Posts made by NightAngel12

For those that have more experience with soft code, what would you say is the maximum amount of information that a single attribute can contain?

To give some context for this question to help coders with answering me:

&infodump ####=Text|dbref#.DESC<INT@INT>INT

get(after(before(after(before(<CODE>)))))))))

sort of storage system? It's doable and with enough patience it works fine for certain things. I'm curious just how much information can be shoved into one of these attributes. Can I repeat special characters? Do certain characters not work? etc.

What about generating a basic coded system inside a non-themed sandbox MUSH and use a core element from FS3? The +combat instances? Then, players create their character with a name they're willing to actually RP as, (no 1337Pwned or ~BIG===D~FTW names, which should be sitebanned on creation just because)
and then when a group determines they want to RP together, they all +combat/join the same instance and use the system's codes to roll dice and add NPCs and such. End of their RP, they close the instance and post their log wherever. Provides a fun way to enjoy FATE online without having to deal with the overhead of actual world building and metaplotting.

You as a staffer can run plots of your own that can line up from RP to RP if you want to, and players can join in on those plots, but if a group of players decide to RP something other than what you're plotting, they have the freedom to create on your game without @-commands or permanency.

@Miss-Demeanor I have seen this happen many times when playing tabletop, and it isn't just dickish GM's either. A lot of storytellers tend not to take into consideration all possible avenues of exploration, so what ends up happening is that when clever players try to follow a thread... the GM panics and smacks them for not paying attention to this other thing they /have/ thought through.
If feel it's all sides that might need change, players should look into subtle things without fear of being attacked by the GM, and GM's should be encouraged to flesh out their stories with more than just one thread of play through and/or simply not get flustered if players don't pick up on their 'clever' thread hooks.

@WTFE I have done MUSH coding, but not for a while. However, it depends on where you might have met that chef/coder.

I really hate it when the Director comes down to my kitchen (I operate the satellite kitchen for memory care patients at work) and asks me what I'm doing. When I respond I'm making dessert (from scratch, because.) he then replies, "Oh, I thought they were going to have you just take from upstairs. We have a pastry chef so there's really no reason for you to have to."

... right the fuck in the middle of me having spent the last 5 minutes +/- whipping cream because they won't buy me a kitchen aid...

I wonder if he realizes he was talking to someone who routinely sharpens and hones their own knives and then fabricates down whole sides of cows... (doubt it).

The best part was later going up to the Exec chef and clarifying with her:
Me: "Just to clarify, do you want me to use desserts from up here?"
Her: "Well you'll have to." (With an attitude like somehow I'm the person who did wrong)
Me: "Okay." (Slight quizzical tilt, trying to imply an offer of 'give me more info')
Her: "I already told [pastry chef] to make extra."
Me: "... Okay! See you Thursday." (Thoughts: /TOLD HER... WHO THE FUCK WAS GOING TO TELL ME!?!/)

To note, every one of my bosses acted as though I already knew and it was as though either I had ignored their mandate or the pastry chef had... why can't bosses just over communicate to make sure everyone is on the same page?

I find that I'll log a scene when I remember to log that scene, but typically I'll forget. Usually before I close a window I'll take the entire backlog without editing so that in the event that something happens where, like @WTFE said, someone asks me if I have a log of something... I can scour through the backlog and find it.
Personally I use SimpleMU because it has such a massive backlogging capacity (if you set it to).

I'm a professional chef. Haven't always been, but my list of work prior to professional chef is a long one and a lot less interesting.

@Sunny Hehehe, yeah. I figured out the not being clever part early on, so I tried to be a little more forthcoming with the hooks. In my example, the character would take a number of poses to express their discomfort and then begin searching for a way out. I tried to give adequate opportunity for others to RP with him without just posing a single "He bolts out of the room the minute So-and-so walked in."
I think more what I was trying to say was that these depths don't seem to be represented in a lot of the characters I've come across. The character seems to be a flat two-dimensional text based mote rather than a complex text-represented human being with unique-nesses in ways other players can barely imagine. (sort of, since we obviously imagine them at some point)
It's less about people reading into subtle or writing subtly, and more that I haven't seen deep characters with problems that run deeper than face value emotions. (As in: Strong female fighter type is strong because. vs. Strong female fighter type is strong because she was raised to be a meak woman, was betrothed to some jerk who beat her, got strong and became who she is.) Perhaps I'm not RPing with the right people, but those characters I've met that haven't led to ooc friendships that transcend the computer screen typically are just their face value character trope.

I haven't been on MU*s for nearly as long as most people here but from the first RP MUD to the first MUSH I ever played on, I learned huge amounts of what it means to RP from a large multitude of players who had been RPing for some time.
I found that typically I stick with the 3rd person, but found there are scenes or times where it makes more sense to use 2nd. It's something that boils down to who your RP partner is and how well the both of you understand the IC/OOC boundary line. Personally, I don't ever take you-posing to specifically mean /me/ the player. We're actors, acting. So the you must therefore refer to the character I am play-acting. That's how my head interprets you-posing as a default. Now, I have played on games where the intent of the other person using you-poses was to affect me the player, but typically I just 'play' along with it and keep myself separated from the actual events on the screen.
I would say that a pet peeve of mine is a lack of exploration into another character or follow through with an RP. I know each of us is RPing for his or her own characters' story, but we should also be RPing to uncover the stories of others. Characters need depth, and those that might have played with one of my characters will likely have lost a lot of that depth because of the way I write. I don't put meta information into an RP, ever, because it takes away from the exploration of that character from another character's standpoint.
Example of this would be a habit a character has, like one of my characters who had a habit of bolting from rooms with more than three people in it. He had a social anxiety, even though he was supposed to be a noble, but instead of posing some meta information about how others might notice he was bolting away like usual, I simply wrote the same way each time the group grew above my specified limit. It was a hook, albeit a subtle one.
That's where follow through comes in. I've played a large number of characters across several games and I typically find people that don't follow through with an RP. If there's an RL issue, that's fine just send me a quick +mail or something to let me know oocly that you can't follow up on something. We'll work it out. It's those times when a player disappears in the middle of a scene, doesn't return for hours/days/weeks/etc. and then does return and doesn't talk to you. They may have even forgotten they were RPing with you at all.

I know I'm late to this party but I'd like to ask a couple questions to @faraday .
When you developed the roll-count-successes system for FS3 did you initially intend it to be a strict 25% chance for success across the board? If so, why?

Secondly, what would be the best method for me to adjust the dice roller code so to reflect a more gradual improvement to a character's chance for success? Such as, ranks 1-4 are 7s and 8s, 5 - 9 is 6s, 7s, and 8s, and 10+ includes 5. Currently it's trapped behind so many calls to different functions that it's like trying to unravel a rubber band ball to get to the tootsie roll center.
I like your new FS3, it has some nice alterations to the skill system that does seem to simplify things, but I'm curious if the above alteration to the dice might have solved issues for a lot of games out there. I liked quirks though, personally, but I can see an advantage to how you split up bg skills and I can see good use for advantages as an incentive tool for driving PrP between factions. All around a big fan of your coded works