Posts made by Seraphim73

@Ganymede Actually, it's right before what you quoted:

With that, Han takes her hand and starts to massage it.

LEIA: Stop that.
HAN: Stop what?
Leia is flushed, confused.
LEIA: Stop that! My hands are dirty.
HAN: My hands are dirty, too. What are you afraid of?
LEIA: (looking right into his eyes) Afraid?

And then comes the section you referenced. Leia said to stop rubbing her hand, Han did not. It's not like I think that it's the creepiest exchange in the world (or even in the Star Wars movies, ugh... angels...), but I don't know, I was conditioned by growing up on movies from the '80s and '90s to think that sort of persistence in the face of resistance is sexy and manly and romantic, but it doesn't seem very consent-friendly to me.

@BetterNow said in First Through the Gate Syndrome:

Another thing to consider is that being first to pose means being the first to pose the rest of the time right after the GM/ST/DM, which means you don't have that cushion of time to type up your reaction the the plot runner's emits. That makes some people feel pressured, especially if they are a slower writer.

I actually see getting to go right after the GM as a bonus... because no one is going to suggest the very thing that you're typing up right now in their pose one ahead of you.

I agree with @Auspice however, that 3PR helps with that a lot -- because you aren't locked into any one spot, so no one's waiting on you if you're suddenly stuck for what you want to write, or you can let other people creep ahead of you if you want to slip out of the first pose position.

I do like that in FS3 combat, pose order really doesn't matter much, but I do also think that this discourages interaction between PCs during combat -- because everyone reads the combat results and starts typing, you have to be the type of player who pose-queues -- and then is willing to go back and edit the pose before you send it through.

@Ganymede It can be smooth and still be creepy. They're not mutually exclusive. But like, he pens her in, grabs her, doesn't let go, she says "no," and he doesn't respect it. Totally fine and romantic for 1980, but definitely not okay in 2019.

@Auspice I feel called out. Accurately, but called out.

ETA: @mietze said in MU*, Youth, and LGBT+ Identity:

I think it's a lot more subtle now, but sometimes I wonder generationally when this is encountered in a situation that I would just laugh off/brush off, if there is a reaction similar to my kids' horrified reactions to the <lots of stuff that wasn't seen as troublesome at the time and is now>

Hell, how about Han and Leia in the Exoggorth in Empire Strikes Back? I thought that was smooth as hell originally, and now I think it's cringy and squicky.

@faraday said in First Through the Gate Syndrome:

ETA: If you want to have "making a plan" be an important part of the plot, that's fine, but I think it's a distinct phase. Don't mingle planning/executing into a single scene.

I like to have people make a plan OOCly first (because that usually goes a hell of a lot faster than doing it ICly), and then drop them in media res. It takes away some of the slowness of planning, and some of the railroadiness of in media res, although it still removes some of the fun of snarking around plans and keeps some of the rainroadiness. It's not a perfect solution, but I think it's a relatively neat medium when you've got time to OOCly talk the plan over.

As for a pose-order first round, I worry that it would delay later poses and make the first round take even longer. But I could be totally off-base on this. I do like something Faraday did and I copied over on BSG, which was having the ST scene-set, the IC leader of the scene pose first, and then everyone else as they will after that (I think someone else suggested it up higher in the thread too). It lets the IC leader pass the orders down the chain as mentioned above, makes someone break the seal, but doesn't stack everyone else up to a strict order after that.

I get that this might play into @faraday's discomfort with being called on to go first, but since we always asked the person who was going to be in charge if they were okay with it, I don't have so much of a big deal with it -- you picked the rank, you 'get' to be in charge, you have to pose first.

I can only speak for myself, but I do have some of Theory 2 going on when it comes to plot-scenes. I know that I've had spotlight-hogging tendencies in the past, and I want to do everything I can to avoid them now.

That being said, I think that the flood of poses close to one another may also be a result of the fact that it just takes a certain amount of time to type up a pose for a large portion of MUSHers. So if it takes 10-15 minutes to type up a "solid" opening pose, then most of the poses are going to flood in between 10 and 15 minutes.

I'm also totally happy to set most non-plot scenes, particularly if I suggested the idea.

I love showing the world reacting to the players, and seeing the players reacting to what the world does to them. Granted, this is the same thing I love about playing a PC, but you can do it on a grander scale as a ST than you can as a player (usually).

I love seeing characters talk about NPCs or situations I've created for days or weeks afterwards. I love creating those characters and playing them as real people, and seeing them live on after the scene is awesome.

I love seeing how excited and pleased people get during the plot, hanging on every roll or pose (GM and player poses).

I love it when players do something I wasn't expecting, and I have to think on my feet, only to realize that it fits perfectly into one of the ideas I had for the plot, and I can just run with it.

I love giving players the opportunity to learn more about their PCs, or to show off hidden aspects of the characters that they already know.

@mietze said in Responsible RP Resolutions:

I find I am rarely invited by others to participate in things without having to shoehorn my way in or taking on a coordinator/arranging role, possibly because they assume that if I wanted to be part of things I'd ask OR that I have a ton of other meaningful stuff going on. As a result I try to be as inclusive as possible with stuff I do, but to be honest that also often results in non-reciprocation or being downplayed as easy-for-me because of similar assumptions.

I actually got this exact feedback from the Staff of another game recently, and it shocked me. I'm feeling a whole lot of what you're saying, as well as most of @Caryatid's intro post. I've been trying to reset my expectations for the last couple of years, and I've succeeded to some degree, but not as far as I'd like. When I get down, I try to spend some laughing with my toddler, or read a book, or kick some AI ass in Madden or Crusader Kings 2, anything to give me another story or something else to think about. Reminding myself that perception is reality from every perspective helps too -- that the people I'm jealous of are probably jealous of someone else, and that other people probably feel like I'm involved in everything, even if I don't feel like I am.

I actually like something a little bit in between, but I would rather err on the side of knowing everything than being too secretive. I like seeing how active people are, and reading some of the great RP going on. But you're right that it can lose some of the OOC mystery and intrigue.

Even on Ares, I think it's totally fine to keep scenes unshared until after the IC reveal (as long as they don't time out, of course). I would actually prefer that in some cases (evil cultist status, a big reveal that some characters have been in on for a while first, that sort of thing).

I love the idea of a Rebels-era Star Wars game, and would love to play on one. Having been part of the last time one of these was attempted (Fires of Hope), I would agree with @Sparks and strongly, strongly urge anyone running a game like this to focus on one faction and really, really closely tie the PCs together. Characters on FoH started out very tightly focused on a single Rebel Cell and explicitly-linked Indies, but they spread out quite a bit through the brief life of the game.

As much as I would love to play the Imperial side of a Dark Times game, I think that you're going to want to focus both the playerbase and Staff attention on a single faction.

I also agree with @JillBioskop and @Sparks that FCs should be kept out as NPC quest-givers.

If you wanted to use FS3, you could easily have Weapon Specials for Demon/Slayer Strength and for Werewolf Claws, and that sort of thing. This would give you the necessary lethality/accuracy/penetration/initiative modifiers. You have to trust your players to use the right specials, but if you can't trust them to do that, why the heck are you letting them play on your game?

@Lemon-Fox Actually I used the wrong terminology. I think starting with the Battle of Tukayyid and going into the cold war following would be awesome. Or Dark Ages, which yes, that would be after the BattleTech timeline, in the MechWarrior CMG timeline.

@faraday I would LOVE a Crimson Skies game, either canon, or just the Weird War 2 Dieselpunk aesthetic.

Had me curious until Rhost. With you considering Ares, I'm curious again. Although I've got to admit I'm more of a Wars guy than a Trek guy.

Star Wars
MechWarrior/BattleTech (Dark Ages or War of the Clans)
BSG
Crimson Skies
John Carter of Mars
Straight Up Fantasy (Ares + the skeleton of Tat's spell system if she'd share it)
Wheel of Time

ETA: Oh yeah. All in Ares. Maybe not Wheel of Time. But probably. Ares is life.

@insomniac7809 said in Fandom and entitlement:

I really don't think the Harry Potter films are at risk of losing $10mil unless the premier is literally shown on a rapidly-sinking raft made entirely out of $100 bills that is also on fire, and even then they'd probably break even.

From what I've heard, China won't even show a movie with an explicitly gay relationship in it. So yeah, the US returns might actually go up a little if a Harry Potter movie showed an explicitly gay relationship in it, but there would be no China returns, and that'll take a huge chunk out of international box office right there.

@Ghost said in X-Cards:

...could it be said that for the same reason people are uncomfortable with the use of social dice there could be some correlation to the reasons why they would be comfortable using the X-Card, but aren't paying enough attention to the fact that on some level the X-Card is in the same category of the very thing they hate about social dice? (i.e. No one wants to be controlled, but it's better to hold the reins than to be strapped to the wagon?)

Short answer: No, I don't think so.

Long answer: Nope, it's really not the same. The X-Card when used properly is a method of defense from storylines that are harmful to the player. Social dice are a system that can be used to shape the story and the reactions of the characters around them. The X-Card is explicitly and escape from the story, while the social dice are a way to interact with it. Many people don't like social dice because they take agency away from a player, the X-Card gives a player agency to avoid something that is harmful to them.

Also, @Ganymede said it very well.

How about "even if it isn't gaining the 1-2 PCs any benefits, it just looks bad?"

I've sat back on this topic a good long while, so of course, my opinion is worth more (I say, I say, that's a joke, son).

I tend to think that the difference between an NPC and a Staff PC (or GMPC or whatever you want to call it) is that an NPC serves a purpose that is not simply engaging in RP. That purpose may be dispensing plot info, it may be guiding PC leadership/PCs away from unthemely decisions, it may be generally reinforcing theme, it may be... well, there's a lot that it may be, but it should, in my opinion, always be something more than simply engaging in RP. That doesn't mean that they can't be involved in BarRP or come to a PC party, but they should always have a purpose in doing so that goes beyond their character. And while it might be fine to introduce an NPC in an awesome way to prove their bonafides as a source of info or an authority figure or whatever, besides maybe that one exception, they should never be the spotlight of a scene.

A Staff PC, on the other hand, is there to engage in RP, often focused on their own story. They may be used to dispense info, they may be used to give nudges into more profitable courses of action, and they may be used to reinforce theme, but their focus will be on engaging in RP, rather than serving any other particular purpose.

I fully believe that Staff should be allowed to -- nay, encouraged to -- have PCs on their game; I don't believe there's a better way to keep your finger on the pulse of the game than playing it. I've learned that Staff PCs should never hold the spotlight even as much as the average "engaged" player, and certainly well less than the most-engaged non-Staff PCs. I believe they should never hold any position more important or rare than any other PC (and usually nothing that several other PCs don't already hold). I believe they should never save the day, except in the company of others. I believe they should be within the bounds of an "average" PC in every way. Is playing a Staff PC less fun than playing a non-Staff PC? Probably a little, because you have to be careful that there's no perception of unfair advantage. But that's part of the price you play for having a game that is (or should be) exactly what you want to play.

An NPC, on the other hand, can be the One True King (to keep all the PC nobles from instituting direct democracy in what is supposed to be a feudal game or to keep the peace between squabbling PC nobles in what's supposed to be a PvE game), an ancient sorcerer, a computer superfreak who knows just about everything committed to electrons ever, or whatever awesomeness the plot/setting needs. They can have skills, powers, or rank that no PC can have, because they're a mechanism to enrich the story of the PCs. In my opinion it's fine to have scenes where an NPC is just there to be social -- it can help show who they are, and give context to their other, more plot-driven actions, but I think that the majority of their scenes should be driving plot or reinforcing setting.

Focusing on 1-2 PCs with a single "important" NPC is a good way to get the rest of the playerbase thinking that they're being spotlighted to the exclusion of others, whether the NPC is teaching those PCs, TSing them, or shooting craps with them, it's just bad optics.

There are times when this hobby (and the people in it) is insanely frustrating and maddening and not particularly good for my RL state of mind. There are also times when it is entirely fascinating, invigorating, and inspiring. There's definitely some balance, but I generally fall more on the 'good' side than the 'bad.'

@faraday said in Incentives for RP:

I must confess though that I've always found it weird that you need to incentivize RP at all. Like... RP is literally the point of the game.

While I agree with you that the need to do this is kind of baffling, I also think that if you incentivize the type of RP you want, then it's worthwhile. Because yes, everyone is here for RP, because MUSHes are RP games, but not everyone is here to spread plot hooks and welcome new players onto the grid and generally support the actions of others. Many players feel that's burdensome, so if you want it, you incentivize it.