Best posts made by Lotherio

It all goes back to what Faraday said:

These days my policy is just "run what you want, just don't wreck the theme."

I ran stuff on one of @Seraphim73 's places nearly weekly for a few friends that had zero impact on theme and their meta but kept me and a few daytime folks having fun. Zainy Indian Jones Scientist vs Scientist mayhem and all that it was, probably measurable damage amounts on the scale of some places but barely a breeze in comparison to their scale.

Don't wreck theme, words to live by.

What @Arkandel said there. The reason submissions and tracking may deter from helping find RP. On most games I get into, I do put in the, if it doesn't break theme, feel free to run wild. Someone asked about tracking too. I don't want to track as staff minor things like what happened to Villain X. Four to five years back, I found comic place that used the 'if you don't break theme' policy too, and didn't want to track villains (literally, because super heroes and lots out there), so they had a table on their wiki that had every villain that came up in a scene. Folks could add a line with the current status (escaped, in jail, on the run, etc.) as they used them.

I updated the wiki to allow folks to add lines of history to villains, just a click 'new page', fill in infobox stuff (last scene:New York City; What: Fighting Team Orion in Financial District; Outcome: Escaped after destroying benches and sculptures in a park). Literally two seconds to even code it, two seconds to add an entry. No reason to +request a plot to fight a villain, or submit anything afterwards.

Most places use wikis these days. Its handy to track information and meta across all parties. I like open wikis, not a fan of completely locked down wikis with only staff control. I like to build it so players can easily add things they want; places, NPCs, events, plots, etc. A Mu* is a joint effort, in my view, between staff and players, to make the stories.

@Arkandel said in Finding roleplay:

TL:DR ....

This stuff should be boosted any way possible - because if on that critical moment they even think 'well, man, I need to run this by the sphere people first, should I make a +job?' it might never happen, and that's a damn shame.

I can't two upvote a post with my thumbs, but yes, both ...

I am curious on player expectations going to a new game.

I've seen it in a few threads. Some of the constructive comments are for staff of said place to run more plots and events for players. Others are that there is too much control and little for players to do on their own.

Taking for granted there is no sweat spot between just enough staff run meta with just enough room players to run what they like ... what do folks look for at a new place when considering how much they want to invest in developing a character?

I believe in a combination of both, meta that doesn't require a ton of player involvement from day to day, but that players can jump into at their leisure when they can be on. Meta that isn't so earth shattering that everyone has to stop their storylines to at least address how they would respond to the mu*-wide plot.

As well, I believe players should have freedom to go out and do their own stories without jumping through too many hoops. This seems popular on supers places, practically a requirement. We can call it sandboxing if folks prefer, just I think the mu* should in part be the sandbox, not the TP rooms only; anything shy of changing the sandbox.

I prefer on the fly impromptu over heavily planning the meta as well, so it can be influenced by the players and their decisions as it develops. I don't plan a series of events for them to participate in, I put up a few npcs (groups and individuals) and potential obstacles (other potential environmental concerns) and establish something is happening (murder plot, take over the underworld faction, strong arm someone, open the gates of hell portal, whatever), and let them go about it as they may after interacting with a group to learn something is happening.

Just lately, there were a couple threads that suggest staff should be driving nearly everything but near the end of the Multiverse thread, one person noted the trend towards all the planning/time scheduling that is more and more common is sort of killing the impromptu nature that made it fun to begin with.

TL;DR: What is better, staff controlled meta or player run driven plots, with impromptu being viable vs all the scheduling that seems to go into plots these days (as suggested and pointed out by many)?

I'm honestly curious what folks tend to prefer and if I need to change my ways these days to try to account for what the trends might be.

@Apos said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:

And in direct contrast to that, a lot of RPI's try to code everything and limit characters just to that code only, and force characters into narrow decisions that don't really fit what a character would do, removing decisions from players.

I think this is the biggest negative for me in RPI Muds. You show up first time on the grid and are forced to RP being naked because you forgot to type 'wear all' or something. For being RP 'intensive' its already a negative because it ignores character knowledge as opposed to player knowledge and the character would probably be dressed even if the player doesn't now how to wear clothes or get stuff from the newbie dispenser. I prefer my muds with less RP and more grinding.

And you already addressed this when you pointed out no one will be shouting at new players for being naked in public.

Hope your crossover project is successful, sounds like a lot of work melding two potentially drastic cultures in regards to what constitutes 'RPI' and what it means; assuming you're trying to draw in Mud folks towards the free form or mush versus reliance on full code to account for everything.

@Thenomain said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

@Ominous said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

@Thenomain said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

A single room can have multiple scenes in it, and it happens all the time. They are interlinked by proximity, but nobody is throwing you out of a room by saying they're not willing to include you in their interactions. There's no reason to be a jerk because you feel slighted. There's certainly no reason to feel slighted.

I am referring to people who have told me before "No, you can't be in here at all," when they are RPing in a public room. It's incredibly rare, but it has happened.

Oh, then yes. I don't read "ask before joining a scene" to be the same as "the room belongs to those in it", but I'd agree that those people who want ownership of a room should be smacked. Anyone who enters an existing scene and ignores the situation also need smacked. While there's no call for telling someone to scram from a room, I'd say that first come first scene-set too.

I think we're agreeing.

I think bubbling has been touched on enough (the right to the scene set), and the ooc watching as creepy has been mentioned. There is another smaller reason for why a room may be closed off and this may be culture clash.

Most L&L games I've been on since the 90s have been utilitarian in grid structure. Enough to offer variety in scenes but not enough to make the grid 'cluttered'. You get one 'inn' one 'castle court' and a few other public areas. Where as, even in the 90s, WoD emulated a city grid, with different sections. You get choice of restaurants, choice of venues, and its modern, you get more variety in the numerous types of venues thrown onto a grid. In L&L in the 90s, there weren't many TP rooms or private rooms then, it was one lounge and the grid (and if you had two 'bars', one was high class, one was the dive).

So folks did feel a sense of ownership to a room, if they needed the only 'alley' on the grid for their scene. The mentality needs to shift, I agree , to using TP rooms or sandboxing the location from somewhere more private if it really goes to bubbling or there really is a legit reason for no more players.

The scene could of have divulged to some sort of conflict and it really is closed off, because they don't need another individual coming into the scene to 'solve' the problem that the other four people already in the scene have been embroiled in for two hours. There are other reasons the group playing at the location is unapproachable, from filling a table (miss places code on places that don't use it) and being secretive, to off in the back office and the place doesn't come with one.

Argumentatively, they can take it to a TP room as its gone private, and probably should. Just there may be a reason its closed despite being public. Even some staff still hold out with using the grid for play, and saving TP for places just not on the grid at all. The scene probably did start public, and they want to encourage use of the grid.

And as others have mentioned, some folks can only manage 3-4 in a scene. Another person shows up and one has to leave due to size. This is similarly asinine; forcing someone continually out of public RP because you want to join a group. There is a secondary issue with this as on a lot of places with big groups, there is a habit for folks to come to big rooms just to get votes, another issue all together (but something on the cultural differences of MUD vs MUSH - joining big scenes for some bonus/xp/etc).

Its just polite to ask, and if their reason is they just don't want you in the scene, they're asses. But the may have a legitimate reason. One or two players can only manage 3-4 players. Who knows they may be leaving soon anyway and they'll ask you to wait or let you know this. Or it may be bubbled. Hell, if you really need that one public room for whatever you have in mind when they say this, you can ask them to take it to private if there is really no more room. If they were private and didn't move, they'd be the asses in that case..

This turns the issue around a little. Do you really need that room, or just want to join a big scene - which is another discussion aside from courtesy in asking to join a public room.

@Kanye-Qwest said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

@lordbelh said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

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.

+1 +1 +1

How about - roleplay? It's very easy to dismiss and then ignore people being disruptive for the hell of it - you know, the guy who runs in and collapses in a bloody heap at a table of strangers just trying to have coffee. And if you do it IC, then you are refusing to let it disrupt your scene and that is zen and good.

Dealing with snowflakes is a different discussion than courtesy of asking to join a scene.

And if it's someone just posing in to see who bites and feels like interacting, do or don't, but again, it doesn't have to disrupt anything or be taken OOC.

Wouldn't it save this person 20 minutes of time of going to a scene, waiting for a couple poses to see what's going on, pose to see if anyone bites and not getting any reaction if they would of just paged the group in public to see if there was room for another. They could page back, we're sort of in a private conversation, or there is room for another, or one or two could say the third is leaving soon, give them 10 minutes and they'll be open for anything. With limited time, even if I felt I can manage a big scene, I'd rather ask and make sure I'll get a bite for my RP instead of go and just be ignored.

Jumping into a room is as much an assumption as the room ownership. A few pages could of avoided all that.

Point to the ongoing topic of why OOCly people make sure things are square OOCly, this difference of opinion right here - assumptions on either side, leads to another head on the drama hydra (eviscerating spiral).

@lordbelh said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

@Lotherio said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

Exactly why folks are saying it helps to ask first?

No, people are saying its polite to ask first, thus implying entitlement and control over a grid space, and the right to tell you no. That it might be smart to ask first isn't something I'd argue against. I sometimes do, I often don't, but again I'm willing to live with the consequences, which might be Vampire X and Vampire Y looking at me, looking at each other, then leaving for a more private location.

3 posts and that was that scene. Yet.. it was still a form of interaction.

Circular logic. Polite to ask first is wrong, smart to ask first is right.

You mentioned you leave scenes if they get too big. Most places I've staffed at, I've been approached by the friends of people like that and asked to do so something about the problem of big scenes, such as making it policy to ask to join a scene first, because they're sad their friend is always leaving public scenes. I'll never make that a policy at any place I'm running. But, its still polite to ask first, and if the room is closed without any good reason, I do believe they should be asked to go private (reminded to at least).

@Kestrel said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

It is a lot easier to be a Mary-Sue on a MUSH, because if you don't want to, you never have to expose yourself to anyone who would rain on your parade.

True, like those who would claim ownership of a public place, you learn to avoid these.

The wish fulfillment, true. On a mud you get what you find, or someone gives you. You don't get to play something cool out of the gate. On a Mush, if you apped it you got it, a cool sword, car, powers.

You sit around waiting, or you make something happen. No mobs, you make up npcs and monsters. There's a good thread recently discussing staff aproval versus player run/initiated.

You can go fight something without knowing were the special mob is on the grid. You can do murder mystery, plot sleuthing, save the village.

You do lack the pride you get in a mud for beating uber mob, or finding unique item ... More sweat and blood on the mud.

See also my bafflement on this thread. It weirds me out that people would strictly arrange for and only play out perfect relationships, even perfect friendships, or expect other players to alter their characters' normal behaviour to minimise conflict.

That is an extreme, most players prefer spontaneity versus full arranged. I think most agree if its that planned out, why not write the book instead of playing.

@surreality said in How does a Mu* become successful?:

Grids have become much smaller over time, which limits the Explorer; I've looked at some ways around this for a super bizarre project I wanted to try and found some ways around it but there's no way around a somewhat larger-than-people-find-ideal-these-days grid. (That, or I am just used to people shrieking like harpies at any over all grid of more than 20-25 rooms; I'm accustomed to that being a minor side area grid from a main area that may have two or three of those springing from it from the days of MOO, by contrast.)

Ironically, I think this is where MUX could draw more people in, or provide more options than it currently does, it's just utterly counter to the current game design mindset in a number of ways and it's time intensive on the build side before the doors open -- many staffcorps are racing to open and there's simply no time for this level of detail. To me, personally, I consider this a drastic loss. We used to see more of it. It is/was a fantastic means of imbedding plot elements or story seeds in the setting that players can uncover and then explore or pursue, solo or with STs/GMs or other staff assistance.

This makes me curious, if beefing up grids would help. You could probably extend social to other MU*s for the most part, or outside of a MUD the balance would be lost. Especially in killing; sure a lot of players like PvP of some level, but with friends and the amount of social scenes or social coordination to get to the killing without it being free for all PvP, its probably skewed more towards social.

As for grids, the argument seems to be, too big and folks don't know where to go to find each other, or its too spread out. Then again, how often is one bored to go to the same old venue to hang out:?

But meta, folks can +where/who/etc to mostly find each other. I imagine a larger grid would gives folks enough variety to mix up restaurant play and, while a MUX tends to use code for secrets and such, good descriptions could be inspiring enough.

I'm toying with altering common room descs just to see if folks bite with interest, curious why it changed.

As for secrets and such, I've seen it emulated on MUSHes too. I mentioned Nightmare LP Mud as my favorite, because it seemed to be one at the time that hid objects and descriptions. One had to read the entire desc and look at each object to see if there was more too it. A few Mu*s outside of MUDs have done this and hidden it enough so there were no visible local views or +views, but most players outside of MUDs don't tend to think to 'look' at every thing in the desc just to see if there is more too it.

Edit: @Apos commented on this above while I was writing this.

Also @Thenomain mentioned considering changing from pages to grid wandering. A lot of places have removed access to unfindable, or when you see it on WoD, you just think they're avoiding certain players mostly when its on. But I'm curious if MUSH could benefit from some of these concepts, dark grid, unfindable, interactive descriptions. Just that it would take some educating or adapting on these being things, when players, at least on a MUSH, tend to think anything possible is visible in a room/location.

@Kestrel said in How does a Mu* become successful?:

A friend of mine is currently working on an MU* project where he's looking to really amp up the 'explorer' factor in what I think is a rather novel way — rather than having a traditional grid designed by builders, he wants to create a self-creating, dynamic player-driven grid wherein anything you can imagine wanting would be automatically generated (and then be explorable) the moment you enter a command like, 'goto bar'. If no bar exists, the system would then simply create a bar with a randomised name/description, and other players would have a chance of finding it next time someone uses 'goto bar' as opposed to looking for that bar specifically by its new name/ID. And similarly this could be used for generating and linking generic backstory town-where-I-grew-up, where you may discover that you actually grew up in the same town as another player, allowing for the opportunity to coordinate.

What's old is new.

A lot of the original Mu's were basically if you want it, make it. Having the 'system build it sounds novel, but also a lot of work. But, way back when, part of the vetting process of learning was learning to code. Some MUDs have MUDs schools, old Mu's had Schools for new chars too, but it taught them to code. My first one was Star Trek: The Original Series MUSE. I liked Romulans and choose to be one, the first thing I did was spend two weeks in 'Romulan Academy' learning to code. I made puzzle box with six sides that would randomly determine the order (1-2-3-4-5-6 scrambled) and users would have to dial it in right to 'beat' the puzzle.

In the early 90s, lots of places enabled @quota on players and they were expected to contribute to the shared environment. Build a bar, make a ship, make cars that moved, make puppets that interacted with players and otherwise build the shared world together. At some point, people decided this created too much clutter or used up too much space, and the quota was slowly reduced until, like most places today, its either turned off or set to like 1 which is reserved for one private room, which must be @dug by staff.

Edit: CLean up italics with my use of asterisk

@Pandora said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

So this got me to thinking - how could A -ever- murder B and make it look like an accident if C is apparently omnipresent? I know if you stuck me in a cruiser with 2 people and I wanted to kill one of them I'd just wait until the third person is asleep or in the loo and I'd say afterwards 'I called for you, but you didn't hear me' and what are you going to say? 'No, you didn't call for me, I'd have heard you.'?

There are myriad way to do this, other than waiting for C to be offline and then have them make up an excuse for not being there.

Poisoning, and visiting and continuing to posion while under doctors care.

Not only does it include C without forcing them to make up some OOC determination for having a RL, it makes it so you could be caught, others could be brought in, the story could grow.

If you're looking for a PK when no one is around, or others don't have a chance to intervene, this will upset folks too.

Edit: Hell, someone shows up almost murdered looks like accident, doc figures it out, this could explode into a good plot ... we have a murderer on the ship, who dunit?!

@mietze said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

The other in essence means that it's not you that controls your PC at all, unless you're on 24/7 others can make up the IC narrative and your actions as soon as you're logged off. (Maybe that would also encourage people to always plan their pvp actions by checking who list and using that as a tool...oh no wait. )

Sounds just like the 90s all over again. Planning for offline IC time, and folks trying to get in that killshot by concocting convoluted plans to off someone based on 'they're never on when I'm on'. And places where staff allowed this ...

@Kanye-Qwest said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

@Lotherio said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

On a MUSH, we assume the rest of the IC world still exists, if you conceivable demonstrate that you stabbed them (easy, in the code), gave the IC doctor a chance to be found (timestop the scene to be fair to the player, not be a douche and say 'welp offline, they failed') or got staff to check for NPC docs for you, and then make your rolls for stealth to show you buried them without being noticed yes.

...what? If A is setting out to murder B and get away with it, what exactly determines what is a 'fair' effort to find a doctor? I mean, if you stabbed someone, you are probably not going to make any actual effort to find a doctor. This example has gotten way far afield and doesn't make sense anymore. As Pandora noted.

The original scenario was on a space ship I believe. And the finding the doctor was brought up. Why do you get to determine for the entire NPC population that there is no doctor?

Also, I said in a city environment or more open, have at it. Its probably easy for A to kill B and get away with it.

Edit: This is ICA-ICC .... the world deserves to react, you can't hand wave it (or you can, but loses believability to me). Its like saying, we'll we killed the police chief because we wanted to, no one found us because on one was around on-line, guess we got away with it. They have to make up why they didn't notice us.

You can kill them, sure, but the story is losing verisimilitude for me by assuming it was just that easy.

@Kanye-Qwest said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

@Lotherio said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

This goes into asshat territory too.

If I'm staff, and its conceivable NPCs are doctors, players shouldn't have to wait for the bone setting. It should be assumed. In fact if A, B, and even C are having fun, the NPC world should react as expected without staff needing to be there, or hand waving no NPCs. That sounds like a deterrent to RP in general.

But in that example, you had to spend a lot of time and energy saving up XP to learn bone setting. If staff had NPCd bonesetters every time someone broke a bone:
A. it trivializes the work of those players who put in the effort to learn how to yank a bone straight

I agree with this. I've been on games where staff did point out to go find the players who could do it.

But this oddly seems counterintuitive to the discussion about finding the PC doc situation too.

I'm in the if there is a third player involved and you've involved them, don't cut them out camp. But on these places where you have to find PCs, it works if the player base is big enough, but it sucks when it thins down.

I am a daytime player, these places have always sucked for me as there are fewer players on them. Sure it trivializes the work of those players who learned to yank a bone, but if our IC times don't line up, the story must go on (without making up excuses for the IC docs). Why must I have to get on during my family time, or my kids recital just to appease the player that spent all CGen points on being a doctor, the same as why must I say because they were not there during my time online, they must make up the reason my character must remain in agony while @Pandora buries my alive, whimpering and pleading for my life?

B. Defeats the purpose of having broken bones. There's no point in offering consequences that mean nothing. It's a waste of time and processing power.

If the players involved had fun, does it defeat the purpose of broken bones - no. They play out finding doc, getting it set, then healing. Instead of being forced to 'no doctors on during your time slot/commitement' and letting it fester and worsen despite the description of the hospital saying 'doctors and nurses scurry about'.

As an aside, I'll say this. MUDs, or the ones where you're accountable for offline time, really favors the players who can make time commitment and dampens the fun for those with less time. Which is why those with less time probably seem to favor MUSH that gives them opportunity to have fun without a major time commitment of building up a char slowly over time to be on par with the majority of the player base.

Its another difference all together, but with limited time, I prefer a few more open doors to what I can do, or my players can do, without limiting it to the code, or the availability of other players. I have friends in nearly every time zone, waiting on players to be available to do anything sucks too.

Edit: Well, you were off line, you didn't get the golden ticket. Well, you were off line, you missed the awesome event and tons of XP award. Well, you were offline, we had a major emergency, looked for your character, you missed out on the fun, and now you have to explain where you were. Well, the doctor is offline, your SOL, and the code has festering into it, if a PC doesn't check it you could die. Time constrained people will go elsewhere, and they do, to MUSHes or places that give them freedom to have fun like everyone else.

@Kanye-Qwest said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

@Lotherio That's great, but is not appropriate or acceptable for all game formats, right

I never said it was, I'm pointing out my preference for MUSHes. I have played on games requiring my time to be spent on-line, I've played MUDs (still do), I've played the RPI MUDs mentioned. I'm saying my preference is where everyone can find their fun.

Even on places where there is meta and time constraints, I usually find a group that I get along with OOCly. We run our stories, folks call it sandboxing. Playing in private areas on anothers game and just running your own RP stories because you do like the code (and abide by it, just in your own bubble).

Take @Pandora's example of the one hour. My friends may all just agree to a time bubble to continue the fun when they can all get back on together.

If I want to play a game, I go play a game. I'm into MU's for shared RP and story telling these days.

When the sword was pulled from the stone, and the current generation all learned grammar and spelling instead of thumbing shorthand for smart phones and devices ... a golden age of MU'ing was ushered in. Kids realized they didn't need graphics to be entertained and had more control over their role-play and stories in a more free-form setting. They were entertained and MU'ng as we know it was changed. OOC drama was at an all time low, everyone got along, no one argued over rules and interpretations, we all said please and thank you, everyone had awesome plots and no one dropped on each other in the middle of plots and scenes in favor of their favorite video game of the week.

@Pyrephox said in Survival/Apocalypse Genre Survivability:

Basically, I think a SF premise can be a lot more sustainable for a large population than the typical post-apoc setting, and it doesn't rely on people periodically doing incredibly stupid and self-destructive things for survival to still be a concern. Because, let's face it, if the zombie apocalypse actually happened? The living win. They may take a lot of hits in the beginning, but we're fucking humanity: exterminating anything that so much as LOOKS at us funny is what we do.

10 billion rounds of ammunition produced ever year, not including gun owners that reload (use their shells to make their own rounds/shot), there is more than enough bullets to take out every zombie that isn't impaled on some stick/fence/wrought iron contraption in the wild.

7 billion people left in the world .... assuming 10 percent survival after initial outbreak (and 90 percent zombies), that's 700 mil folks still kicking it. If 10 percent of survivors were good enough with weapons (if they could kill 1 zombie per day), and had all 10 billion rounds ... it'd take less than a year to knock off all those zombies (100 days). If the number of folks left were close to how they are in most zombie flicks/fiction, they wouldn't be fighting over bullets, they would have stockpiles.

But ... SF survival sounds interesting. I always wonder, every one who likes Dune wants L&L pre Muad'Dib. I'm a God Emperor fan, I think it would be fun to play post/Scattering.

@Ganymede said in What themes and subjects do you look for in a game?:

@Arkandel said in What themes and subjects do you look for in a game?:

Conversely I don't like heavily edited home grown themes. My idea of fun does not entail reading through the amateur rumblings of someone who took their plan for a novella/D&D campaign/fanfic spread out over ten pages on a wiki just to set the basics of their metaplot.

I concur with this, for other reasons.

If I have to read a whole bunch of stuff that isn't published or available elsewhere, the barrier of entry is higher for me because I am less inclined or able to concoct backstories or motivations for my PCs. It's all well-and-good to have a noble PC that is ambitious, but why is what I get stuck on.

I wanted to weigh in on the other end of this spectrum. I prefer 10 pages of wiki for some home grown theme opposed to highly developed/published themes and genres. Simply because I don't want to have to be 3 core rulebooks and half a dozen spaltbooks to understand theme enough to be able to RP and enjoy the game. Or, have to have read the 12+ core cannon books based in some world, with 24+ spinoffs that may or may not be considered cannon by some readers. I've played years of TT V:tM back in 2e days, but was never comfortable on WoD games because someone always brings up weird rules (that and XP bloat) and everyone always knows more than me so it is never fun (because I like to run one-shots and personal plots; partially as a daytime player, staff are never around).

I'm more drawn to original themes. Because it is something new. Its easier to buy into something original, as a lot of published material have timelines associated with their books, or the core supplements keep adding and changing the timeline to make room for the new material. I could never play on that Nymeria joint, not because of the owners so much (yes an issue), but because its in an established timeline that leads to where the books take place, no chance of deviation. Bleh, what's there for me to do there, L&L TS (I enjoy me some, but I need more)?

What I do look for: social and adventure. I want adventure in increments, not adventure all the time, just doesn't make sense to have something happening all the time. I want social for the inbetween parts when there is no adventure. Give me a sense of having something to do and when not doing that something, I am plotting the next something to do or dealing with whatever is going on in the social world.