Posts made by Misadventure

What are we supposed to say about someone else who just never makes time to RP with you that you are linked to @sunny?

How do I explain that I haven't seen or spoken to my spouse about anything of import in IC weeks or months, without making a decision for them? Do I have to invent a plot by which despite my being present in the setting, I was somehow not available either?

I agree that you should really try to avoid making up events or motivations for someone else without express permission.

However, the assumed regular interaction suddenly has to be removed with a reason, and that reason will involve the other person. Unless there is a really convenient way to remove the relationship, such as it was never revealed to anyone.

A player has a responsibility to another player they have linked themselves to, and just saying no you can't make decisions for me while you actively make decisions to avoid having scenes or giving a way out is plain being rude and immature.

The question is how do these players best respect one another's "rights" and prior commitment if they have decided to end/alter it?

Apply that to code and enjoy.

Examples are helpful. It would do well in a format where there is 1-2 lines per point, and linked/spoilered/expansion boxed examples.

@sunny How would you feel about @mail that said that hey we can have met IC, the new PC is fairly reasonable etc, and unless there are very specific questions that must be addressed, nothing is urgent?

Or flop in the powder snow then back into the jacuzzi/sauna for ski lodges. Least here in California.

What did these authors DO? Be social, correct the time stream, lead social change, fight in martial arts tournaments a la Epic Rap Battles of History?

Sometime after you became "Sir".

I am restraining myself from mentioning hovercraft.

I am so good at this.

@Arkandel said:

@mietze Oh, the number of players who're hacking military sites from their iPhones on a starbucks wifi.

Yeah, you hack military sites on Starbucks wifi with OTHER peoples iPhones. srsly.

And that is the issue. The IC world isn't made of of accurate data in the right amount, nor are the players around you experts on what they do. So the accurate expert player ends up constantly policing the game, or being jarred by how inaccurate it is.

@lithium I am talking about the problem of the echo chamber effect. Nothing to do with couples being treated as alts.

Its a major source of cries of "favoritism": the people involved have had a chance to speak on many related topics and come to an understanding of one another. Makes for much more effective and efficient communication, and gets rid of the sense that you have no idea what to do when dealing with a ST or other player.

There is the other problem: not realizing that just because you, your spouse, your RL friends, and close online friends are in agreement, does not make you right, or your way the only way.

One problem with unstated GMing methods like this is that the situation can change and the players won't be aware. Effectively the physics of the universe shift, and they are unaware.

An example would be the superhero game I GM'd. It was fairly gritty in some ways, but I made sure that all PCs were tough enough to survive without constant coddling. When the action was moved to a super powered warzone, I tried to communicate the danger they were entering. It was a place where meta-augmented mentally unstable volatile super soldiers were used against one another and normals. It was a nightmare of ambushes, traps, and people trying to kill supers.

Despite every effort to do so, the players weren't ready for how lethal it was, because they didn't realize that I as a GM chose on set of behaviors for the US super beings, and another for these monster-soldiers, and that came across in terms of how go for the kill they were.

I only +stalk you because I luuurrrrrve you.

Or because you have a butter bean I need for my magics.

Also note that two players, who talk a lot about game situations, may sync up in thinking and attitudes and how they express them in terms of phrasing. So they will naturally end up with similar or the same reactions to IC events unless they have a specific IC reason to not react that way. We do after all, rely on our own ability to perceive, and make judgments, and analyze real world topics that we then bring IC.

There are many forms of fudging the roll:

You can literally ignore the roll.
"Roll stealth plus dex." notes failure "Okay the guards don't react when you sneak by." hopes players never ask.

You can literally ignore the result.
Especially if you don't announce what a roll is for. "Make a stealth roll." "Oh, you failed." nods, writes something. "Make another roll" That note might be someone saw you approach the area, even though usually the rolls are only against the direct opposition. It doesn't have to be used.

You can ask for another roll to mitigate the original result.
"Okay not a great stealth approach, make an Int + Security check to notice the flaw in your effort."

You can give stronger or weaker consequences.
"A guard going home from work stumbles upon you. How do you take him out?" This guard is off the clock, unarmed,and isn't in a position to be trouble or set off alerts.

You can alter circumstances so the results don't play out as long or as effectively, or cut them short later on.
"The first set of guards alert the second, but they don't call it in." or "The police are delayed by the crowd around the dead homeless guy." "The police find no clues, and they let it go after a week."

This is part of why I favor strongly organized approaches to play (by tradition or the rules), so you know what a roll is, how many will likely be made. This is also why i favor systems that measure level of success over pass fail. Many pass fail games keep the chance to fail fairly high to maintain tension and suspense, but it does lead to failing a basic check. I also favor systems that allow for some sort of "fix" to a roll. Something that says you always get at least average results, or need not roll when difficulty is Normal or less, or a limited number or re-rolls, or modify the roll after the fact. (These are in a way a form of skill situation "hit points" and you can see them running out, and the tension rises, the the players are gently reminded that the rolls are getting closer and closer to real, no change results.

I agree with @Ganymede. I understand the initial concern, that RL couples will always act as a trustworthy, honest and open ally. This sort of thing can ruin board games. However, were you to police that, you would also need to hit up RL friends, people who have MU*'d together before, Staff who know each other, and so on.

The reality is that playing among strangers, having people you know and can rely on is a solid benefit.

Que?

It is likely related to the success of garlic repelling vermin bearing disease. Vampires were originally disease monsters, so hence the relationship.

Seriously assess if losing my life was worth the gains.