Topics created by Misadventure

On the rare occasions I dare it..

I want to give each character a chance to do something cool/different. Everyone deserves a moment in the spotlight, so to speak.

I want to give the characters something that when it's over, they feel like like accomplished something.

I want the characters to learn something - about the world, about a subject, about themselves, from the experience. Give the player a chance to grow their character in the way they envision.

@Ganymede said in When communication is too long to read ...:

As the parent of a ND person, I do remind them that others won't know their needs unless they speak up. Thankfully, they do. Sometimes, in inappropriate loud ways, but, hey, they are young, and they've got some time.

That's awesome, sincerely. But I am also the parent of a ND person who isn't that adept (as you say - they are young, they've got some time), and I know other ND people who are stuck by one or more of the reasons I mentioned before. So I still implore folks to approach the situation in a compassionate and constructive way instead of rushing to judgment.

@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.

@Misadventure said in Is MU* RP slanted towards player success?:

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?

I don't know the specific games you speak of, so I can only speculate. But some players/GMs like the illusion of risk. Like how many TV shows want you to believe the characters are in peril even though deep down you know that they're most likely going to win.

Of course, just like some shows are known for killing off main characters at the drop of a hat (ala Game of Thrones), so are some games. There you really can lose your characters, and that risk is a feature. Some players love that level of stakes.

@Misadventure said in Is MU* RP slanted towards player success?:

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?

MUs (along with most RPGs and media) are often geared towards the main characters being Big Darn Heroes. The goal is that they struggle but eventually win, and in doing so gain something (fame, glory, skill, loot... depends on the game). Zeroing out resources isn't in line with that goal any more than death is.

You could certainly design a game with depleting resources, though, and some have. Shadowrun has an expendable karma pool; WoD has expendable Willpower; etc.

@Misadventure said in Is MU* RP slanted towards player success?:

What happens when you "lose" in FS3?

FS3 is just a system. "Lose" is more of a story effect. The worst the combat system does is a "knockout". What that means is open to interpretation (your fighter plane is disabled, or your PC is unconscious, subdued, or otherwise unable to continue the fight), but it's all in support of the story.

@Ganymede said in Is MU* RP slanted towards player success?:

I think what you mean to say is that FS3 was designed with awesomeness in mind and that is why it is awesome in what it does because it is awesome.

Daww. 🙂

@Misadventure said in MU* Mystery RP:

A mismatch of expectations only leads to suckitude.
Intent -> All Players Expectations-> Game System Design -> ST Communication

That's usually the problem I run into on a MU*. A clash of expectations combined with pretty quick and unrelenting judgement that you can't ever escape from.

So making sure the players are all on the same page about expectations from the ST and from the players both is really important for a game. That's what I find to be missing from most MU*s.

@Devrex However folks want to handle it.

My focus there was affecting a non player controlled element of the setting, and I doubt players would want to have their PC swayed by +jobs. I could see them calling out some tasks as sort of requirements to meet, or advance socially or what have you, but since interaction with another live player is the best part of involving human players, I could easily see people skipping it.

@Misadventure huh. This seems interesting and useful though i could see your CEOs point, too

@Devrex I definitely want something that is at least partly abstract and automatic to keep the workload more around handling actions that dont have a good coded analogue.

Also, I found myself wanting to React to each post on the screen, which tells me I have been using Microsoft Teams too much.

@Macha Sounds about right. It was pretty well known around here that it wasn’t exactly a safe environment. The internalized misogyny that keeps that running makes me insane.

@Ghost There are a bunch of google collab things for Stability that are (relatively) self-explanatory, and if you don't mind slow and limited sizes, they can be fiddled with free or pretty steadily for $10/month for more reliable access.

https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1jUwJ0owjigpG-9m6AI_wEStwimisUE17

^ That one is pretty solid.

(It says 'no NSFW filter' but don't assume that's because it's for porn-hounds; they set up a NSFW autodetect that is notoriously and often hilariously buggy. You'd see buildings, clouds, rocks all censored to much gnashing of teeth in the beta because the autodetect thought it might be a nipple.)

@insomniac7809 said in Thirtsy Sword Lesbians wins some ENies:

I mean, the title says it all, doesn't it?

I read it as 'thirty sword lesbians' and I didn't know if it was referring to the number of blades or ladies involved.

@ZombieGenesis Yeah, it is a spectrum with a lot of overlap, probably. The intersection of gaming and creative writing is honestly so magical. I haven't found anything else like it in my life. Definitely people seem to prefer different spots on the spectrum, though. My best friend in the hobby prefers a spot more towards the imaginative storytelling side, and I am constantly in awe of their storytelling capabilities, and often feel pretty silly in comparison. At least our playstyles are similar enough to get along and play with each other happily.

@misadventure Oh the latter, just prompts. I don't know, like maybe the flight attendant armed with a sonic toothbrush comes up with some really great idea. That person knows their character's strengths and if they can use them in a way I can't think of for myself then right on. If they can pull off the rolls they gotta pull off, equally right on. If the rolls go bad, I proceed with making their character's day that much more complicated. I might raise an eyebrow when the non-combat glass jaw shows up at a scene that I think looks like heavy combat, but if they can find a reason to be there and a way to contribute, great.

Now what I do get irritated at is when Captain McGlass Jaw gets mad at me for not coming up with some specific way for Captain McGlass Jaw to shine. Like...dude that's your job, I'm over here being the rain and the engines and the guy with the gun, you tell me how you Awesome.

@faraday said in What do player-STs need?:

It's a hard balance to strike, maintaining continuity, theme and fairness without discouraging folks in the process. You can try to be positive and encouraging, but some folks are just going to take it hard no matter what you do.

And sometimes, as a player running things, you just need to accept that not every game is made for you. Sometimes, what staff has laid down is not what you want. It doesn't mean anything else. Adapt to their vision, or find a game that is more aligned with your ideas.

Staff can lay out pretty clear guidelines. And sometimes, that's just not enough, or it's the wrong game, and it really doesn't mean more than that. Can't please everyone, can't get it right for everyone.

I'm moving this to our new Game Design section, because hey! 🙂