Posts made by ixokai

@thenomain said in Changeling the Lost: 2nd Edition:

Here's another example: In Buffy (and later Angel), Angel is a mean-ass vampire who regains his soul and becomes all mopey and remorseful. Spike is a mean-ass vampire who regains his soul and then shrugs about it gets on with life.

I don't know why I'm doing this, but -- Spike getting his soul back made him batfucking crazy and deeply susceptible to the First Evil's manipulations. It tormented and haunted him.

Spike getting chipped which is what he was for most of his 'quasi-good-guy' phase was Spike being tormented by not being able to hurt people until he learned he could hurt demons, so then yes, went on with his life hurting the hell out of demons.

Things are a little weirder in Angel because it started out with Spike being kinda a ghost but this was only after him playing a pivotal role in a redemption arc which let him deal with the whole soul thing.

This nerd nitpick is coming to you courtesy of Ixokai, who should really make @Sunny a buffy game.

@sunnyj said in New Project?:

Werewolf, on the other hand, I feel lost all of its charm, and it hadn't much to begin with. It got TOO streamlined and 'neat'.

I don't follow Werewolf, I have PTSD from Anytown MUSH over werewolves, so.

That said.

EVERYONE I know or have heard from hates werewolf 1e. You're the first person in a long time I've heard like, oh, 2e? Blah, I miss 1e.

So I don't know, there's something about you here I'm not getting.

@rdc New Mummy doesn't really work on a MUSH. Its very, very ... driven. You start out at power stat 10 and have this GOAL in mind and have to go solve it. You solve it then go back to sleep. As time goes on you weaken as you continue to try to solve it, but if you fail? You go back to sleep. Not actually trying to solve it (say, casual RP) actually hurts your power stat too.

There's some really weird edge cases and hard HR's you could throw to turn it into something mushable, but it'd start looking very little alike what the book new Mummy is about.

And yeah its 1e. It was the book right before Demon which was the first game whose first release was part of the 2e ruleset-changes.

Okay, RDC, my long lost friend, your vote options are absolute ASS.

I want to play Demon so bad I would do literally anything. I would host, code, and pay you as game-god a monthly stipend. I mean not like a lot but hey, have some coffees. Then I would promise to say something nice about you every day. Plus other benefits. I don't even know what the benefits would be, I'm just expressing my pro-Demon stance here.

So I voted for the only option that included pro-Demon bias, Mage/Demon/Beast only in Washington. Though I have no particular interest in mage or beast in washington (or at all: beast seems tweaked, though I'm not opposed to it entirely, if I can play a Demon.)

But just saying, these options are ass. They largely do not let me say OMG YES DEMON in a way that is sensible.

FWIW, my loggers intentionally use &LOG-<#> obj attributes, exactly for the reason of not exploding the vattr table. It uses a lot of attributes but it reuses them from the last longest scene.

@ganymede said in Preferred App Process For Comic Game:

Relevant: how much time one has to devote to the game.

Relevant: when one regularly comes on to play.

You want staff to start approving characters based on RP schedules?!

As for possible 5E games, I was fully invested in coding and hosting one but the HW just... vanished one day after I squinted and expressed an opinion on a policy plan, so. Dunno otherwise.

@tempest said in New Games and Feature Characters...:

Edit : I will say, that for whatever reason, Comic MUers make the most RIDICULOUS fucking fuss about NEEDING alts. It's obnoxious, but the sad facts of MUing are "big who list = more players will stick around when they log on to look", and a lot of people will NOT hang around if they aren't allowed to squat on 3, 4, 5 characters. So you're shooting yourself in the foot twice on this one issue if you don't allow alts.

Crap I clicked wrong but to be clear I think this is stupid and absurd and in no way support it.

@salty-secrets said in New Games and Feature Characters...:

@ixokai If you asked me to make a MUSH and then told me my reward when the MUSH finally opens is to not be able to apply for a character at the same time as players, potentially not even getting a chance to try out for a character I really want to play... I wouldn't make the MUSH. That's just a really bad setup.

I agree there needs to be oversight so that staff doesn't first pick all the interesting characters, but surely there's a better way to do it than that.

You couldn't give players a three day headstart? You'd think that's asking too much of you?

You, as staff, are fundamentally advantaged. The moment it opens you are first past the post, guaranteed. No one else can claim that advantage.

You agree there needs to be oversight, though, but what does that MEAN? What oversight would be okay to you? Game is opening.

What do you do?

@thenomain said in Mux Logger Objects:

edit: I just caught the use. You didn't mean inline for the command queue, you meant to pull @command-based code from one attribute to another and still properly run it.

I do absolutely mean inline for the command queue-- I'm just operating from a Rhost POV which uses 'inline' extensively and with meaning.

The command queue is a series of actions, they are executed in order. Some things add entries to the command queue. @trigger. @dolist. @include is different in that it operates in the current command, it pulls actions into it-- its like a @Trigger that happens in the current command and doesn't queue a new action (like @trigger does). @include has a few other special properties, but I won't focus on them right now. But there's more. @dol/inline is a Rhostism that does a @dolist which doesn't add entries to the command queue-- they all happen inline.

In Rhost, "inline" means, "a thing that, historically, queued a new action to run later, but now runs right here and now in the current command running on the queue."

Consider, what's the difference between:

@dol [lattr(obj/foo.*)]={@pemit %#=[get(obj/##)]}

and

@eval [iter(lattr(obj/foo.*),pemit(%#,[get(obj/%i0)]))]

The former puts each pemit on the queue. There's generally a bit of a delay there. The latter does it all now.

Rhost has @dol/inline, which lets you use command-syntax and operations (including @assert and @break and @include), to do them right now in the same entry in the command queue.

So yeah, I do mean inline in the command queue in that its not queuing new commands, but my terminology was deeply colored by my largely being a Rhost coder.

@thenomain said in Mux Logger Objects:

@ashen-shugar

Sorry about that. So yea, with MUX you're pretty much SOL without recoding it all to be in-line

Why? I can't find the code Ix is using so I can't comment on it, and I don't know what @include does.

http://musoapbox.net/topic/1476/loggers/7

The rhost one, not the penn one.

But, what @include does is sort of like @trigger, but in the current command queue. So if I put some stuff in INC_FOO, if I then @include me/INC_FOO, it will execute the INC_FOO stuff exactly as if it was in the original attribute. Then continue on-- unless something aborted the command queue. Inside INC_FOO, it has access to the full state of the calling attribute.

I have a "Standard Library" on the games I code for. In it I have a lot of common stuff I don't want to repeat over and over. One common is, "is the calling player staff, if not, report error and abort":

&IS-STAFF %'std'=@assert isstaff(%#)={@include %'ui'/FAIL=%#,Permission denied.}
&FAIL %'ui'=@pemit %0=[ui-fail(%0,%1)]

Now in actual commands, I can then do this:

&cmd.set-stat obj=$+set <asterisk>/<asterisk>=<asterisk>:@include %'std'/IS-STAFF;....do stuff

Its not saving a lot (Except in more complex uses), but it does allow code-reuse.

A common thing in my code is for argument 0 to be a target, a player. So:

&FIND-TARGET %'std'=@assert t(setr(target,pmatch(%0)))={@include %'ui/FAIL=%#,I can't find anyone named: [ansi(hw,%0)]};

&cmd.set-stat obj=$+set <asterisk>/<asterisk>=<asterisk>:@include %'std'/IS-STAFF;@include %'std'/FIND-TARGET;&_cg.%1 %q<target>=%2;@include %'ui'/SUCC=%#,Blah blah it worked.

Actually, my problem was a typo when I relayed what needed to be set to the person with #1 access. I don't have access to the .conf; we're using #1's @startup instead.

Thanks though

In addition to not allowing more then one FC for some temporary period of time, I'd not allow staff to take any FC's for like... three days or a week or something. Staff have an inherent advantage in getting their favorites since they decide when the game starts. I'm not against staff playing at all, but "staff gets the best characters or special treatment" is a complaint I've seen.

@ashen-shugar No that wouldn't work at all. I use @include extensively for code-reuse purposes.

Ie, like:

&I.FIND-LOGGER lp=@assert setr(logger,locate(...))
&cmd.log-view lp=$+log/view *:@include me/I.FIND-LOGGER;@pemit %#=something with %q<logger>
&cmd.log-undo lp=$+log/undo =:@include me/I.FIND-LOGGER;

'trigger()' can't halt the queue of the calling command like @include can

@bobotron Yes there's a penn version.

http://musoapbox.net/topic/2363/mux-logger-objects

The Penn version lacks a couple features like +log/undo but that should be easy to add.

EDIT: Derp idiot moment

http://musoapbox.net/topic/1476/loggers/7

Mine actually doesn't work on MUX (the Rhost version heavily uses @include), though I'm going to make it work for HorrorMU soon. When I do I'll post an update to my logger thread and ping you to see if you haven't found something you like yet.

@valkyrie said in Horror MUX:

@botulism If you can get it to run, SceneSyS is great for logging/observing.

Yeah, nooo.

We'll have loggers like on m1963, though.

Actually this resolved itself though I'm not clear why.

That said, I can't @hook/before pose -- it says its not a valid command. Any clue?

@ominous We're like Dolls from Dollhouse. Or, an American Horror Story. Our Archetypes are people, kinda. And over time I'm going to enjoy most of all figuring out what parts of my character are really him and what is his programming, no matter the form. The Facility allows long term character growth.

Note that once a new story starts we do not remember anything of the old story. Its only during the interludes that we remember everything.

I almost exclusively code on Rhost, so every so often when I do something on MUX, sometimes I get a little lost.

I had #1 set hook_obj to an object my codewiz owns, but it doesn't seem to be running. Is this normal? I was surprised #1 was needed to set a @hook in the first place, does it also have to own the hook object itself? (I don't have #1 access and don't want to ask for it to do what I want to code here)