Am I a complete monster to want to ask: who are you? I can't find an insomnia's playlist page. That might entirely be a 'its almost 7am and you are awake on a saturday' failure, admittedly.
Absent that, I dunno. This charity sounds good. I like charities. I give a lot. But like...I've never heard of this, though googling seems to indicate its real, but maybe some like... personal story? Sell the story?
I accept "ixokai is a monster" as an outcome for asking.
@sparks said in Mutant Genesis (X-Men):
@bored said in Mutant Genesis (X-Men):
Oh, I guess you could be Jubilee! Hooray!
As someone who has played Jubilee more than once before, I have to just chime in with an obligatory, "Why does everyone say my name like it means 'shut up'?"
Because while I know you don't suck, I'm sorry, but, Jubilee has a weird attraction to those that do more then suck, but suck badly and with intensity.
Jubilee was my first ban on m1963. She was the second Jubilee. The first, was only just not banned, and by a small margin.
Jubilee calls to the crazy. Its not that all Jubes are crazy, at all; I'd never judge a character based on this history. Buuuuuut.
History says: Jubilee are cray, yo.
I'm iffy on a teenager but am going to give it a shot.
@caryatid What's the difference between:
They're still asking for the exact same thing. They just didn't post an address to do it with a command in-game.
@ghost Oh, right. To be clear: I've no issues with this game's pitching process. At all. It seems entirely reasonable.
@arkandel said in Mutant Genesis (X-Men):
@ixokai Fair enough. And without knowing what The 100's cookies are, I kinda get the vibe it's one of those systems I always thought typically turned out to be massive circle jerks.
The 100 was FS3, and cookies were basically 'votes that grant at most "luck" and so benefit in a moment but no lasting benefit'.
It was fairly benign, but the pressure was... unpleasant.
To me, at least.
Yeah, when my guy was top five, I had a moment of YEAH! But when I wasn't... not. I don't find feeling either feelings on a mush is positive. This competitive drive to rank takes away, IMHO, from what is really important. Having a meaningful impact to the people around you.
About applications and MG specifically, I think it could be useful to staff not to see if a player is "good enough for a character but rather to ensure they can roleplay their way out of a paper bag. Some iffy players can be avoided, yet I imagine if Magneto or someone others should be gravitating around is a terrible player then it can have an impact on the MU* as a whole.
This is a hard question. I would be deeply adverse to any kind of audition-- the very idea of an audition places one into a position of judgment and earning, on the spot (and this is important to what bugs me), approval in a moment.
That said, I do get the idea that you want a <important character 'A'> who doesn't suck. I think Mutant Genesis has a good balance here. There's no audition, no situation where you Prove Yourself, but you do gotta express an idea for how this character goes, their arc, and place in the world. But it feels more informal then an audition.
Maybe it ends up with an A who isn't any good in actual play, but what can you do? I don't think auditions prove good A's either. A good A makes RP better for everyone around them. You can't determine that in isolation.
@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.
@tangent said in Mutant Genesis (X-Men):
@ixokai my lone experience with an audition was a really good one. It forced me to really think about how I was going to use dialogue and how to show my character's style. That pressure was really good for me, but obviously that is different for everyone.
Even though the game didn't work out for me, the character (Gambit for X-men) is still one of my go to characters years later.
Really? Huh. I have a visceral aversion to anything like an audition, that goes back to a WOD game years and years ago, and how it just made me feel like crap. To me it sets the entire tone of the player-staff relationship as one of hostility and judgement.
BUT sorry I should really let this go and not keep derailing the thread 
@bobotron said in Mutant Genesis (X-Men):
@ixokai
That's ultimately what an audition (at least in my history of them) was. I guess 'interview' is a better word. On M3 and Megaman X and BWTMet, we'd have them talk about their application and their views of the character and integration, and often do an 'RP scene' to see what kind of handle they would have on the character in a particular situation.
Yeah, see, right up until its an audition is fine -- it's that audition part that I find unacceptable. I don't immediately get a characters voice right away, it takes some time to fit in. The idea of sitting in and trying to get invested into a character to prove my RP or my take on the character in some 'RP scene' to be judged worthy or not? Nope! Nope nope nope.
@bobotron said in Mutant Genesis (X-Men):
@tempest
Ahh, I see. That's where our disconnect is coming from. That's different from the last couple of comic MU*s I played on, where you did an email app and staff created the PC bit for you and if multiople people can through they adjudicated the 'passing' apps via a secondary (usually audition) process.
I can't imagine 'auditioning' for a character. The moment someone asked I'd blink slowly and say: yeah, go screw yourself.
What MG asked for, what your 'take' on a character would be and such, that seems reasonable to me.
I agree completely; the last game I used a multidescer on was CDI (a million years ago), where I used it because everyone used it, but as I hate writing descs and having like... three outfits, after CDI, I got into the habit of posing my outfit on entry to a scene.
And I promptly stopped using multidescers, which directly led me to fall out of the habit of writing decent descs, and lately, I ... admit I have a character with a url for a desc. Most of my people have descs, but this one I just wasn't feeling it during chargen... and after I was like... never got around to it.
I feel the shame of this, yes.
@templari said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:
For the most part, it's just simpler to keep it all in game. Oh, and well, less bots posting dumb shit on a MU*, unlike wiki's.
I've never seen a game wiki where user-registration wasn't locked down. Either they use mediawiki, and usually don't allow user creation (instead, in game you +request to get an account), or they use wikidot and require manual invitation or have a password provided in-game required to join the wiki.
As for the rest... Nothing is secret? People put secrets on their wiki?
Its true no one looks at descs anymore, though.
@faraday said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:
For example, Ares has a
whois <name>command that tells you their full name (including rank and callsign) and lets you look people up by first name, last name, or callsign. 90% of the time you don't need the whole spammy finger-style profile, it's just the clunky way we've gotten used to for figuring out "who is this person again?".
steals idea
@tempest said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:
IDK how people RP on phone.
Me neither, but I know quite a few people do. Also from their iPads.
Everything needed to play the game should be available in the game.
For one thing, a not insignificant number of people find making wiki-markup 'work' impossible. They look at wiki, and their eyes just glaze over and they give into despair. For that reason alone, wiki's should be optional.
For another, I don't want to need to alt-tab all the time to play the game. If I'm running a plot I don't want to have to open five windows to see what the characters are capable of doing: @Tempest's example of Superman is flawed. There's LOTS of FC's that are obscure or have nuanced power levels depending on when/where in their arc they are, and I'm just not really familiar with most.
@ganymede said in X-Men Utopia MUX:
@ixokai said in X-Men Utopia MUX:
On m1963, you make your sheet in game, and it gets automatically converted and put on the wiki (unless you make super weird formatting) for you on approval.
I know. I'm on your game.
What I meant was: it would be neat if all you had to do was make a wiki page. You know, just do that, and bamph, character. But, yes, I understand that people have misgivings about doing anything on a wiki.
I totally get what you're saying.
What I'm saying is that just getting someone to log into a wiki is a challenge.
The number of people who righteously detest any ask that I put out there that they even know there's a wiki at all, is quite high.
So, the idea to me, that all one has to do is make a wiki page, is apping? Its like as far as I can see it, its not just a step backwards (in the 'easy' department), but it'd be actively rebelled against.
Some of us find making wikis super easy, but that doesn't come close to approaching most, as far as I can tell.
@ganymede said in X-Men Utopia MUX:
It would be neat if the application to make a PC were just to make up the wiki with a sheet on it.
On m1963, you make your sheet in game, and it gets automatically converted and put on the wiki (unless you make super weird formatting) for you on approval.
Considering how many players freak out over having to do anything at all on the wiki, I consider your idea a nonstarter, personally.
I think any game which makes 'requires ability to format in wiki-text' a requirement to play is losing a not-insignificant number of players.
For some people its easy and natural and they have no problem. For quite a few, just getting an account seems to cause a panic attack. And for more then a few, having to do anything off-game is deeply unpleasant.
@gamerngeek said in X-Men Utopia MUX:
@ixokai Not really. If I wanted to play a Year One Batman, I link to a good Batman wiki writeup (there are lots), and type &differences me=As per link, but cutoff at Year 1. Also, his Robin is Jason Todd, not Dick Grayson.
Done. Finis. Asking for any more is really redundant busywork. Asking people to write up skills and powers is just that. We all know what skills Batman has. We all know what skills Peter Parker has. We know what powers Superman has. And if we didn't, somehow, we click the wiki link and read, same as we would +sheet, except without all the rigamarole.
I look at Marvel wikia pages constantly, due to handling apps. And they are simply not written in a way that clearly shows what powers someone has at a certain point of their development.
@gamerngeek said in X-Men Utopia MUX:
@the-tree-of-woe said in X-Men Utopia MUX:
@ixokai It's not without its bugs. I'm mostly mulling ways you could get away from the traditional model of app-writing. It's ancient, and while it's still serviceable I can't help but feel like there's got to be a better way to handle it.
Honestly, there is. Just that most of the dinosaurs would never consider it. The answer is: get rid of applications. Your application becomes a link to a wiki with data about your character, like Comicvine or Wikipedia. You can write up a "Differences" paragraph, and go "My character is this, but X". Let's face it...we all KNOW these characters. Everyone on the planet knows Batman. And if someone is apping for Cannonball, odds are good that, yeah, they know Cannonball. What good does it do ANYONE to make people retype and regurgitate info we already know and which is easily available online. None. It's like the long apps of old. In a day when Wikipedia didn't exist, they maybe made some sense. Now? None.
ComicVine and wikia don't work really because characters have vastly different powers often depending on where they are in their story.
Not every character apps in at the top-tier of where they 'currently' are in their story.
Writing a 'Differences:' between if someone was playing a year-1-ish character would be essentially writing a whole app.
And ComicVine has history, but is terrible on details of abilities and skills and the like.
@zombiegenesis said in X-Men Utopia MUX:
If we could get everyone to write traits that succinct I'd be much less against trait apps. I've run games where I've been very explicit that BGs should be no more than 1 page length and I still got no end of ridiculous BGs. The issue is, that I've found, is that a lot of these appers have apps from ages ago that they just recycle.
To me the same can be said using FASERIP with this: Telekinesis RM
You can see that and a bunch of other traits with a simple +sheet command.
To be clear, I don't think either is wrong necessarily. Just different.
Oh yeah, I'm not against RPGs-or-stats.
In fact I usually prefer them: I like rolling, I like dice informed by stats (better even if situational modifiers can be taken into account) determining success.
Sorry, I was sorta derailing the thread. 