Best posts made by Pyrephox

@Arkandel I can dig that. In CoD, I'd probably put conditions for every awesome use of artifact. Want to hulk out from that alchemical potion you found? First, break something precious that belongs to a close friend or ally to get the Essence of Loss that is the potion's active ingredient. I'd always have it be something that the player has to CHOOSE to have their character do, rather than something that was imposed on them, but power should cost. And, in a horror game, it should never be "enough" - the PC should always wonder, "Could I do more, could I protect more people if I were just willing to sacrifice more?"

I generally try to think of a concept that will a) fit the game setting/theme as best I can, b) has a 'hook' that I can see being desired and useful within the concept of the game, and c) is something that I can really see myself playing. Needed/wanted concepts lists (or questions) are an inspiration to me, because it helps fill in that A and B requirement right up front.

Having a character that feels USEFUL really is important to me. I don't need things to revolve around the character, or for the character to be vital, but I do need to be able to look around and go, "Okay, my character can help progress things by doing THAT." It does mean that when I'm looking for regular playgroups, I tend to stay away from characters which are similar to mine in skillsets/abilities UNLESS the other character's personality/circumstances are different enough that how the two characters USE those abilities are likely to be very different.

@cobaltasaurus said in Development Thread: Elements: Courts of the Sacred Seed:

On the day that you should be choosing a Court to join (if say your magic is different than your parents...) you are instead put through a public the Ritual of Attainder (maybe rename this Ritual of Clipping ??).

Pruning. "Did you hear? Lady Iris' youngest is probably going to be Pruned at the end of the year. Seventeen and not a hint of power." "Such a shame, really. But the Gardens of the Courts must be tended."

Or, worse: /Weeded/. With an unseeded from noble origins referred to as a Weed, if you want to really convey that disdain.

coughs Apologies to @SunnyJ for the massive derail, by the way. Mage game! Sounds cool!

The thing that often gets confused in this specific situation is that there's often some serious blurring of IC/OOC lines when it comes to 'discipline' scenes. Which is to say that they're often intended to be an IC means of correcting behavior that the discipliner finds annoying/disruptive/incorrect OOC, which is why there's often a desire to have the 'discipline' be unpleasant for the player. When, honestly, things like 'this character is acting wildly out of theme/reason for their organization' is usually an OOC problem, and should be addressed by an OOC discussion and/or uninviting the player from the org involved.

But we tend to be very conflict adverse (I am not at all immune to this), so we try 'IC discipline' first, even when what we're really hoping is that the player realizes that this isn't fun for anyone but him/her, and stops doing whatever it is they're doing. So it has to be OOC unpleasant, rather than just IC unpleasant.

But this, of course, usually ends up feeding drama than solving anything.

@cobaltasaurus And how you ICly name this whole process could tell people a lot about the culture and its values. If it's something fairly straightforward and blunt (like Ritual of Pruning or Ritual of Attainder) then it suggests that the nobility is unflinching regarding the costs of their lifestyle, and also suggests a certain bluntness in culture. On the other hand, if you go with something obscure, flowery, and with an air of secrecy and repression about it - like, The Ritual of Autumn's First Wind - that only makes any sense if you paw through some allegory, then it suggests a culture who would rather mask terrible things in pretty words and pageantry, which also can have knock on effects for the rest of the society (like, maybe after the Ritual, the family instead of acknowledging that the Weed has been disowned, carries out a funeral and officially, they've "died" and are literally never acknowledged by any member of the family as alive ever again).

@ganymede My style when I'm running a combat scene is:

Brief OOC declaration - "I am using my X power to do Y on Z enemy."
Roll
Brief OOC declaration of results - "That's a miss/hit/oh wow you mauled them."
Player directed to pose results as next player OOCly declares action.
And so forth.

If you go silent on me on the declaration stage, I will ask three times, and then usually I will skip you for that round.

@Livia said in What game system would you prefer for a big-tent nWoD project?:

@Ganymede said in What game system would you prefer for a big-tent nWoD project?:

@Livia

Short-term aspirations are directions that you want to take your character down. In role play, it can be as simple as “my NPC daughter wants to go dress-shopping.” Why? Because if you are a paranoid changeling going out in public can be an awful experience.

I know what they are. I don't see how that adds any real value. And again, all these examples, on their own, are fine.

It's when staff is telling me I should be resolving 5+ of these a week I start to wonder how often you can come up with these throw away quick aspirations.

For me, I use it as a guide to think about what kind of scenes/activities I'd find exciting for this character in the next few days. If I'm a social mood, I'll throw out a "meet someone new". If I'm working on a plot, then, "talk about X", if I'm feeling restless and want some action, I might say, "get into a fight", or "go into the Hedge". I don't stress about meeting 'a certain number' of Aspirations per week. I just think about what would be fun, write it down, do it, get XP!

For me, it's both motivating and helps serve as a quick reminder of "Oh, yeah, I wanted to track down this character for a scene," or "right! I'm working on X."

Please note that I am in no way on the "rape factory" train, nor do I think it's a logical or inevitable conclusion. And I certainly wouldn't want it to be part of the game!

All I was doing is riffing on some of the setting ideas - not saying it /should/ be this way, or it /must/ be this way. Having played on several @Cobaltasaurus games, I trust her to make a setting that is fun and enjoyable. I just like worldbuilding.

Personally, I think it's worth giving it a shot. There's not a lot of real downside - if it ends up being too much work or too difficult, the easiest thing in the world is just 'we're not going to do that anymore', and if it excites and energizes people who do get excited by that - either as players or staff - then it's a net good.

Although I most like the suggestion made earlier in the thread of, essentially, a 'partial roster': a character which inhabits X particular space, and must have skills/abilities A, B, and C, but is otherwise customizable.

Or, honestly, I think full rosters would be a good choice for powerful mortal characters when you want to really emphasize that side of the game. Have a roster character mayor, or police chief, or crime lord that outlines exactly what power such a character can wield, and encourage people to take that character as something more than an 'instant victim'. It tends to be the mortal side of the WoD that needs more love, and break people out of their 'humans are furniture' sort of mindset, and some strong rosters with deep hooks into the meta, built by someone who can set them up not to be insta-jobbed by random supernaturals, could help a lot.

@Livia said in What game system would you prefer for a big-tent nWoD project?:

@Pyrephox said in What game system would you prefer for a big-tent nWoD project?:

@Livia Once or twice, when I want to remind myself to go out and find someone new to play with. A lot of times, I will make my next aspiration directly after a scene when one has been fulfilled, because THAT SCENE suggested something fun to do next. Often with that character, but sometimes just in general.

But how many do you realistically get through a week?

Depends on how much RP I get. The only CoD game I'm on, getting any RP at all is pretty hard, and I've been faded myself with work stuff, so none in the last few weeks. But before that? 3-4 a week, assuming a scene a day. Fewer scenes, usually fewer Aspirations (although sometimes you get lucky!)

Oh this is sounding coooool. And I love that there's the potential for diplomacy and intrigue with other nations that aren't (from this) either Good or Evil.

@derp said in Roster Characters & WoD?:

@pyrephox said in Roster Characters & WoD?:

the biggest thing I could see needing some very firm rules is how to resolve conflicts of depiction when no party wants to give way.

I don't even think this would be the first big fire that you'd have to put out. The first big fire that you'd have to put out is figuring out how every single job that a player puts in is going to be resolved before that player logs out.

And who gets control over the xp pools that come with that character if you have to give them up every day.

And...

I doubt that this sort of system would have either jobs or 'XP', and that's okay. Based on what Ominious has said, it would probably be more like people collaborating on what the arcs for characters are and players who are interested in those cooperating to pursue them. I imagine that if there's XP at all, it'd be on a milestone system - but, honestly, it'd probably be better to do away with it.

It wouldn't be a typical MU* experience, or even a typical tabletop experience. Less focused on 'this is my character and it progresses individually' and more 'this is our game and we move the characters to experience the stories we want to tell'. A niche appeal but not an invalid one, at all. It actually reminds me of a lot of the better freeform RP you find out in the wilds, which is a lot less individual focused, and may have one or more players trading off for for each other during their 'poses' (which often more resemble vignettes).

@Derp And CoD doesn't gate nearly as much Cool Stuff and Neat Powers behind useless one-dot abilities, so a low XP character isn't nearly as basic as they could be in previous editions.

I admit, even having taken several online Python courses, when I looked at the Arx code, I just sort of folded up and said, "NOPE." I still want to try it at some point, but that sort of overwhelmed reaction isn't, I think, at all unusual.

@devrex This would not be a game for you, then. And that's okay. Not everything has to be a game for every player. I'm not even sure it would be a game for me, although I'd probably at least look at the actual setup before making a decision, if it were made.

@Auspice said in Arx's Elevation Situation:

@Pyrephox said in Arx's Elevation Situation:

large scale famines or plagues or natural disasters would work just as well, but wars are the least unpleasant of the big events because they allow players to have input and steer how the conflict comes out in the end.

and people traditionally hate famine/plague type plots.

Which makes sense - there's really not anything you can DO, as most character types, for them. You just suffer through them and hope you come out with enough to go on. I sort of like them, but I like them best when you have a system in place that can note warning signs, you can decide whether to try and invest enough to head it off, etc. I like planning, and I am weird.

But wars are more dynamic, and provide more things for non-planner PCs to do.

I wouldn't mind helping build systems and setting for a game. I'm too much of a flake to run one, but I like writing and testing systems, especially these sorts of systems.

@sparks Remember that it doesn't have to be the BEST resource. Just one that lets the prospective coder (who, remember, maybe doesn't actually enjoy coding, but just wants something functional enough to do what they do enjoy, i.e. design the game) fumble their way through something that works.

One of the things that I think Kingsmouth really did well, the thing that also fed into the creation of these systems, was that that it knew what kind of game it wanted to be, and made it very clear in everything it did. The backstory of the game fed into it being a highly political game where change was expected. The territory system, the boon system, influences, /every/ system was built from that focused premise. It was a politics-focused Vampire game, and every member of staff was on board with that. It didn't support other kinds of play, and didn't try...and that was okay!

Too often, WoD games try to be everything to everyone in order to garner the most butts in chargen, and I think that leads to the Anywhere By Night feel, and many of the tensions between players that want fundamentally different experiences. Kingsmouth was a game that succeeded by doing the opposite - instead of doing a whole bunch of things poorly-to-mediocre, it chose one thing that staff were passionate about, and did it /very well/. And that brought people. People who were new to MU*s, to Vampire, or to WoD, in a number of cases. Hell, it got me to play Vampire for a while, and that's a thing that I thought would never, ever happen.