Posts made by MarsGrad

'Eyyyyy Atonement! I'm not sure we ever actually interacted directly but I played Skinner (cyborg dude with a metal arm) and Heinrich and a bunch more, far shorter lived characters before Skinner way back when.

I'm actually Hunter over on Spirit Lake now, so we'll deffo have to do some more stuff.

Edited to add: Oh, I completely missed Roland! We definitely interacted on Parallel but... honestly it was so long ago and it was overshadowed in my mind by Atonement that I don't remember who I played. Some Niner punk as well, but I definitely remember the name Roland.

@killer-klown said in Star Wars or Starfinder?:

Star Wars - as much as I love it - is a sweeping space opera. You can incorporate other elements, but that's what the game is built around.

Actually, FFG Star Wars is explicitly built around focusing on different elements of Star Wars.

We had a Firefly-type game with a bunch of loveable rogues on a rickety ship traipsing across the galaxy. We had a Star Trek themed game, where the PC's were the command crew of a larger exploration cruiser in the unknown reaches.

Those are both Edge of the Empire games and could very easily not include a single stormtrooper or rebel soldier.

We had, yes, a Star Wars style game where we were largely planetbound fighting against an evil regime.

That's Age of Rebellion which focuses solely on the fight between the Rebels vs. the Empire.

Anyway, I'd probably vote Starfinder, if only because I really don't think an FFG SW MU could work. I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

@faraday said in Social 'Combat': the hill I will die on (because I took 0 things for physical combat):

@marsgrad said in Social 'Combat': the hill I will die on (because I took 0 things for physical combat):

Also, I don't think anyone is suggesting 'my characters has goals and personality quirks' should act like ironclad armor.

Just to be clear: Yes, I am suggesting exactly that. Some things just won't work on some people, just like you can't take out a tank with a pocketknife. Just like no matter how many points I make or how well I make them, I won't sway some people here to change their views on social combat.

I stand somewhat corrected.

Let me rephrase: "I don't think anyone is suggesting a character's goals and personality quirks should act as fully encasing, 360 degree, impenetrable platemail that renders them immune to all forms of persuasion, etc. It just makes certain approaches non-viable just like, say, attacking a tank with a pocketknife.

@pyrephox That is a sound argument for any game that focuses more on the game than the RP.

Unfortunately most MUs do not. If the bulk of the game is in the characterization of the PCs, not the dice rolls, than it's actually more obtuse to expect the personalities of the PCs to be completely irrelevant to rolls specifically targeting said personality.

Also, I don't think anyone is suggesting 'my character has goals and personality quirks' should act like ironclad armor. They're detriments to certain approaches. They're the cover you take in a gunfight. The smoke screen laid down by your allies. They should be treated as penalties (and bonuses) to an opposing character's roll based on how they go about convincing Space Cowboy to do the thing they want him to do. Or at the very least you should work with Space Cowboy to make your awesome intimidation/persuasion/seduction check believable.

@derp Fair enough, but the other other side of that is that someone with those resistances is now immune to literally every angle of attack on their character. They no long fear death or the death of loved ones. They're immune to the charms of the most seductive wo/man. They're completely indomitable, incorruptible, and also they're really self-righteous. They have no weak spots because we've taken backstory and personality out of the equation. A dude with a ton of armor and the best physical resistances on the game will still get steamrolled by enough firepower, but this guy can't ever be convinced of anything.

Social stats are far too vague to work effectively on their own.

@faraday said in Social 'Combat': the hill I will die on (because I took 0 things for physical combat):

@marsgrad said in Social 'Combat': the hill I will die on (because I took 0 things for physical combat):

Then he rolls dice, gets an awesome result and Space Cowboy is expected to be cowed by this, even though it's been established that Space Cowboy is a masochist and doesn't fear death. It overrides his admittedly cliche character and ignores his personality.

That's like having someone roll Salesmanship, get a good result and say: "OK clearly I've done a good job selling you a car - you tell me what kind of car that might be." It doesn't work that way.

I enjoyed this example.

But yeah, I agree. The problem is most games are designed to be played in a tabletop setting, and even homebrew systems borrow heavily from established RPG patterns. They're supposed to be targetted at NPCs who are played by a GM that understands how to keep things a little fluid and flexible to account for creative player approaches. They're not by any means intended to be used to resolve a social interaction between two PCs that are probably pretty rigidly designed and thought-out.

That said, I actually do like the social performance idea, but that still relies a lot on trusting your fellow players.

Yeah, I mean it's been said in one way or another already, but I don't have an issue with social combat as a theory or a concept. My problem is when it's handled /exactly/ like physical combat, where Johnny B. Goode comes up and poses how he shoots at Space Cowboy and then rolls dice and we get the results. That's fine because the agency is entirely on Johnny in that situation. Whatever Space Cowboy's backstory and personality, a bullet is a bullet. It doesn't override Space Cowboy's character or development to be shot.

The problem comes when Johnny walks up to Space Cowboy and poses a big threatening speech trying to intimidate Space Cowboy into backing down by implying he's going to harm and kill Space Cowboy. Then he rolls dice, gets an awesome result and Space Cowboy is expected to be cowed by this, even though it's been established that Space Cowboy is a masochist and doesn't fear death. It overrides his admittedly cliche character and ignores his personality.

I'd love it if Johnny came up to Space Cowboy and said, 'Okay Space Cowboy, I'm going to try and intimidate you into backing down.' Then he rolls his dice, gets his awesome result, and then works with him to decide how he might do that, ie. Space Cowboy maybe worries about his friends and Johnny managed to convince him that 'Oh, you might be able to stop me, but not before I kill your whole crew' or something.

Very rarely is this done. Most people just want to play out social combat like physical combat and ignore the differences because they both involve dice, but there's an entirely different rhythm and approach to it.

@d-bone said in Armageddon MUD:

If we were to use Armageddon as a comparison, you make a mistake because you were not informed, or otherwise just behave not 'normally'- (or to be fair, don't take the game's wilderness seriously- though information on where you can go to new players is fairly scant) the game deletes your save file- and the reload takes anywhere from 2-3 days approval process on top of your character design process down time.

I mean... People iron man Dark Souls. Mostly speedrunners, but...

Anyway, you're taking the comparison way too far. I simply meant that Dark Souls is an unforgiving and brutal game. So is Armageddon. I did not mean to compare an RPI MUD to a hack-and-slash RPG in every aspect.

Also, I'd argue the point that Dark Souls is more or less fair every time, and that most deaths can be considered a learning experience. I didn't have a terrible amount of issue with most of the bosses. Most of my deaths came from a horrible camera and janky controls on narrow walkways over bottomless pits or massive drops.

As for Armageddon, like... most of those issues have been addressed on this thread. Documentation has apparently been improved, despite, in my opinion, being already fairly extensive. Here's a page that gives you a map and lists all the important locations. It tells you some dangerous places to go, gives you a link to more information on one of them, and then further links to an even more in depth map. Here's a link to the Jobs helpfile that lists several decent starter jobs for anyone who needs a few bucks. Or... I think they use obsidian coins? Here's a link to a page all about the music theory and history of music in the world of Zalanthas and how it's differed in the two main cities! Why? I dunno'.

As has been pointed out, the game's under new management. Staff is different, apparently less murderous. I only know this because I read the previous comments where it's been said about thirty times. I understand that a game as long lived as Armageddon produces a few sore spots and definitely churns out horror stories, but like... I don't know. Maybe give the new guys a chance before damning them with the sins of their predecessors. Or don't. I'm not particularly biased either way.

The lack of information on how to address a Templar is, admittedly a headscratcher. As seen here, it lays out how to address a Tuluki Templar, but apparently that city has been closed to PCs? I have no idea. I'd recommend sending up a request to staff. Seems more like oversight to me, or someone forgot to update the website's help files. Not exactly an uncommon occurrence.

I don't play Armageddon because those monsters endorse hairless dwarves, and I for one won't be a part of that injustice, but it seems like a lot of the same complaints that keep getting brought up on this thread are a bit outdated for this game with 20 years of history behind it.

I've tried Armageddon a few times over the years. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't.

All in all, it's an RPI. A somewhat more brutal example of the genre, admittedly, but more or less just an RPI. You either love 'em or you hate 'em. Or maybe you have a more mild opinion on them, I don't know.

As much as I hate to contribute to the horrific overuse of this comparison...

If you like Dark Souls and you like MUs and you like... I don't know, hairless dwarves and sand and mantis people, you might like Armageddon! Or you might not. It's a crazy world of risks we live in.

@faceless said in ROGUE: It is coming...:

I would be interested in seeing something based around the Mandalorian Wars; it has conflict that Star Wars needs to thrive, it has the possibility of diverse locations, enough open lore that you could take some creative liberties, and it has basilisks. Just, you know, without people playing the key characters of that time period. I hate FCs actively played in Star Wars MUs.

This was going to be my suggestion originally, but I dread to imagine that someone, even Staff, might NPC Revan as something other than my perfect, unassailable headcannon version.

Or worse someone might ruin HK.

Yeah, I'm not so sure about setting it during the new movies either. One, AoA's already on that. Two, everyone and their grandmother does either Pre-Empire, or Post-New Hope. Or occasionally Old Republic. A shake-up would be nice. Three, that's going to get messy with nine not even released yet, and honestly, while I like the movies, FO vs Resistance is Empire vs Rebels but less interesting, so short of allowing people to play FCs and reenact their favorite scenes (which would get old fast and also goes against your no FC policy which I am totally in favor of), it seems like there's more potential elsewhere. Set it during the New Sith Wars. Haven't seen that one yet. Mandos while they were still riding basilisk war droids down from atmo allied with a struggling Republic against a resurgent and fractured Sith Empire? Sounds crazy. Maybe crazy enough to work.

Maybe too crazy, who knows.

Either way, I'm going to be playing a Hutt and running all the crime ever, so it's not like my opinion counts for a whole lot.

As for the broad range vs narrow focus? Eh. I dunno'. Star Wars kind of thrives on the many diverse factions and people/creatures. I can see the point of trying to herd people together to facilitate RP, but I can also see how that could spoil the fun. I play Indies primarily. Being forced to go Rebellion/Resistance or Empire/FO because that's what the whole game is, would be an instant deal breaker for me. I'm sure there's others with a similar opinion if the game was fully indy and they really like playing a Stormtrooper. I'd suggest looking for a different solution, ultimately.

This whole thread has been immensely entertaining at times and terribly hard to watch at others.

It's been a real roller-coaster ride.

@SunnyJ Plotting and scheming are two of my favorite things!

Edited to add Dystopia and MotM.

I can not recommend this game enough. Between the satisfying code, excellent theme, extremely friendly and open playerbase and staff... It's just instantly addicting. Plus, since it's still got that new MU* smell, everyone is new and figuring things out, and you can watch as the code and game grows which is always a really fun thing. At least for me, anyway.

Yeah, it doesn't seem plausible with what we currently have, but that doesn't mean this alternate future doesn't have some crazy secret sci-fi tech hidden away for government testing, and some politician decided to actually make use of it instead of just sitting on it. Plus, the way I understand it, the places that were flooded are still flooded. No one's trying to rebuild like with Katrina, they're focusing what's left of the population into what still remains largely untouched.

And finally, that whole part of the history is just... window dressing. Sab already said it's not the focus of the story. It's just a pretense to get the characters into the right state of mind for the actual game.

@Kanye-Qwest

@Kanye-Qwest said in Flights 'n Tights MUX:

@MarsGrad said in Flights 'n Tights MUX:

@gr said in Flights 'n Tights MUX:

Discussion boards tend to have discussions.

Hopefully in the right spot, though.

I mean, sure, but where is the right spot? Making a hog pit thread to bag on it seems a little excessive (or a lot excessive). It's not at all unusual to have advertisements trail off on tangents about what people think about the stated info/reaching for clarification.

For sure, but this is no longer a discussion about the merits of Flights n' Tights. It's about whether playing Killer Batman on a DC continuity game is acceptable.

All I'm saying is... If it was my post designed to drum up interest in my game, I'd probably be feeling like it derailed slightly.

@gr said in Flights 'n Tights MUX:

Discussion boards tend to have discussions.

Hopefully in the right spot, though.

@Coin said in Flights 'n Tights MUX:

Welcome to MSB.

Yeah... I should have seen that coming. >_>

Maybe I'm reading this badly, but I feel like this thread has descended into everyone arguing on the same side against people who posted once or twice at the beginning and haven't turned up since, and misinterpreting what side everyone else is on.

And plus, isn't it an Advertisement? I feel like this is no longer about this specific game, and more about what people find acceptable as far as thematic limitations go.