Posts made by Lisse24

@Taika Isn't that kind of the purpose of goals? (assuming you're using CoD). Players set their priority and what interests them and what they'd like to see happen. Although, not every goal needs STing...

@Darinelle @Sparks Can I ask how the focused thing is going for you both on Arx? One of the reasons that I left, probably the main one, was that I couldn't keep up with the main plot, but that plot was so all-encompassing, that I couldn't get people interested in what my char was doing either. In the end, it felt like I was just spinning wheels and the whole experience was pretty frustrating.

@Taika Basically they were a bit of information tied to a plot that a player had access to.

So, a player could type @clues and see all the @clues that they'd learn about in the past and reference them, and reread over the information when they needed to. The clues were also searchable and able to be shared. It really is a pretty neat system that adds a lot to plots and such.

@Arkandel Don't want to derail, but one of the things I really liked about Arx's @clue system is that getting an @clue is a reminder that Something Happened and you have something to work on.

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

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

I like plot, but I like subsequent consequences even more. A plot is fodder for scenes. Results are fodder for thinking and getting in tune with the actual goals of the game.

SOOOOO much this. I don't like plots that don't give the people involved in them some way to go RP about it. Not just in a "look what I did" way but also an "and this changed <these things about my world or my character or my understanding or life as we know it" plots. If the goal of a MU is roleplay, then plots should enhance and encourage RP. If you make your plots an end to themselves with nothing connected, then what's the difference between your plot and a repeatable daily quest in WOW?

Completely agree with @Darinelle and @Misadventure! Their answers are better than mine was!

Plus, I think this is what MUs do well. MUs allow for this type of RP where other formats don't and I think we should be leaning into that as a hobby.

I find that I'm enjoying myself when my character is meaningfully involved in a plot that makes progress/has a new development every 1-2 weeks.

Meaningfully involved: I mean that my character is making contributions to the outcome of the plot and not just sitting in on meetings/watching other people make decisions. I also separate out Big Battles where my character is just one of many and her contributions don't count. Court scenes don't count. Attending council meetings where my char is in My characters actions have to count.

A plot: Generally I mean one. One plot at a time. I'm a very linear person, I can't help it. I get stressed when I have to divide my attention between too many things, which is why I can generally only maintain one character on a game at a time. However, I have been able to maintain a personal development plot, along with a group plot, so it's not impossible, I just don't want to have too much shoved on me at once. Neither do I want to be sitting around twiddling my thumbs and feeling like I have nothing to do or no way to contribute. I've left games for both extremes. Heck, I've left a game for feeling both ways at the same time.
I have no preference about the scope of the plot. Big or small doesn't matter so much as the way that my character affects it and the way that it affects my character (See above).

Progress every 1-2 weeks: Pacing is hard. Something needs to happen regularly so that you keep investment and feel like things are moving forward. However, if things progress too quickly, you don't have time to RP about it and make good decisions. For me, personally, I've found one development every 1-2 weeks to be the sweet spot where I regularly have something new to share, but don't start feeling overwhelmed. Of course, this varies. If my char is pulled out of all RP while the plot is going on, I want developments more often. If the next step requires a lot of thought and planning, slowing down or breaking into smaller chunks is preferable (This is why I appreciated Firan's Res-day system, even if I didn't always like the resolutions).

This of course, is just what I prefer. It doesn't quite answer what you were asking, but I hope it's helpful!

I'm sure chicken and waffles are perfectly fine, but if you're going for a good southern breakfast, nothing beats properly made biscuits and gravy.

WTH? How is this the time for that?

https://twitter.com/PolkCoSheriff/status/905438240278278144

@WTFE said in The Metaplot:

No, the problem is when staff makes a metaplot so intrusive you can't escape it. And, indeed, when you try to escape it or avoid it they go out of their way to make sure that the plot follows you around.

Example from a pathological MU*: Castle Marrach. There was once a metaplot on that. (It withered on the vine for many reasons, but in my time there it was active. If you want to call what was happening "action".) At one point in the metaplot, the consort of the queen (whose name I've forgotten because it doesn't fucking matter), who was somewhat of a weather mage, got into a foul mood and it got reflected in the weather. Players were expected to jump through the hoops to find out why Lord Foulweather (not his real name, duh!) was upset and do something to soothe him. Since, however, most people didn't even really know Lord Foulweather existed, and those who knew he existed knew next to nothing about him besides that, this plot was met with a joint, loud yawn from everybody except the five players who routinely got plot bones handed to them to gnaw on. (And who were actually in a position IC where they could even go to where plot-fu was happening.) The rest just ignored the occasional weather emits.

This is actually my problem with metaplot, in how they're most often used to describe happenings on a game - they're inaccessible. They usually deal with high-end powers and politics that only a few get to interact with on a meaningful level. It's not really fun sitting on the sidelines and watching the same 5-10 chars do all the things. This is why I'm not really fond of hierarchical power structures on games, because everything naturally flows upwards and very few things flow back down again.

I'm all for creating a continuous and interconnected world where players actions matter, however I believe that plot should be driven from the ground up, and derive from how players interact with the world and complications set in front of them, rather than the top down.

In which I add another char and attempt the feat of juggling two active PCs at once!

@Wizz Yup, that's my gripe with it. It skipped the step where we thought the Stark children could work together, but were in doubt over whether they would or not.

@Tinuviel Pretty much everyone is agreed, but it's one of the ways the two parties maintain their power and keep a third party from forming, so it's not going to change any time soon

@WTFE said in RL Anger:

You don't have to apologize for the actions of others. I'm just explaining to you why it is that Christians have such a bad name among non-Christians these days. Weirdly enough, I don't actually hate Christians (and I tend to tear capital-A Atheists a new asshole when they're being obnoxious about their anti-Christian rants). But boy HOWDY am I gun-shy around a newly introduced one until I figure out where they stand on things.

And, inevitably, that is going to hurt some who don't deserve it.

The rift between the Christian community--especially its more vocal and "conservative" element (although it baffles me to this day what they think they're "conserving" with their foolishness!)--and the non-Christian community will take time and effort to close. And, while this may seem unfair (and could very well be), it will be the Christians taking the bulk of the effort for this wound to heal.

I think we're completely on the same page with this. Christians have definitely dug a hole for themselves, not because I think the conservative, fundamentalist elements are the majority of Christians, but we certainly were silent and let them spread their lies because they were our 'brothers.'

I think a lot of Christians, like me, realize that we need to take the first steps, and I know you don't see it, but there is a lot of good work being done. Yes, Rob Bell was shunned by the Evangelical community for a bit when he first made a stand, but they are slowly opening up and listening to him, as they are with the Gungors and people like Mike McHargue. It's encouraging that when I go to Goodreads and look at Popular Christian nonfiction, among the Lewis, Tozer, and Piper, there's also Don Miller. It helps that more theologically orthodox voices like Phil Vischer (the VeggieTales guy) and the people from Relevant and many Christian intellectuals are pointing to these voices and saying, "We need to do something."

So yes, we do hear you and we are listening, it may just not be reflected in the media that you're seeing yet.

@WTFE I'm so sorry that you had all of those experiences, and for the role that Christians played in them, I apologize to the extent that I'm able. My family and my church condemned such extremist and uncalled for measures in the 80's and I continue to do so now. I'm sorry you felt hated and judged and isolated, if I was present and could have stopped it, I like to believe that I would have. Please believe me, that I'm currently trying to do what I can to keep anyone from feeling that way in the future. I want to state unequivocally that the way you were treated was wrong and unChristlike and it should not have happened.

I do not expect sympathy for Christians crying oppression. They (We) are not oppressed.

I would like there to be understanding on both sides about why the opposite side feels the way that it does, so that, perhaps some years down the road, the hatred can stop and there can be healing.

@Aria Man, I hate to start something, but ...

I'm Christian.

I grew up in the Evangelical community, though in a very small, independent tradition, and not among the Baptist wave.

Although, I left my tradition for a mainline denomination, I'm currently attending a church of that same tradition again, because family.

I disagree a ton with what many Evangelicals preach and believe. I do not believe there is a war on Christians. I do not believe Christians should be able to legislate morality, BUT ...

The argument isn't that they're oppressed because they're no longer able to force their beliefs on people. The argument is that they're oppressed because they feel like they can no longer voice their beliefs outside of their own small circle without having half the country jump down their throat for their backwardness and hate. They feel like their not even given the chance to truly explain what they believe or how it differs from more extreme fundamentalists like Westboro Baptist.

And given the amount of conditionals I felt necessary to put at the beginning of this post to keep people from jumping down my throat, they maybe have a bit of a point ...

@tragedyjones Oh I'd love playing that.

@Arkandel said in Good TV:

GoT - no spoilers, just a bit of trivia I read last night!

Apparently Bronn and Cersei's actors contractually can't share a scene, since their actors went through a bad breakup iRL years earlier and they wrote that into their contracts that they can't share the screen.

Seeing your hated ex every day you go to work for years must be awkward!

That just makes me want details. How bad can a breakup be that you can't work with the guy for any amount of time even years later?

@Wizz said in High Fantasy:

I'd kinda like to see a MU* that is run more like a public OTT. Players can have bits that multiple characters are attached to and these characters are part of limited campaigns (as in, will end, characters get sent to that giant tavern in the sky) with scheduled scenes. "Downtime" rp is an option, but not incentivized or rewarded in any way - no weekly XP, no cookies or votes or whatever.

I mean...I'm not gonna do it but. XD

The thing is, though, I play on MUs because I like exploring characters and relationships. That is a type of RP that is done better on MUs than any other format, and your proposal basically says that's not real RP. If I want campaigns and constant action, I'll get together with my friends and do TT.

@WTFE said in Eliminating social stats:

I really don't give a shit. All the "Federalist Papers of RPGs" in the world doesn't change what literally thousands of years of literature has deemed to be a narrative. There is merit as a game to the "let the dice lie where they may" stance. But that merit is not a merit for narrative. Good narratives can emerge from that only by accident in the same way that getting a coherent and decent character out of a character generation system that will kill characters off part-way through can: blind luck.

And note, again, I'm not saying you're wrong for liking the "gamist" approach (as much as I fucking hate that clunky neologism). I'm saying you're wrong for thinking that the "gamist" approach made for a good narrative here. You're not doing wrongfun. You're just factually incorrect about the narrative structure.

Several times in this thread, I've heard people equate using dice as the enemy of creating narrative. I want to push back on that. I'm quoting WTFE just because this is one place where I've read that argument, but certainly, he's not the only person whose made that argument.

Here's the core of my argument: MUers are terrible writers. I don't mean that they're incapable of stringing together 3-5 sentences with vivid language in engaging poses. They can absolutely do that, by and large. No, what I mean is that, for the most part, they don't think long term about themes and beats, and what constructs a good narrative. Ex: "I'm going to have my character lose this conflict so that he can wallow for a bit and then have an awesome comeback," or "The story I'm telling with this character is one of alienation and loss and so, I want to sabotage his own attempt to become Priscus though his inability to connect."

Muers don't think that way. In general, I believe that there are two major stumbling blocks to MUers telling compelling narratives. 1) They don't like losing, and any good story has peaks and valleys. MUers avoid valleys at all costs. 2) They don't control everything. Sure, you can be telling a story of alienation, but that doesn't mean all the other chars are going to play along (I've run into this with my char over at F&L, where I had to rejigger my approach to her several times).

In these circumstances, adding random events, and letting a neutral arbiter, such as dice, determine the outcome periodically, even for social interactions, can enhance narrative. They help a player adhere to their character's nature, strengths, and weaknesses, while simultaneously adding challenges and random difficulty for that player to overcome. The knee-jerk, 'well let's just throw away social dice because players don't like losing that way,' will not enhance the narratives told on that game, it will diminish them.

I mean, yeah, if you approach every new player you meet with 'Hi. I'm Steve. What's your name?" It will be boring.

If you try to think up an intriguing situation, or if you create a character that is interesting to interact with. Also, I think this goes back to pacing in that having a meeting where you reveal, through your chars dialogue what the char is all about, yeah, that's boring. You don't even have to tell a char your PCs name. Yes, I am looking at you @Ganymede, Mr. Auf der Schmermerter.