Best posts made by mietze

I have not played on Shang but I love the descriptions over the years. How can you not like Baskin Robbins? Compared to everything else that gets shared here, I dunno, I thought it was really cute and almost sweet!

I think there is often a difference between ooc rooms in games that are small enough for everyone to be known to each other vs huge games. It seems to me that people get more stressed out when they have no clue who Mr. Woe Is Me I'm In A Crisis but less so when it's someone who everyone knows is a habitual whiner/attention seeker/let me masturbate my RL stuff real or manufactured all over you and this can be ignored without feeling bad at all.

I think a lot of the time it's less intentional bad intent but more of the "wow finally I get to DO something actiony and important and my PC gets to be The Hero!" without thinking of things as collaborative story. Which is why I think staff is key to make sure there's lots happening for people to do and 15 people don't need to glom on to everything perceived as a scrap. Will there be scene/plot/action hogs no matter what? Yes, but. I think things are compounded when people have to fight and pounce on everything if they ever want to be in on action not of their own Temp Room making.

In real life too, how you say something or what you write has huge impact into whether or not people perceive it like you meant it.

I mean is that not communication 101? If you word your criticism full of passive-aggressiveness or condescension, is it surprising if it's not heard beyond that? If you want to tell someone they're uneducated about something but your letter is full of misspellings and grammatical errors, will it be taken as seriously? If you retell a story for the benefit of others, leaving out key details and/or very deliberately minimizing an ugly role you had, should you be surprised if people who're also involved come forward to correct the details (or present another side) even if that side story was just meant to be entertaining and not the main thrust of the conversation?

I am not sure I can fault MSB or any text medium for being a place where you must either be very clear or willing to clarify (both of which need thought and some degree of care) when you post. I am not sure I can think of any place as an adult that's a meeting of passionate peers (with no hierarchy or unifying expectation, like a workplace) where that's not the case, tbh.

It did work a lot better than me trying to outline every possible thing and then warn in advance. Plus, knowing boundaries also helped me guide things when other players would insert ideas into play. Which is something awesome, that should be encouraged, that isn't going to get labeled in a summary warning.

I also think shock gore/violence for its own sake is boring as hell. I feel that I very much operated on a middle ground of respect. I prefer slow burn horror/tough choices/etc rather than gratuitous "ooh this ought to be edgy" stuff because the latter is boring. (Like the people who think the only way to make your character "dark" is to have a Rapey McRaperson Does White Slavery! background that some poor staffer has to read through).

Apu, it is on the player to exit ooc with minimal fuss then. They should neither derail the scene that others are enjoying not target the people in it for abuse. They cannot expect everything to be dropped to attend to them.

Not only that, as mentioned above, there are some people who may not be aware of their triggers. There are some people who have really weird ones. There are some people who aren't usually triggered by a subject but in certain circumstances or the stars and planets aligning just right that day, it might happen.

I think it's better to just have one to one communication with the people you're running for, and to make sure there's a line of communication during the scene. Not just for no-go areas but hell, just helping your folks hook in if they are ooc stumbling a bit. What is the point of running something for people if you don't bother to find out what's fun for them while it's going on?

As Theno says, code isn't going to solve what ultimately boils down to a social problem.

If there was compulsory participation by all, it could be useful for the elements that the ST knows to plug in ahead of time. Hell I might be out of touch, but I have never run a scene where I had mapped out everything that could possibly happen. I like for pcs to come up with things I didn't anticipate. (Which is why people who needed straight formulaic plug in right answer get prearranged outcome plots and scenes did not sign up for/ask me to run theirs. It's not that I think that style is bad, it's not, many people enjoy it both running and participating but it's not how my brain functions.)

I could see this also being useful on a game where the only plot runners are staff. Both from a habit (of plugging in plot elements) and empowerment (being able to respond swiftly to ooc shenanigans/knowing more of what you're going to get as a player based on staff temperament and ability).

I will go one step further.

If someone has ADD and cannot focus for long enough periods of time to run a plot scene and associated paperwork that Wizzbang MUSH states are requirements for their plot staff, then they should not be allowed to be plotstaff if they fall behind on what they are signing up to do.

If someone enters into a major depressive episode, as I did before my last exit from mushing, and they cannot log in or participate in a manner that is expected of the position they've taken or the group they are trying to be part of--then they should withdraw from that position and inform their group that through no fault of that groups other members, they need to pull a l and take a break.

Etc. If your illness or life circumstance makes it so that you are incapable or minimally capable of doing things in a timely manner, or in a respectful manner because you are so up and down with your emotions...

Then yes. You should not disrespect the rest of the community by forcing others to deal with your problems that they can't really help with. You should not clutter a game and make everyone's time there less pleasant with your outbursts; nor assume that people who are not acting out don't have some serious stuff they are dealing with as well.

I do not think we should not expect in an interactive collaborative hobby some semblance of emotional and mental hygine. And honestly? People while they may be initially disappointed DO understand or respect that, if you are upfront and do not drag them unwilling or unwarned into your business.

Or if they don't, then that is valuable info to have for the future.

I have never played on a game that did not ban child rape or molestation play, nor on any that did not have explicitly a no-rape without explicit content consent for both ways parties policy.

If someone is so avoidant they must be shielded by code from discussing anything that might come up pre scene much less unexpectedly scene in progress....

I will be honest. I don't think that type of person is safe for me to trust/include in scenes without me getting to know them better first. That is a level of trauma and loss of function that has been the first flag of major warning that I wish I had attended to in a player a few very memorable times in my mushing career and frankly in RL too.

For example: Incest. Is that blood relatives only? What about legally permitted relationships like between second cousins. Is it incest if two step siblings hit it off, even though they did not live together during most of their childhood? What about a person marrying/fooling around with their sibling's partner?

Suicide: Off screen okay? Is staged to look like suicide homicide ok? Is it acceptable for pcs to commit suicide in the scene?

Child abuse: Actively in front of the pc is not okay, what about mentions? Does this only encompass physical violence (and does that include spanking, or denial of food, etc) and sexual violence or does it also include yelling/name calling?

I don't think you have to think of everything but if the goal is to truly protect people and allow them to participate without having to ask for clarity, then making sure there is a uniform expectation of what falls into that category for all scene runners/participants is a good idea. Otherwise it makes it meaningless; and things might be mislabeled (lowballed or highballed).

One way I have done this with random sign ups is to disclose level/type of risk. (Keep in mind, I've never played on a place that did not ban rape, nor have I really met people who loved rape plots that I enjoyed playing with, and I myself don't particularly care for that in a plot so Surprise! Rape! was never in the cards.)

So, if there was risk of death/permanent harm, I would disclose that. If the pcs would be facing a situation where there was going to be tough choices (vs easily seen rah rah no harm done solution to find), I'd disclose that. If there was a fixed outcome (say, like participating in someone's becoming or a scene that was being done because the pcs had lost an asset, etc) then I would disclose the fixed outcome part (but always would incorporate other elements that would not.). If something involved kids I would disclose (even if the kids weren't going to be harmed) because child involvement I've found has a lot of reactionary elements to it (with people getting angry/irritated/worried about any child showing up in scene.)

Once I had my sign ups, I would disclose a little more prior to scene and invite people to ask questions they needed to ask or bring up any concerns. I always asked for graphic gore preferences (going with the most conservative comfort level), as well as whether or not as a group they were comfortable with group/scene set poses involving descriptions that certain pcs could see but others could not, or if they wanted all such info handled via page/permit. This was especially important in law scenes when a lot of the times a party can be divided during the scene.

I don't think you'd need to put "warning: aliens are going to pop out of people!" But probably it'd be a good idea to put "warning: graphic violence depictions including on-screen npc deaths that may be horror movie gory."

When it comes to fucking with things like touchstones (at least for vampires) that have a very heavy affect on the pc both mechanically and in how they are played (which can be very fun and a risk much desired!) I'm going to assume a certain level of intimacy and cooperation with your players (who would need to describe and give you that background for it). In that case I would just have a one on one with those folks about it, oocly, to find out their comfort level. Or if you are gathering a group, I would disclose that participating in this prp will mean that you are putting your +sheeted assets at risk for lasting, irreversible harm. Most players will not be bothered by that and will welcome it--if they trust they'll get a great story out of it. But people who say "no" to that at first may be willing to trust you with it later, once they see your storycraft and your interest in really hooking in to their pc and challenging them.

It is always a deep honor, imo, when you're trusted with that; but a lot of the time it has to be earned a little ooc first.

As far as sacrificial lambs--well. To be honest, the challenge will not be finding someone willing (you'll have people falling all over themselves) but finding someone who is willing to share the spotlight/work with other PCs to enhance everyone's enjoyment rather than assuming the scene will be all about the maiden/lad-in-distress.

@Thenomain

Yeah specific issues were, which is pretty cool. Just seems weird to also bitch about someone updating their free thing 3 times in 10 years like that's just excessive or something.

But, judging from the comments my developer spouse has to deal with on his company page, I suppose not super out of the realm of weird gamer whining.

@Derp said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:

To be clear here: I don't think anyone is attaching me, though I do appreciate @Surreality for saying that. It's refreshing.

To be clear on another thing: Yes, the entire staff of Fate's Harvest is listening. We are aware of the feelings, we're in active discussion on the matter, and we take your concerns seriously.

What we are doubling down on is this: We are not going to remove a player before they have presented themselves as a problem on that game. This goes against the spirit of things that the Game Owner wants to see become canon there. So no amount of outcry is going to get us to magically remove the player before she has done so.

However, that doesn't mean that we aren't doing something. We've already shifted course a bit in light of these things, and continue to discuss ways to try and help handle the situation in a way that protects us and all of our players, both present and potential. While we haven't come to any solid conclusions yet, you're being heard. We just won't take the (in our opinion, drastic) measure of removing a player from the game before they present themselves as a problem. I know that this leaves some people disappointed, but that's just the way it is.

And on that note: We invite anyone who sees something shady going on to let us know. Staff can't be everywhere all the time, as players have pointed out, but the players also have to communicate with the staff if something suspicious is going down (beyond 'this person is present'). If you see something, say something. Preferably with some kind of log so that we can see it too.

One interesting thing about the game: logging is pretty heavy on most players' to-do lists. If you want to do more than the standard one xp a week, logs must be submitted. Pretty much everyone is aware of that, and scenes get logged pretty diligently, so logging is already in our nature. And we do read them.

So, as constructively as possible: We know. We hear you. We'll take action if it even starts to look like a problem. But so far, it doesn't look anything like that. If that changes, we'll be on it. Trust.

You might want to clean this up a bit and post it to your ad thread. This is an excellent, actual response.

This is why I tend to be selective in who I run meaty scenes for.

As a scene runner I put myself out there and am just as vulnerable as any PC. It's why I do not do non-social/gathering scenes larger than 3-4 people (not including me). I do probably have higher expectations of my players than some--I start on time (unless someone mails or otherwise communicates to me they won't be there on time and the other player's consent to moving the time). I hold fast to space limits. I respect time by paying attention and managing bog downs and always allow for spillover times in case we don't complete by the original time (so that people don't have to worry about work or other commitments because we went through 4 hours not even getting past the first stage).

I don't make my players spectate. I try to make sure everyone has some spotlight and something unique to do (easier to manage with smaller amount of people). I do big scene poses and @pemits. I ask for and keep tabs of preferences and I read everything my players write.

Risky and/or dark RP is imo by definition pretty intimate and in need of extended trust and respect.

If someone cannot or will not meet me halfway, or if staff sets up the expectation that interpersonal communication is optional rather than necessary, especially during risk-containing scenes--then I'm not really cut out for their game as a prp runner. And probably not as a player. There's a reason I don't play on "Surprise! You're getting raped tonight!!" total non consent games like Haven, but also why should I play again I will run like hell from any game that has no expectation of real-time communication between people. It's a fine line. But I really think creating a system for the express purposes of sheltering avoidant people from needing to talk to anyone about things that may or are bothering them may have unintended consequences. That does not contribute to a community that would welcome me, or that I would feel comfortable in.

@Paris I had that experience fairly recently also. It's pretty amazing.

In general, I have a no holds barred approach to sexual themes in my RP. There's very little that truly squicks me. It's not because I'm unfamiliar, personally or otherwise, with bad things--writing/storytelling is cathartic for me personally.

The reason why I try to exercise personal caution when engaging in them with others is because I do know that there are many people who would be triggered and I don't want to hurt someone if I can help it. As well as the fact that there are people who make me uncomfortable when they violate OOC boundaries. (Lying about ties OOCly, pressure for certain types of RP, ect.) As much as I wish that there wasn't so much weirdness about sex, culturally, I know that there is so generally I will not engage in graphic RP with anyone who doesn't wish to communicate about their preferences/expectations around it (and saying 'hey anything goes, let me know if something bothers you oocly, though' counts as communication) because it's too much of a risk for me to deal with on a game.

Rape RP doesn't bother me at all. People using it as an OOC whispering campaign (for or against the IC victim) and crossing IC/OOC lines does, and I have very rarely not seen that happen, so I totally understand why many games have policies of either none of that in the public sphere OR all parties must publically declare consent so that the OOC stuff doesn't come into play.

TS can be fun/funny. But like others have said, I mean, I don't like doing anything ALL the time. I have found that sometimes (not with a good RPer) entering into that will make it the focus of RP between those two PCs and I find it boring after awhile. I like relationship RP (like others I prefer complicated to 'princess and prince together 4 ever happy unicorns') but for it to be interesting to me I like doing a great many things, and TS can take time away from interacting with the world at large or doing those other things if it becomes too much of a focus. For me. Other people are happy with everyday TS and I don't think anything's wrong with it. And some people never, and that's just fine too. I would not preclude involvement with either one, though I suspect the every day person would get pretty frustrated with me after awhile and I'd want to disclose up front that I don't think I'd be able to maintain that.

It's really not all that different from any other kind of group matchup. You can really like a player and their PC, but if you're in incompatible time zones or you're on 8 hours a day and they are on for 8 hours a week, probably there's going to be some issues that have nothing to do with anyone being a dud, and it's probably good to be realistic about what's a good match.

@ganymede I think that depends on the viewpoint. I think it is hard for humans to unentangle all threads of racism from how they other people. So I would expect to relate to it in some way with how I see racism/classism/colonialism/oppression all around me right now. It is complicated and often has crossover.

I do not expect gamerunners to totally leave elements of that behind, but I do expect to not have to sit through thinly veiled racist stereotype garbage from RL dressed up as fantasy.

@Ganymede I am kind of hoping to find that eventually with my PC, though the romance part is optional, if there's a right player who is interested in fleshing out something that's currently offscreen. I do really missing having a partnership in play. It's super rewarding, romantic or otherwise.