@Miss-Demeanor said in The 100: The Mush:
despite many of the PC's at the time being all for hunting down and raiding the Grounders and wanting revenge or retribution for so and so being captured or hurt by the Grounders.
Really? Because I wasn't around for the Adult PCs/Mountain Men storylines. But I was there for the initial grounder stuff. What I recall is everybody wanting to nut hug the Grounders, and sympathizing and excusing them every step of the way.
@Bug-In-A-Jar said in Downvotes:
@Kanye-Qwest It's no surprise that democracy is popular.
I thought the problem was that it wasn't popular.
@ThatGuyThere I fundamentally disagree with you over whether L & L games are about the marriage simulators; I think it's about pseudo-feudalistic worlds, whether far-future or far-past or whatever. I think what attracts the players is less about the marriage simulators than the settings. Which is not to say some players dont love matching up and playing the romance stories, but that's not the whole game or even the selling point. Its the default fallback option.
I haven't played on the game, but the Guest Star system doesn't sound like a terrible idea to me. There seems to be enough checks on the ways it could be abused, that it probably isn't going to be as long as those checks are enforced.
The best mass battle system I've come across is L5R. It both deals with the meta-battle, and allows the individuals to shine.
@somasatori This was what RfK did.
@HorrorHound That's kinda cool.
To prove my point about conflicting cultures (and thus, sadly, I don't think you'll ever please everybody @Kestrel):
@faraday said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:
Here are the etiquette suggestions from one of my games, but they are by no means universal:
- Ask before joining a scene in progress.
On not all games this is a thing, but if you want to be safe, you can always do it anyway. If I'm in a public room I expect people to join if they want to. I kind of want them to, since that's why I'm in a public rather than a private room.
- If someone asks to join a scene, try to find a way to work them in if you can.
Within reason. Gotta give to receive, and I know plenty of people who think you've got no right to expect any interaction even if you politely asked. Me, I like to include someone who does ask, who make themselves intractable.
- If you really want a private scene, use a TP room.
This is something I'd agree with, but it also runs directly counter to the idea you have to ask before joining a scene (asking means you can be denied, which means people can totally have private scenes anywhere they like.)
- Avoid 'lurking' to watch a scene that you are not a part of unless you know the people pretty well. It sometimes creeps folks out.
I do think this is a thing. On every game I've seen this.
- If you are speedwalking through a room with other players, a simple OOC "Just passing through!" is polite.
Is this a thing? Admittedly I often do say 'passing through', but sometimes I don't bother. I don't really care if someone else says it.
- Ask before posing logs containing sensitive/private IC information.
Oh god yes. But still something that not everybody does or thinks is necessary. I've learned this to my chagrin.
@Arkandel Seems more of a peeve to me.
To me its more of an indication of an entitlement culture. Again, it comes to back the fact that if you want to control your environment you do it in a private space. Otherwise, live with what happens, and if you can't accept the possibility of people joining then just don't go outside. The fifth person joining isn't really being that person in my opinion (and this even though I will often leave a scene that grows beyond 2-3 extra people), its rather on you. You had fun and you now no longer have fun with Mr 5th in the room? Do something about it. Take your fun out of the cafe and into a cab, and drive somewhere else IC. Make something out of it instead of complaining, or seething internally with resentment, or bitching about it in pages. I know people do that a lot.Occasionally I catch myself doing it, but I recognize that this is my issue.
While I usually play men, I occasionally play women.
The first time I did was an eye-opener, though. An asexual warrior with the focus meant to be on that aspect, with her just happening to be a woman. The shit that consistently ended up directed at me, without an ounce of solicitation, was horrifying. It certainly informed how I page people, because I don't want to be that person.
I kept going: Why, WHY would anyone think this was OK to page me?!
The problem with the Doors system, to whoever mentioned that, is that it was utterly in favor of the aggressor. With the amount of XP a regular character on a MU WOD game carries, they could fail like 5 percent of the time (not even talking about a fully stacked specialist who just couldn't fail.). Now in 2.0 they've added more defensive merits to try to balance things more, but even now it heavily favors the aggressor unless you've bought said merits. '
Which makes it a bad pvp system, unless you modify it.
ETA: How is this different from combat? If you start a fight you run a serious risk of losing. There's a puncher's chance of even a mediocre combat character giving you a bloody nose and some humiliation unless you're an absolute beast. And you know, there are risks and consequences of throwing your physical weight around, entirely unrelated to how it goes in the actual fight.
Social combat then shouldn't offer the same absolute success, the same visceral 'I win for completely' reward, because it doesn't come with the same 'I could totally lose completely' risk.
@Lisse24 I do like that investigation you can have active are limited. It was one of the things I was vocal about initially, in that it forces you to delegate issues down the command chain. One character just can't investigate and discover every damn clue out there, and so solve every problem.
Only being able to resolve one story issue at a time would also play into that. Basically anything that forces people in power to delegate is a good thing, in my experience.
At this point in the game the people who can shine are the ones who can dig into the lore of the world, and the ones who can be social. That leaves the explorers and the soldier types somewhat threading water for the time being. I'm sure other concepts, too.
But I do know that the whole dynamic exploration ideas is going to offer something to both sorts.
Of big battles, the important thing is that people feel they can in some way contribute. What it gives you isn't just the battles, though, its all the roleplay around where you can finally explore those sides of your character. Rather than taverning it up.
In this they're no different than other GM events, in that they provide so much extra opportunity to shake things up in your regular scenes.
Execution is the problem, more than concept. Most concepts can in some way or another be made cool, no matter how ridicilous it sounds on paper. Executing it is the problem, and most out there concepts just end up stupid because they weren't thought through beyond 'I want sexy + genious + kick ass marine'
I like PvP. I enjoy the competition and I enjoy the IC drama and excitement that comes from it. All games with politics, hierarchy, that have limited resources available, etc, are inherently going to be having some kind of PVP competition. I greatly prefer the games that are honest about it, and think about how to make the pvp enjoyable and meaningful.
Because the drama and resentment comes anyway.
All of that said, Villains vs Superheroes sounds like Camarilla Vs Sabbat. And I vehemently believe you should never pit the two together on the same game. The PvP within the Camarilla, or the PvP within the Sabbat opens up a million different story options because you're still ultimately on the same side even as you struggle and scheme for resources and authority and power and whatever. You can still stop and thump the common enemy. You still have to compromise, and those compromises are necessary rather than some odd staff fiat of 'well you can't mess with your arch enemy' or even worse 'go ahead and go nuclear' and watch the game flame out.
The only times I ever post logs, is if I need to to get xp. Otherwise I just don't.
I mean, it still requires the game to be good. But I started out rping on a web interface. I'd not mind returning to it.
@surreality I think most PVP on most games become a question of just pure pride, because you don't have to think of the larger implications. They're just sandboxes. The only real resolution comes with the pure nuclear option, since there's no meaningful exchange short of that. You talk shit and stew in your cliques, and then it boils over until you go nuclear. You don't walk through all the stages that should come first, because they don't exist.
@Arkandel This is my impression as well. People will play on dynamic games with lots of ups and downs, if you're upfront about it and show them that losing can still mean winning down the road. But few people like investing in a character only to have them gone. With the loss of a character comes loss of that character's network and story.
