I'm having a hard time getting any RP as well, not for lack of opportunity or partners, but because my health and energy are bad and taking over the aidecare is wearing me out.
I often feel like stuff is passing me by, and it's depressing.
OTOH, it will improve at some point, so I hang around.
@surreality said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):
I want to play an anglerbro who won't date women because he's 'just not ready for that kind of commitment.'
@Ghost said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):
I'm exiting the thread, but I want to let it be said that when someone who's made a post seeking constructive input that she's worked hard on, for a game idea, getting nitpicked until she says "fuck it" and walks away, leaving the rest of us to look forward to the upcoming games run by the people who henpecked her to death...is not constructive.
Just shows me where I won't play (or recommend); but also, there is still too much WORA mentality splashing shit all over folks who just want to have fun.
I suggest to surreality to open her game anyway, since the best response imo is to have a successful game. I did, and it's been great.
@EmmahSue said in Roleplaying writing styles:
Inasmuch as I haven't posed in a minute, I try v. hard to keep all 5 senses in mind at all times. We live in a layered 4D world, yo!
Also, just because I-the-writer have complete control over what text goes on the screen doesn't mean I-the-PC has complete control over what's happening in the scene; that is to say, include things that your PC might be doing to betray hidden or unconscious thoughts and motives.
OOC insertions in poses are only okay if you're making fun of yourself.
And whoever said above that telepathy (if you don't actually have the power) is lazy is correct. Write better poses that allow for interpretation and don't shove your character's thoughts at me in a way I can't respond-to. I don't have telepathy, so I can't hear that shit, and if I can't hear it, I don't want to read it. It's superfluous and becomes more about some external third-party view of the scene, rather than the interplay between people involved in it.
There are exceptions to every rule.
ES
Yeah. I will sometimes give more of an omniscient narrative if the character opposite mine has a reason for the insight (especially if it's a familiar friend, very empathetic person, my character is being really transparent, etc); other times I'll give only external cues, when it makes more sense to be more enigmatic-- first meetings, good composure rolls, etc.
I try, as the narrator, to poke fun at my characters whenever I can. I stay hands-off on other characters, though, for the usual meta reasons.
Yeah. Nothing is perfect, and no game will ever be perfect. People will always bitch; I try to tell folks to play a game based on what it is rather than what you would like.
Do your best, treat people empathetically, do staff jobs in a timely manner, and listen to genuine criticism. If the game fizzles, well, that happens. Most of them eventually do, good and bad alike.
Don't feed the trolls by letting the wrongfun police drive you off. Give yourself and the people who want this gane to work what y'all want, not the folks who want to tear you down.
I don't see why it's necessary to feel like you have to (be the one to) 'advance' a game's technology. They wanted a pre-gun setting, go join a game with guns, or start one, instead of trying to force that kind of theme change (slow or not). You can affect things as a player without needing to do that, why the fixation?
My characters tend to use guns on games where they're available, but I don't feel the need to push that on games where they don't yet exist. Society doesn't need to advance that rapidly on a MUSH (especially real-time ones), and the concept of society needing to advance or to advance via gunpowder is unnecessary and arbitrary. Societies stay pretty similar for hundreds or thousands of years, why is NOW (at present MUSH time) suddenly necessary?
IMO, staff just need to say, 'No, that's not our theme and we're not interested,' if that's the case, and it's a reasonable answer.
@Gilette My game has been getting a steady influx of first-time MUSHers, either mudders who are bringing friends over, or forum rpers converting over, or people getting real life friends to learn. I have been pleasantly surprised because I was starting to worry that we'd end up just cannibalising from the same general playerbase. Out of about 80 players, I'd hazard a about a dozen or two have us as their first game.
@Ghost said in Emotional separation from fictional content:
And if you feel that all of the games eventually turn out this way?
They don't, but sticking to games run and played by the same toxic folks will make it seem so.
@Derp said in Identifying Major Issues:
So , I guess we need to fix that. It's easy. Recruit the younglings that have no time or lives but also have a level of skill and facility with writing that will please our aging population. Cake.
This is mostly what we did on F&L in regards to running plots and staffing-- either they're relatively new and young and have no life (our most prolific plotters) or they're older and busier but still enthusiastic (and who give more guidance).
Re: storytellers-- a lot of folks just don't like running plots, or are nervous, especially with combat stuff. I won't run combat scenes because chemo fog WILL make me make a dumb mistake, but I'm happy with running a casual one-off.
This reminds me to make some throwaway emails. I've been stalked off- MU* before by MUers (one is still at large); and have seen others' offgame accounts get stalked, too (by folks still in the hobby).
People decide your wrongfun personally offends them so they have to chase you everywhere when you escape them (when it gets to that point, the real problem was them all along, they are addicted to the bullying), or they decide they must own you because they got too fixated on the you behind the character; both impulses come from the same lack of boundaries. Email is a boundary.
Not sure why folks are surprised at the resistance, gamers are batshit.
@Ghost said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:
(i.e. perhaps the better way of dealing with it in the long term might be to encourage her to roleplay openly with everyone knowing who she is, and then watch for the behaviors. If an open statement is made: We don't like the way you manipulate shit, and players make it clear to staff that they won't stay if she is allowed and if those behaviors persist, then staff will have to choose to ignore so many players' stances or adhere to them.
She already knows all this. She's been told all this for years. She doesn't care. At some point, treat people like grownups and accept that they are showing you their true face.
She's not a newbie, she's not naive, and she is not ignorant of any of these things. She has not changed her behavior in over a decade of being told all this. Her most recent post made this pretty clear.
All you are doing is enabling her. Plenty of people have, that's why she's still around.
@Ghost said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:
So I'd hate to see such an open forum used to attack innocent players
She isn't.
@Rook said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:
I think my implied question should've been clearer: How do you NOT come to a game like this and make every fucking effort to be different, anonymous and someone new? My point here is - someone who doesn't do this, is either blissfully self-ignorant and in denial of accusations before, or they are (as so many have said) happily arrogant and uncaring for the reputation that precedes them.
Correct, her critics are 'creeps' as of that last post.
I have banned a player from my game who was stalking another player, and part of the reason for it was multiple skype logs, in addition to page convos.
While that is extreme (two folks arguing in skype is their business, for example), fishing behind people's back for real life details that that person doesn't want given out is serious.
I would also give a warning if I saw a player starting to go after another on a mush community skype channel, or trolling, etc, as imo it's basically an extension of the game. To a point, I feel the platform is irrelevant if it's the same community.
Same for teamspeak, etc. I've been part of mmo guilds where abuse on TS was considered bannable in-game, and agree with it. Death threats are pretty much a deserved instaban.
@Derp said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:
But you can also catch a lot of heat singling out players for different treatment for any reason, and not treating all players as if they were playing on a level playing field.
There is no middle ground there. You either do treat them all the same, or you don't treat them all the same.
There is a lot of nuance in the conduct of a player. Unrepentant long-term repetition of certain behaviors, vs a one-time incident (like you said, games have their own culture and sometimes shit just happens), is a good tell.
As much as I've said here about VAS, I've been really impressed by many players actively learning from their fuckups (especially new mushers) and becoming genuine assets to a game.
Thst's why I won't give everyone the same chance, and that is also why most games have some kibd of three-strikes policy. Many people fuck up, for many reasons. Most of them try to do better. A very few, despite many chances, don't.
IMO, I think that one-size-fits-all policies, adhered to in all cases without allowance for circumstance, preserves the illusion of fairness. While you should, in good faith, (in most cases) treat everyone the same, and create policies that reflect that, there are some cases where people are not the same.
Willfully choosing to ignore that in service to an unrealistic ideal is why folks like VASpider, Custodius, Elsa, etc, have caused so much damage for years.
They know precisely how important it is for folks to project to their players that they are completely impartial to all players in all circumstances. They know precisely how hard to bend the letter of each rule in order to be excused from culpability.
Sometimes, in the face of all of that, I think it's okay to say 'no'. Even if that might make some folks uncomfortable.
@surreality said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:
There's been... more of that than usual this month thus far, and it is really getting to be a concern, in the sense that it makes me wonder if it's worth sticking around or not. Not something I ever thought I'd be saying, either.
I'd be sad to see you go. You seem like a very empathetic and kind person.
@Coin said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:
After what Sovereign did on Reno, I banned him when he came to Eldritch. I didn't wait for him to do something bad on Eldritch, because he's a shitty person I don't want on my game. Spider was pre-banned. These are people, not usernames, and changing their PC, going to a different game won't change that. Only a consistent, protracted, sincere change in attitude will, and even there, no one is under any obligation to give them that chance, especially when it's been given more than often enough, and always ended in calamity.
Your entire point is flawed, because you choose to grant a clean slate to people based on an arbitrary notion like "it's a new game". The action isn't justified by the reason. It's like saying, 'this man is a thief in Illinois, but in Michigan he's not'. No, dude, the guy's a thief, period--he may not have committed theft in Michigan, but that doesn't make him any less of a thief.
I agree with every word here, especially when her taunts on tumblr in response to the threads of today and yesterday have shown no repentance whatsoever and outright mention of her closeness with headstaff. It's not different this time, Derp.
@surreality said in A Constructive Thread About People We Might Not Like:
I don't really think it's entirely fair to dogpile @Derp here, though, and he's kinnnnnnnda taking all the lumps for this forum-side.
He's not the game owner, and the game owner is the one who has apparently made the call, at least according to Spider's post.
I know I wouldn't feel it quite fair if I was taken to task for decisions made by headstaff that I don't really have a say in, but have to enforce or relate to others, so, y'know. Something to keep in mind here.
I don't hold him responsible for the policies, but he's defending them, so we're responding to that.
I don't think anyone expects FH to change their minds, the only voice we've heard from there so far has doubled down.
Edit: so far, while we are addressing his posts directly, we've been pretty good about criticising the policy and not the player. Derp himself seems to have the best of intentions.
@Arkandel It was really crazy. We've still got crazy in the hobby, but the general reaction to it is, "That's screwed up!"
This was in the early to mid 90s, and folks were still getting used to the idea of the internet. Most people in America were on AoL; the rest were often paying by the hour on inix/linux based internet services, and monochrome monitors were still a thing.
People LIVED online at a time where that was an incredible, heady experience, and just being internet- and especially telnet-savvy was a badge of pride and pretty unusual. A lot of nerds (and I consider myself one) had never really held social power before. Most of us were college-age with a few in their early 30s. No forum RP, no MMOs, livejournal wasn't a thing. Facebook wasn't a thing.
People were still sometimes resisting graphical browsers, and many computers could not run the web and telnet at the same time unless it was a linux machine running x-windows, which made you switch desktops. Ordinary people didn't do that.
There was no real decades-long everyman internet culture. There was no everyday standard of 'that's fucked up'. People had their little fiefs and got away with so much shit; it also encouraged, when web boards became a thing, places like soapbox's predecessors, where that excess was normal to a lot of people.
That intensity was a rush to so many people.
It's no surprise to me that as a lot of us oldbies have matured, a lot of the forum arglebargle has started to drain out. You've got some resultant 'but what if this goes bad, everything goes bad' kneejerking still (more lately I noticed but stuff goes in cycles), but nowadays every other game is not run by an Elsa or a Spider and their mush-wide posses.
IE it was the wild west back then. I am kind of surprised we made it to where games like SYE are considered toxic. These were the popular folks back then.
Sorry if this comes off as patronising, anyway.
I agree, MU* (and player if folks are uploading their OWN profiles) pages should only be editable by their creators, or people they select. There's just too much opportunity for trolling, and in my direct experience, a subset of MUers will happily take to non-MU platforms to keep dragging on games and folks upon which they're fixated.