It's worth noting: this game is absolutely not following canon. It begins at the end of Episode IV, and we consider Rogue One canon, but everything that happens after players hit the grid will unfold according to plots people run and interests of players and actions of players.
We'll take inspiration from Episode V+, from the EU/Legends, but we are not scripting out the game going forward to match the canon that unfolds later.
@faraday said in Regarding administration on MSB:
I can't in good conscience invite them into a gaming community that is so darn toxic. And I'm not just talking about MSB here, because the same attitude that feeds the Hog Pit pervades the games too.
Its like we're in different worlds entirely. If I saw anything like the Hog Pit on a game I ran, I'd burn it to the ground, shut it down and leave it buried. I don't. I don't even kind of.
@bored said in Star Wars: Insurgency:
Took a look but honestly having FC characters makes it a very hard sell for me.
This is understandable. Some people won't do it: I don't really care, myself, because I have no interest in playing any Star Wars FC's.
The success rate for this on Star Wars games, in my personal experience, is a flat 0%. Especially picking a specific planet that isn't in any of the movies, I don't really understand the motivation.
Now this is less understandable to me: we wanted a planet with cities and jungles, where there's shipyards and miners. A diverse planet. The thing is, Star Wars doesn't present very many of those in the movies as options. There's Coruscant for the cities, but that's all it is: one gigantic city. There's Naboo, but it has Gungans and no. Other then that, what do you have? You have a couple jungle planets, a desert planet or two, an icy planet.
Corellia doesn't appear in the movies but it is elaborated in the EU, and really, we can define its setting pretty easily. Its cosmopolitan so we can run a planet-focused Insurgency type resistance, but its got wild spaces so we can tuck a rebel base off in the middle of a jungle, it is a Core World but with an independent streak so there's some good potential for tension between the Empire and the Rebels.
Heck, IMHO, even 'a single planet' is a huge scope for a game: basing a game over a whole galaxy seems like complete death to RP. While plots and events can take place all over Corellia (and the galaxy for that matter) via +temprooms and the like, the grid is Coronet City and the surroundings and that's where we intend 'most' RP to happen.
The motivation is to make it as easy as possible to log on and find RP without having to jump through hoops: if everyone's relatively nearby then its not super weird to have a Cantina scene, or have a random gunfight as an ISB team raids a rebel warehouse.
@faraday said in Regarding administration on MSB:
@ixokai said in Regarding administration on MSB:
You're painting with a broad brush and assuming that because there is a dark place (MSB's HOg Pit) and a subset of users snark there, there is a culture of negativity everywhere.
I didn't mean to say everywhere. But I have absolutely seen people leave games or start avoiding other players on games based on the negative stuff that goes on here. If you haven't experienced that, I'm glad for you. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
... Sure, that happens, because PEOPLE.
People have personality conflicts.
They have misunderstandings.
And yes, some games do get these negative auras that drive people away. I'm not denying it.
I'm saying it isn't all games, and can't be assumed to be the case. I don't even think its the USUAL case.
But it varies.
Staff has a lot (though they don't control it entirely) to say when it comes to the kind of culture a game has.
I've been on games that burned up from the inside out due to culture; and I've been on games which never had a serious drama. It just doesn't "pervade the games too", the MSB Hog Pit/WORA/SWOFA negativity.
That doesn't mean no one has a negative experience. But I deny this pervading negative aura that lays heavy over the hobby.
@faraday said in Regarding administration on MSB:
@ixokai said in Regarding administration on MSB:
That doesn't mean no one has a negative experience. But I deny this pervading negative aura that lays heavy over the hobby.
That's fine. I'm not on a crusade to convince you otherwise. But I'm entitled to my opinion based on my experiences as much as you are. There's a reason I only run co-op, niche, borderline-sandbox games.
God, I hate this response. "I'm entitled to my opinion." It suggests, passive-aggressively, that someone suggested you aren't. "That's your experience, but mine is different", again, suggests, passive-aggressively, that someone stating THEIR experience was declaring yours was invalid.
People expressing different views is communication.
EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN EXPERIENCE.
Sharing experiences is COMMUNICATION.
When someone feels a need to be entitled to their opinion, what I hear is: I'm entitled to my own facts.
If it were just an opinion, there'd be no need to state it (EDIT TO ADD: that it is their enshrined, unapproachable opinion). In any discussion its automatically assumed everyone has their own opinions. Isn't that what discussion is? I express, you express, we debate.
"I'm entitled to my own opinion" is this steel wall put out which has this implication right next to it: "and thus you challenging it are wrong to do so. Discussion over.".
Or I'm an idiot, quite likely. But that's what I hear to those words.
@surreality said in Reasons why you quit a game...:
Re: professionalism, it depends on what someone means by it, IMO.
To some, this means civility.
To a smaller some, this means the customer service mentality of 'the customer is always right' + 'I am free to be abusive to a customer service representative and they have to sit there smiling through it'.
I'm down with casual (read: not super formal/detached/distant) conversation in which everyone recognizes that everyone in said conversation is a person worthy of respect and the benefit of the doubt regardless of their position or role on the game. I am not down with the 'free to be abusive to' interpretation, but that also goes in all directions, as that's not acceptable from player -> staffer, staffer -> player, staffer -> staffer, or player -> player, so far as I'm concerned.
To me, professionalism is:
I don't buy into the whole 'the customer is always right, you have to take abuse everywhere' part of it that some retail type professionals have to deal with.
Staff are people and deserve to be treated respectfully, same as any player, and anyone being abusive towards them should be booted from the game, same as anyone being abusive towards someone else.
BUT. Staff should not feel free to snark, to bitch, to belittle, to answer jobs of their own or their close rp partners, to just ignore jobs until they turn red and then send off an idle comment that just resets the timing of a real response, should not take an attitude of speaking down to players, ... and so on.
@arkandel said in The trappings of posing:
@ixokai said in The trappings of posing:
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'.
How about "Jane smiles warmly to Bob. That's something she never does, but the Prince's downfall made her day, not that she'd ever admit it to anyone of course."
It gives you some information Jane wouldn't choose to share and which is difficult to guess from her body language alone unless the player makes it really overt later in the RP, but it also provides some context about what's going on in her head.
I'm not saying there's no other way to convey the same information if the player is crafty, but I find insights like that welcome in a scene if they don't get used too much to set the narrative, since they can't be responded to directly.
I don't mind that, as I consider that the 'directed entirely at oneself' -- its internal, not about other people. The commentary is about your own character, not about others. Its the 'commentary about other people they cant respond to' that is the kind of metaposing I find offensive.
@lithium said in The trappings of posing:
@ixokai What's even worse, is when people start paging you in character, as if you were your character... it's super creepy.
Oooooh yes. It's like, boundaries, people!
@bobotron said in Social 'Combat': the hill I will die on (because I took 0 things for physical combat):
Let's leave aside 'completely ridiculous argument' because I don't think anyone is going to reasonably argue that 'Hey baby, wanna fuck? +roll' is a valid instigator for Social Conflict.
Let's not.
Because the reason I dislike PVP Social Combat is because I have seen, repeatedly, that. Slightly different words, nothing more substantial then a single pose of a few words and someone rolling a social stat and demanding my character react accordingly.
Its not even infrequent. Maybe its not seduction, maybe its manipulation. You raise completely nonsensical arguments about how people believe these vast conspiracies and crazy things, which are true, but we believe those things because of extremely long, dedicated efforts to convince people of an unreality.
It took Fox News years to convince people that facts weren't facts; and now that they have, they're suffering from not being facts too. But it doesn't happen in just a roll.
You are missing the key point.
If someone wants to back up a convincing argument with a roll, I'm fully willing to take into account that roll, but its not an absolute. If my character agency and his particular nuances are not a factor in outcome, only rolls, in his behavior, then whatever. You can argue all you want, we'll never agree; your game has no interest with me.
Social is more nuanced then 'can aim and fire a gun'. Social involves a lot of particulars. I've had more then one woman or utterly incompatible character try to seduce a gay character of mine in the past: I'm not joking, not making euphemisms. I've had a lady roll seduction on my queer ass.
History matters, in social. How you grew up. The particulars of what makes you angry, not; safe, not. A gun is a really simple thing. You aim it and shoot it and someone else dodges or armor takes it. Comparing Social to Combat is, frankly, daft, in my opinion.
But that doesn't mean social isn't important. Its just not important in some games: particularly, PVP heavy games. I personally prefer strongly to play PVE type games, where social is a thing you target at NPCS, and where even combat is actually rare to target other PCs.
@jennkryst said in What's missing in MUSHdom?:
@ixokai [Place] with a proper HSpace-esque flight simulator. Spelljammer is at the top of my list, but others are potentially neat.
Man, I have no idea why anyone would want that. The idea of a text based player-skill based flight simulator is anathema to me. The whole HSpace thing is a black box of ugh to me 
@firepuff said in Travel Times - Enforced?:
Some of my best RP has been "enroute" somewhere. It's okay to RP being bored and throwing a ball at the wall. It's okay to RP that your rump hurts sitting on top of that horse and whine to someone that you want to rest for a bit. It's okay to get caught up by random bandits/pirates/whatnot enroute. It's okay to RP random gossip along the way.
Think Lord of the Rings. Can you imagine how short those books would have been with instant travel? How much adventure would have been lost along the way?
I don't think anyone is arguing that "enroute RP" is a problem or can't be fun.
The problem is that at any given time, if I say, "Anyone wanna RP?" its because I want to RP. In a game set in a city, my possible RP partners are for all intents and purposes everyone.
If I'm on a ship which is enroute to Mars then my possible RP partners are only those people on the ship. That's vastly smaller; unless we all have exactly the same predictable schedule there's a very good chance I'm not going to RP being bored, I'm going to just be bored and not RP. And on any decent sized game, there's a good chance someone else might have RP'd with me.
IMHO & IME, mushes just don't work unless they are set in a fairly localized space. You can do plots to run off in far distances, and for all that plots are important, the meat and potatoes of what happens on a mush is more casual, unplanned RP. That's not really viable with travel times in a large setting. The travel times actively mean you can't RP with a significant portion of your playerbase.
For me I'm too attached to characters to do short-term mu's. Its not that it can't work, but its not an event or story that makes me interested, but the development between stories.
I'll play just to see evennia in action.
Yeah, on mediawiki sites I always do manual creation of accounts.
That said, its primarily because I've never heard of QuestyCaptcha before. I'd use that and have a command in game that's available only once approved, you type +wiki/password and get a password you enter into there. (This is basically what I do for wikidot wiki's)
On the one hand, I get what you're saying. I am usually the guy arguing against game dividing playerbase, where 'dividing' can be 'covering a so large a space that moving from spot to spot is an issue' or to faction level division where A and B can't reasonably RP.
BUT.
On the other hand, if I'm gonna play TOR, I want to play an Intelligence officer or a struggling-with-lightside Sith. Saying Repubs/Indies only just completely makes me not interested.
But that's me being entirely selfish in my interests, granted.
Also recently read, the Demon Cycle (first book: The Warded Man) by Peter Brett, and I quite liked it a lot. It's about a sort of post-apocalyptic fantasy world where every night demons manifest and try to eat everyone. A rough sort of civilization has managed to survive, just barely.
Very interesting magic system, good characters and cultures. It's got a good mix of action, character growth and diverse groups of people with different agendas all while hell is rising nightly.
@lotherio said in FCs on Comic MUs:
OCs are not bad, but do believe some folks feel they are a catch all with some players aiming them to be better than FCs and a way to showoff, or they are some attempt to be super versatile in an ingenious way so as to be nearly unbeatable somehow.
I've heard this complaint about OC's before, that people will use them to be "better then FC"'s, and on my vast experience playing/staffing on one comic game in my whole life,... have seen it maybe once.
This might be an app-standards issue? Being an OC isn't a license to do anything you want and throw together a random grab bag of nonsensical powers without limits or flaws.
But we also have a rule that "anything a FC can do an OC can do" and that FC's don't have primacy or win-in-their-role privileges.
We do expect an OC to sort of make sense, in their powerset, though 'sense' can vary by story of the character. (It doesn't have to completely make sense, a pyrokinetic who happens to have one other oddball trait might be fine, where a range of unrelated stuff is not) -- That can't be said to be true for all FC's out there, unfortunately.
In like TWO DAYS the latest installment of the Brent Weeks Lightbringer series is being released and I'm seriously loving these books. An interesting, unique magic system, compelling characters (men, women, and one of the main characters isn't your typical hero), and fun writing.
The first book is The Black Prism.
Pure OC is cool; 30-40's is not a setting I'm even remotely interested in.
ALSO.
The dragon vs giant fight.
I just stood there and stared and stared and stared until it was finished.
Totally scripted but still it was a Moment.
@lotherio said in FCs on Comic MUs:
For me, there are so many takes on an FC that most end up being OC that looks like and has power set of the FC. Why not just make an OC game and do that?
Because people want to play Captain America. Its a sort of adult make believe, running around playing our favorite heros.
Personally I would just like more original theme Mu*s.
This I can agree with fo' sho'.