphs really usable content. Its downright frustrating.

Tempo: It depends. For me the point at where I start wondering if someone fell asleep is the 15-20 minute mark, but as long as I know its a slow scene, I don't mind. I usually try to get my pose done in five minutes after the last person posed, but this is because I start writing my response while other people are posing, and just adjust as each pose comes in, sometimes completely rewriting it. But this is why I prefer round robin in any scene <= 5 people: at this point the chances of someone invalidating my pose complete is high, and I get into this trap of never finishing. For bigger scenes, I see 3pr as a needed evil because otherwise I find it impossible to keep up... but even then, I will tend to do that for maybe an hour then just blank out and mentally check out of the scene because its too big to keep up with.

Personal Peeves: You-posing is completely creepy: I do not identify myself with my character. I don't mind metaposing as long as it is treated as something that can be read-- body language, tone, intuition-- or if its directed entirely at oneself. I do not want to see 'Jane smiles warmly to Bob, even though she thinks he's a jackass for showing up'. You don't get to call Bob a jackass and not take the heat for it. Now, if she posed, 'Jane attempts to smile warmly to Bob, though her irritation at him over just showing up makes it difficult', that's fine. Bob can still respond to her 'tone' or attitude or something, its not just essentially OOC commentary mixed in an IC pose.

What annoys me is when people don't take the OOC agency to involve their characters. This is my biggest pet peeve in the world. If you are playing shy, that's fine. Its still YOUR JOB to come up with a reason to get your character to engage with others. I've played shy characters before: I don't have them sit in a corner reading, waiting for someone to drag them out-- I make up a scenario that gets them out of their shell for some reason. (Maybe they're a clutz, and oops! Bumped into you. Damnit now we must make social noises).

@lithium said in Social 'Combat': the hill I will die on (because I took 0 things for physical combat):

I just want social characters to be able to influence people socially, because, that's the point.

I just want everyone to play by the same fucking rules and quit trying to cheat.

"Those who disagrees with me is cheating" is not at all helpful. Your attitude and framing are exactly the problem I have with the other side of the argument.

Frankly, all this "is it a rule?" comes off as deeply pedantic reading of text and reactions. There exists between "rules" and stuff that is just fluff, stuff that is guidance and has force of intent though is more flexible.

Let me first define "metaposing" as I mean it, as its something defined by people as different things.

Metaposing is the stuff that doesn't happen between quotes, and which does not describe a characters actions, appearance, or other overt outward displays.

You linked to my random bitch and said its about different in metaposing etiquette, but I disagree: my bitch was about powerposing, IMHO. Powerposing and metaposing are different. Powerposing is about writing about another character in such a way as their player's ability to choose their reactions is taken away.

Powerposing is NEVER OKAY. Never. Under any circumstances.

Metaposing is okay, in a limited degree, provided its about your own character or entertaining in general. It is NOT okay if its used as a vehicle to insert OOC commentary about other characters that those characters do not have an IC means to interpret and thus react to.

A certain amount of metaposing adds to atmosphere and entertainment, and as long as its not wielded against other characters, its fine. However, when its used to snark them and get in a comment that can't be responded to IC, its unfair and not okay.

I'm forgetting, at least, two thirds:

Castle D'Image (Jaygen, Xanth, Aramais)
Eternal Nights (Danyelle, Paradox codemonkey)
Armageddon (Rachel the seer cherub, Belial the Baron of Hell, Megiddo the site-admin codemonkey)

... VAST GULF OF TIME AND MANY MANY GAMES I DO NOT AT ALL REMEMBER ANYMORE ...

Los Angeles: A House Divided (Graydon white gangrel gangster, Levi the walking mummy nosferatu elder, Exploitation codemonkey, Downtown the sphere guy)
Anytown (Bradin the werewolf)
Mystick Krewe (Samael the rich model emotion-warper, Josh the teenage delinquent telekinetic, Kermit (the second one))
Metro (Mikiyasu the kuei-jin)
Devilshire (Josh the teenage delinquent telekinetic, Iforgethisname: a sidhe played by Alex Pettyfer)
Darkwater (I don't even remember)
The Reach (Chance (the sin-eater), Jeremy (the spider), Matt (another sin-eater))
Second Pass (Milian / L'ian the awkward bronzerider)
Oathcircle (Graydon the sidhe Baron)

Eldritch (Mr. Coin)
Whispers in the Dark (Malakai)
Arx (Antonio-- the dashing captain and disciple of the sea god <NO MORE>, Preston-- the ernest young Knight Templar who believes SO MUCH it hurts, Tomwell-- the wannabe courtesan noble thrust into a life he's not prepared for)
Fallen World (Oxymandias)
Star Wars: Insurgency (Artichoke, Andanen, Chaydin, Deviant, Zexen-Seven)
The 100 (Cameron, Que)
Dystopia (Wut)
Marvel: 1963 (Alex, Venom, Spawn, Anduvin, Nexus, Venom)
Battlestar Galactica: Unification (Connor, Josua)

Current:
Marvel: 1963 (Theorem, Josh, Billy, Chance, Johnny Storm, Peter Parker, Carnelian)
Arx: Donato
From the Ashes (Chance pooka)
Valorous Dominion (Nicolo)
Welcome to Lovecraft (Bradin, Case)

God, for a hobby I've had forever I can barely remember most games. They've all blurred together into a soupy mess.

@stabby If you have Chrome, there's http://duckclient.com/

I third @WTFE

I want to have a fun, entertaining environment. What that means... varies with the situation, the mood, the character, my play-group. As I play with people more I get an idea of what they enjoy, what they don't. I don't check everything with them but if something is off from our usual play-- or if something is starkly off-- I'll gently ask if they want to expand the scope of what we've done.

I'll talk to people, OOC. We can talk about our RP, our plans for where our stories might go. We aren't scripting things out -- what happens is not pre-determined but we can decide my character wants to go from being more timid to getting into a more heroic context. We can create situations to explore that.

My characters have a Voice, ideally, and I can hear it in my head almost -- and I stay true to that Voice. Who the character is. BUT. I still am the author of that characters story: and I am not an author in isolation.

People I would like to think of as at least friendly if not friends are also authors in the same space of me. Us all having fun and having stories we enjoy matters.

The specifics... vary. Some characters I make are irreverent and though maybe shine from time to time are often at least on some level comedic relief. Others are dark and brooding and trying to find humanity. Others are ... etc. It varies. In each I try to find a person or three who while they are not on the same path as the character in question, are on a path to support/develop/reveal the path itself.

Ideally, when my character grows, someone elses does, too. Ideally, we both end things feeling a sense of fulfillment as a chapter or story ends -- and with mushing, the ending of one step may be fuzzy (it may 'end' for different people in different ways and at different places) and it usually just means a turning of the page to a new chapter or story.

There's lots of different ways to have fun. I know some people who want to have fun by minimizing OOC contact almost entirely-- the idea of talking about characters and future development is anathema. I respect that but its not for me.

I enjoy the game when there is an OOC cooperation (with a healthy level of communication that does not lead into the way of coordination) coupled with an IC world that makes sense. I don't ever have my characters do anything that is not IC for them, I believe in staying true to a characters voice, but there's a lot more leeway in this then some people feel, for me. If a character isn't in a fun place, I arrange situations around the character so their IC choices lead them to a place that is fun. Or I stop playing them.

@arkandel said in Mutant Genesis (X-Men):

@ixokai You're a regular on MSB and you're worried about being judged?

Actually, yes.

I know you're sorta joking, but seriously, no joke.

There's a relationship you set up between you and a game, between you and staff, between you and other players.

Little things bug me.

I played on the 100 and really enjoyed it, but every sunday the "most cookies this week" would post, and I'd feel this weird pressure-judgement feeling that was unpleasant.

To not feel this little unpleasant feeling, I'd go in for the big scenes that I don't enjoy or feel good doing, but, the little pleasant feeling at the end of the week when I rank on the rankings, positive!

I'm as susceptible as anyone to feedback loops, but I'm a LOT more sensitive to the feedback that is closer. If staff puts itself into a position as Judge of you being Good Enough, this is a relationship that my personal experience says leads to an environment that is both hostile and unpleasant.

The distant (removed from being immediately accountable?) judgment of MSB is a different thing. I can look at MSB judgment with a grain of salt and in a different context then I look at my relationship with staff on a game I play.

Ya'll have no authority over me: the extent of your power is to not like me. Whatever. I don't like you either. If I play a game, I submit to their rules. If the staff begins that situation as gatekeeper, protector, we're good. If they begin that situation as judge and controller, nopenopenopenope.

I have my hangups like anyone here.

@kay Personally, a game has a theme and a setting.

For me, I'm even less keen to play a game which says: This part being noir! This part being shiny high tech! This part is sily!

Then I am one who says, hey, we're 30/40s noir.

I don't like the difficulty of a 30s game on history, but I deeply don't like the idea of four games in one but what neighborhood I'm in, that determines what sense I am.

IMHO.

Also, to @Warma-Sheen

"I want a fun, enjoyable environment" is consequence-neutral. It doesn't mean I don't want bad things to happen to my character: it doesn't mean I want good things to happen to my character. I have no preference either way on this at all. What I want is something meaningful to happen to my character.

As it happens, a lot of times that is bad. I'm a big fan of consequences and growth from failure. What I don't like is a roll of a dice or a whim of something or other ending my story in a meaningless way.

But bad? And consequences? This is how people grow.

I RP to create characters that grow.

@BlackDahlia

A +where that is as condensed as possible, such that it says like, <Room Name> - <Everyone In The Room>
A +hangouts list which you can +go to named or numbered hangouts from
A +join/+summon that doesn't make me do a dance to wait for everyone I wanna summon to go IC first. Have the act of +joining someone IC make you IC.
+temprooms
Tie all my alts together somehow and then do things like track if a bbs message is read or not globally.
Posebreak!

This sounds deeply interesting to me. Fuck Lords & Ladies which I have no interest at all in. Save the goats, man. The goat is LIFE.

Not even joking a little.

I'm intrigued by the weirdness of this. But novel approaches to mushing appeal to me lately.

@Tinuviel said in Wiki best practices:

@Roz said in Wiki best practices:

@Tinuviel said in Wiki best practices:

@Roz Sure, they're not having a problem with malicious people. But this is still about security. Solve all the problems you can, not just one. Captcha is fine, if you don't mind anyone that can look through a wiki to get information (or a game, or whatever source you choose). And if it's game specific, you'd better remember to keep the captcha question and answer up to date. Like how wikis are always up to date.

You pick a question and answer that's easy/fundamental to the game, not something that changes.

If it's easy or fundamental, then it's useless as a security measure.

... nonsense.

Type '+wiki/password' in game. Receive the word: 'transgoggle'.

Easy. And staff doesn't have to do anything ever again and no bot or spammer will ever get it.

Locking account creation out is a set it and forget it option, that works every time.

It's -- literally the opposite of a set it and forget it option. Because you set it and then have to create every new account manually. So you set it and -- do it repeatedly every time it needs doing.

You need to create accounts. Yeah. You don't need to constantly make sure that your security is up to date. One it is set, you don't need to worry about it.

And you need to actually go through and make all the accounts, either dealing with players not giving you a name/password that works, or telling them a temporary password, or having to ask for an email to send them a randomly generated temporary password... All of this is work.

@Roz's solution is no work. And damn near perfect security: the only issue is anytime you ban a player, you want to change the password. Easy to do. And how often do you ban players? On Marvel:1963 we've banned ... four. And changed the password each time (we actually change the password as a practice before we hit the ban button).

We were asked for best practices. Not what's easy to do.

Yeah, and you aren't giving best practices.

@Taika said in How much plot do people want?:

Curious to get a feel for how much big plot (5+ scenes, or spanning months), little plot (3-5 scenes or a couple weeks), or monster of the week type things people are interested in or really want. I know too much is almost as bad (or worse in some ways) thn not enough.

What say ye, hivemind? How much plot is that sweet spot?

Honestly, your definitions baffle me.

I don't count 'plot' in 'number of scenes' or 'spanning months'; if there's 5 scenes spanning months, I'm saying wow, I'm probably bored. But you call that big plot: 3-5 scenes over a couple weeks sounds good, but you're calling that little plot.

I can't really answer you because you're operating on a set of assumptions that don't match either my preferences or my experience.

Ideally, I would like a variety of plot that is both interesting and forward-progressing, but which is also as much as possible opt-in. This doesn't have to be a lot: it is enough that 'something is happening'. Even if I'm not directly in the plot, I can have a scene which is related to it, ideally.

What I don't like:

• Plot which I am forced to be involved in (count most but not all metaplots in this category)
• Plot that is always the same thing: kill bad guy of the moment.
• Plot that can only have a direct, combat answer
• Plot that happens only in the confines of PRPs.
• Plot which doesn't change the world

Everything else is how much plot I want. Depending on how big the game is, peoples timezones, that and more.... that generally determines more how much plot is happening over a desired metric of enough-plot.

For my part, I never witnessed any creepiness from Jumar, but I'm a dude so am not the target audience.

What I did see is that his OOC attitude was exhaustingly negative. I don't have any problem with the fact that ICly, Jumar was antagonistic towards the peace movement some characters were pushing IC. I have no problem with ICly, Jumar held a grudge and thought the Grounders were nothing but mindless savage lunatics without a perspective or POV of their own. That's IC.

But dear lord could he not keep it IC. The amount of time he spent expousing this belief on channels, both argumentatively and passive aggressively, was almost physically painful. More then once I just gagged channels when he entered what was otherwise an interesting discussion (note: discussion complete with differing POVs, not everyone falling over eachother to agree) because of his OOC negativity and ranting.

@bored said in FCs on Comic MUs:

In the words of my recently abandoned UH EFC, I say thee 'meh.'

If you want to be a star of the show character, you have to be willing to do things for others. If in attempting to do things for others you only end up doing things for yourself and people complain about it? Then you shouldn't have that character. It really isn't hard, and staff can afford to be a little stricter with the big guns if they're a little looser with everyone else. That's why I suggest a fairly loose standard for everyone else paired with the strict standard for the iconics. If a player literally cannot bring themselves to play anyone but, say, Rogue, but also won't run anything that isn't about themselves (gee, we've not seen that happen recently, have we?) then you probably don't actually need that player. Be firm, and they'll probably content themselves finding another high-power bombshell to TS on. If they leave, no loss.

I don't find this attitude productive, personally.

It takes a certain mindset to run plot. It takes certain mindset to run plot your character is in and not consume it yourself. These mindsets aren't exclusively what I think a good iconic character should be played as.

To tie, "plays iconic character" to "able to run good plot" together is something I don't feel comfortable with.

I agree, if you want a certain type of character that tends to be the center of attention, you need to be willing to encourage and allow others to shine in their moments.

But I don't agree this means that they need to run plot.

Star Wars: Insurgency

Alderaan is no more, but news of that fact is only starting to leak out to the Empire. Depending upon who you ask, it was the most heinous act of villainy in history, or a sign of strength and defiance against terrorism.

The Battle of Yavin ended with the destruction of the Death Star, but to think that the Emperor has been laid low by that loss would be a grave miscalculation.

Throughout the Galaxy, the Rebellion and the Empire struggle, and between them the mercenaries, bounty hunters, slicers and traders who care not for alignment to either faction try to make a life for themselves.

Corellia is not the most important battle ground, but it is an important battle ground. It is a strategic asset, gifted with abundant mines that provide essential minerals for the making of durasteel alloy, and its impressive shipyards produce most of the Imperial fleet-- including the Star Destroyers that bring such dominance to naval battles.

For the Rebels to take a Core World will take a different type of fighting: it will take an Insurgency. For the Empire to keep the Core World will require them walking the knife's edge between crushing resistance and not sending the Corellian's (known for their independent and wild streak) right into Rebel hands.

And as is the case with every conflict, there's money to be made. Gangs, mercenaries, slicers, agents of the Hutt Cartel,... There is so much in the air here on Corellia that there are great opportunities to be had... if one is willing to embrace the risk.

--

Star Wars: Insurgency is a RhostMUSH game set almost immediately after the events of Episode IV: A New Hope. Although it takes place primarily on Corellia, plots can take place anywhere within the Galaxy, and (when we work it out) space combat and travel will be supported.

We are using Fate Core as the basis for the game system, with characters powered up a bit from the default rules as the Star Wars universe is a bit more cinematic then gritty.

As far as Force Users are concerned, in our version of the world, Order 66 happened but it was not as successful as in the canon, so more Jedi and potential Jedi escaped and are active in the world. Additionally, the Rule of Two was not a thing so there are more Sith and dark side users out there. There's also so-called 'grey' concepts that don't quite buy into either order.

But this isn't just a game for Jedi and Sith. Slicers, mercs, smugglers, commandos and the likes are all welcome and usable.

We allow Star Wars characters from both the canon movies, the prequels, and the Extended Universe/Legends. We also allow Original Characters of any sort. Star Wars Characters will (when we get this in) have activity requirements, though they won't be intense.

The game is in ALPHA state: we are in testing. RP is encouraged, apping is encouraged, but its important to note that specific details of +sheet's can not be guaranteed to not need revision when we move into BETA and then full opening. In ALPHA, we won't allow any player deaths, as we are continually play-testing systems and stats and game balance.

That said, the basic Corellia grid is complete, and most of the code is finished: the coder (hi) is finding it harder and harder to find things to do so he's been working on the wiki systems a lot.

As of now, it is no longer invite only but available for anyone to come check out.

The website is: http://www.starwars-insurgency.com/
The game is at: game.starwars-insurgency.com 1977

@surreality said in Crediting code, systems, etc.:

What responsibilities or courtesies do you think people have regarding crediting the original sources of major game content when they use it on a new game? (By major content, I primarily mean MUX code, game mechanics, wiki code, etc.)

Does this change based on whether credit is requested?

Does it change if the content is modified?

Does this change if the content is modified, and the modifier appears to claim full credit for the work?

(There's no horrible drama inspiring this one, so there's no need to sniff around for one.)

I think a mention in +help/+news credits would be nice.

It absolutely changes if credit is requested; if requested and you don't do it you're a bad person.

If the content is modified but still derived from someone elses work, credit is still due.

If someone derives work from someone else and claims full credit for the work, they are a douchebag.

Remember: Copyright attaches immediately when you put an expression into a fixed form (digital is fine). You don't have to register it, or mark it. You got it. Yeah, mushes are way less formal and we almost never worry about copyrights but that doesn't mean its not an actual factor.

CYA and giving credit is at least wise, even if not needed. (I don't care in the least on my code)