Best posts made by Misadventure

Then there are those who have to read everything that is posed before they begin to compose, and you have their complete attention and it still takes too long and you never want to play with them again.

runs off crying

To give context: it is included in my job evaluations that I call out when people are skilled, or handled something well.Even though I only do it one on one for the most part.

It's a rare thing, and it's a skill I guess, so I recommend learning it, and practicing it.

@faraday

My parallel story of sympathy:

For a tabletop RPG:

I tried to communicate a basic structure for organizing an investigation along the lines of the Clue board game, adding in the basic journalist questions and a generic list of types of sources of information like the media, subject matter experts, NPCs they've met with prior experience in a topic - especially any that have been already named in the setting, or specifically the given storyline.

I had a personal mystery arise for a player to give them a persona storyline
They brainstormed a list of the seven likely causes from specific things to generic

They investigated six, declared it unsolvable.

The seventh? Their background nemesis, whom* they betrayed in the area of the current situation.

So, I feel ya.

*trying out using whom, no idea if it's right.

@Thenomain

Dear Dev Diary,

Today I convinced the editors that a non-transitive asymmetrical ratings structure of custom tier counts per Kith, Keeper, Court and Page number would best represent the Lost.

Check with staff for scope issues. Meaning are you starting off with something that would be noticed by everyone, or say devastate downtown, bring someone back from the dead, expose the aliens among us etc? Are you planning on tons of collateral damage? Are you introducing innovations in technology (and here I mean anything that players can use if they know how, so spells, super powers whatever) or setting that would be world changing?

Otherwise make it doable, engaging, unbiased, fun for you and participants, and fit it to the players you get,

I'd love to know what staff ban someone citing suspicious calm.

It's up there with you know what you did.

@faraday those are great examples.

I've seen games where the players really are fully going to make up something like a new species and or a new culture with little to no detail, but usually that means there will be a brainstorming moment where the players define at least some of the ideas, enough for folks to get going, but also with the understanding that the act of creation by the group is more important than any defined sense of where it is going.

In other words, it literally is a bad idea to make plans or defined content of any kind that remains out of player knowledge.

=============================

My personal approach as an ST is to definitely have structure to what HAS happened, and to how NPCs will continue to act. Then the players act on that, and we see where it goes, though the typical motivator is something needs to be stopped in the near future and that moment of crisis is essentially the decision point and end of the story.

I would like to think that players would want to suggest NPCs, relationships and events, and either create them or submit the general idea to the play group or an ST, etc. For all that it's good to have an organizing and creative authority, it seems like there is room to make things in the game and utilize player creativity. Maybe even just suggestions of things they'd like to see for their character, other players characters, and the setting and story at large.

My oldest friend has now buried both her parents, seven weeks apart.

If you are going to say 80s, I'ma leave this here: Teen Titans Go! The Night Begins to Shine

Some players have a problem giving their own or other players creations the same authority as that of staff, even if the same level of record keeping is used (either none, or strong documentation). This is a weakness that will affect FATE and Powered by the Apocalypse games online.

@faraday said in [Is MU* RP slanted towards player success?]

The key is to design systems that support your goals.

Yes.
My perception is I have played on a lot of MU's where death was the zero HP option for combat, yet that doesn't seem to be the goal, so what else could game designers do with the topic, and would MU* RP work with whatever this new approach was?

If saying zeroing out some resource (health, willpower, patience, public support, whatever) is the better choice that death or complete failure, why aren't MU*s explicit about that goal?

Or is this really in the realm of no player cares in the least, so you may as well just throw whatever makes them think they know what to expect from the "system" and not bother?

What happens when you "lose" in FS3?

Also, MU*s M U asterisk S is formatting as italic per typical markup, which I don't recall it doing before.

I don't have guilt asking a question, one more question, or anything. You aren't my cricket.

@derp said in Roster Characters & WoD?:

I mean, in my experience, that's exactly what happens. You create a character but until you actually play them and interact you don' tknow where they're going to land exactly, so usually you can make tweaks to the character (within reason) up to 30 days or so.

Good. Places should make that very clear. Heck you could have statless (or base stat only ) characters with the right sphere flags etc ready to go if need be.

@Lotherio said in Adapting FATE for MU*s:

Sadly it seems its bleeding out of most Mu*'s, including the MUSH where it was far more common.

In games where the players are allowed to, or even pretty much required to, come up with story details and complications, NPCs etc, you run into a sort of creation fatigue. I've seen it with Stunting type things (Exalted, Weapons of the Gods, etc), with fact assertion (FATE, Adventure!), and plain ole come up with something (Powered by the Apocalypse, Star Wars FFG).

Players get tired of making up stuff. There are those few who either love it, or are just facile with it.

It's a shame, as distributed work is way better online.

@Ghost there are definitely issues between staff and players, and players and players about what the expectations are.

The topic was piqued for me over, as I mentioned, examples of play where the players were intent on sharing more internal state information than I usually see in MU* RP. To me, it fits the "newer" ideas category like game setups where the players are filling out the world, or actively creating their own IC situations and difficulties like a mix of a character-actor and show writer. There is more info put out, so people can get in on whatever, but also that's just the goal to create something like the experience of watching of a show for the players.

Given how hard that is at an established gaming table, it's unlikely to ever be seen in MU* RP.

Just food for thought on RP creation.

@Ganymede In my one second of research I went with the definition as a statistically significant deficit in some common educational activity such as mild dyslexia, delayed speech dev, sociopathy, ADD, affective disorders. Downs, and not situational factors such as living in a war zone, displaced, foster child, Texas.

My conclusion is that if 1 in 6 kids are actually impaired, and less than 1 in 6 kids I see are total pains in the ass, I blame the parent-guardians.

Question and a note.
It sounds like you are speaking about MUD level automated combat (which is the same as many MMORPG games, with complex many step resolutions and factors) either real time, or with a potentially complex turn system when referring to dice. Contrast with systems usually mean to be simple enough to play "quickly at the table" like your typical RPG e.g. Vampire, RuneQuest, ShadowRun. Is that what you mean?

Also, so note that having ratings for things doesn't require dice. You just need a statement of how much better one rating is than another, to give you an idea of how the narration should go, and what is a concession, compromise etc. A simple example of this would be a proportion system, where your chance to win is rating A/(Rating A + Rating B). Anything outside about that rate of success should be paid for or discussed. So two matched opponents should discuss, and describe it as a close match. If someone clearly outmatched is posed as dominating, there should be a reason beyond "I didn't feel like losing despite being outmatched".

@sg I thought the RPG was great for getting back into the feel of the Aliens movie, and while I love details, I am thinking that for online play, the rules set, even as a slimmed down version of Phoenix Command, is too much.

Did you know there was an Unreal Engine full replacement that used the load, and wounding and other details from Pheonix Command? It was called Urban Terror.

Hardcore works for me because I have a seasonal group who will power level any character, and take you along to get some gear in very high greater rifts. So losing something isn't so bad, and I have peeps to play with sitting next to me.

You don't strike me as the kicky fidget at the movies type, nor the running around the restaurant under the tables leaving your food wherever sort.

I thought you liked fish. ;_;