Best posts made by Sunny

@NightAngel12

I used to go with trying to be subtle. I felt it was fair, if I was posing whatever the same way every time, that I could expect other people to pick up on this and whatnot. Then I realized a few things.

• I am not as clever as I think I am
• I am really not as clever as I think I am
• If I can't remember the details of a scene last week clearly, how the hell do I expect anyone else to?
• Players are not characters, and stats like 'perception' and 'empathy' exist

What you think is a subtle explanation for something is likely just too obscure. They're not picking up on it because you are not actually making sense to anyone but yourself. You might think 'looking down' is a clear signal, but those two words in your entire pose have weight to you, not the people you're playing with. How do they know that they should be putting special emphasis on those words more than 'the table' or 'looks at the person who walks in' or whatever? In the example of the leaving the same way every time -- how do they know that isn't your go-to as a player for 'crap, I have to go OOC'? If you don't give the people you're playing with enough reason to suspect there is more there, they will never suspect it. It will not happen. You are entertaining yourself with how clever you are, but no one else.

I'm not actually saying you actually think you're particularly clever or anything, but it's an easy way to explain how seriously, people just don't do subtle in text very well. They don't write it well, they don't catch it well. When you try to play on subtle, you're shooting yourself in the foot. My RP has gotten so, so much more rewarding now that I straight up beat people over the head with things that might be 'subtle'.

While the character is what's important, the player has to at least understand the situation well enough to have their character react appropriately. Their character may not understand the situation as well as their player does, but for the player to be able to make that determination, they have to know that it's there for them to make.

@Ghost

The attitude presented is why I have absolutely no interest in playing in a high-PC-casuality game. Because 'character death' seems to be the metric that people like to use to create the appropriate tension, and equate a lack thereof to playing house or being conflict-averse. I don't mind if a character dies as part of the story, but it actually has to be part of the story. Killing player characters to show how dangerous the setting is is lazy, unimaginative, and absolutely sucks donkey balls for the people whose time, effort, and investment is pissed on just to set the tone for a game.

@il-volpe

I was there, he hurt me, and he's one of my favorite people in the hobby these days. That is an absolutely untrue statement.

@misterboring

the optics are more important than the protection of real, vulnerable people who had actual bad actions taken towards them

it's pretty simple, dood

@zombiegenesis

Please Buffy? Please? This is me making big eyes.

Tenebrae (I'm probably not spelling that right) is probably your best bet. It is a D&D game, NOT Lords & Ladies (at all) with active storytelling/DMing pretty much constantly. If you're interested in a close-to-tabletop feel, they're a great game. The folks that run it are very solid on the type of game they want to run, and execute it beautifully.

ETA: I don't play here. I have in the past, and this is based on my experience with it.

@deadculture said in Eliminating social stats:

Last second edit to add: It also defeats the purpose of playing a social game to begin with. If you can't put in a pretty turn of phrase, what the fuck are you doing?

Pretty turn of phrase is subjective. So are the circumstances surrounding social interaction. Let's not get into the fact that most people don't pose body language for a cues and the like, we don't get to hear tone, etc. It's completely unfair to say people need social skills. No, that's wrong, and you should feel bad for saying it. Let's not forget that communication takes two, and it's really hard to figure out what's going to convince your PC if you do not give me anything to work with because you are the shitty player.

I mean my partner and I have IMed before from the same house, but this is just weird. >.>

Were I to commit to herding ferrets (and only to herding ferrets) for an nWoD game with multi-sphere support and a higher power level, who would be interested in a- helping me get it set up, and b- helping to run it? I'm not particularly interested in anything but administrative assistance (my love is all being poured into my Victoriana game and then the game I am playing on), but I am damn fine at herding ferrets.

I'm thinking probably a 'replacement' city for Portland, or possibly bringing Bay City back for the lulz. Whatever, it would certainly be a metropolis made up, but perhaps based on a real city somewhere just to ensure we have some material to work with. West Coast definitely; if I did it up in my general neck of the woods (Washington Puget Sound region) it would mean that I know pretty much all the local myths and I'm entirely familiar with the local tribes and state politics (shoot me).

Saying 'me me me' is not a solid commitment at this point; I'm not even going to think about doing this shit without a solid group. But hey, might as well put my money where my fucking mouth is.

I would love an Old Republic era game, but...le sigh.

@deadculture Investigate what? If you as a player give me no reason as a player to have my character suspect that something is up, how do you actually expect that to happen? I am bringing up lying in specific because this is where this whole thing becomes really, really problematic.

Some folks here seem to think persuasion is some mythical thing that some people are good at and others should just go away or get fucked or? The ability to communicate in text, the number of people that actually give you enough to work with to persuade someone? It is a very, very small number. I can guarantee you that nobody here (including me) is as awesome as they think they are, and NOBODY is playing with all of the information we actually would in genuine social situations. So no, people don't need to learn social skills. They need to learn specifically how to convey something in the way that PLEASES YOU SPECIFICALLY, or they don't deserve to sit at the big table.

Whatever.

@onigiri @Altair
I can't even hate you, cos you're new-new. I had been eying Cadenza for-evah when she got taken off the roster, so I finally got off my butt and got Rodica and I am VERY PLEASED with how that turned out so that's another reason for not hating.

THAT ASIDE you guys are new. Please feel free to page pretty much anybody mentioned in this thread for help if you need it. Including me (Natalia), but I'm pretty positive everybody here would be happy to help out with questions or getting acclimated or whatnot.

@Jeshin said:

It is just that they do not fall under the purview of games which we would list and give a sub-forum.

Why are you here? I mean, everything I've read from you has the same air as this singular sentence.

Hint: Do not go into a vegetarian cafe and advertise your butcher shop. At length. And then tell the vegetarians that they're doing it wrong according to your standards.

If you are, by your rules, actively excluding the community that makes up the bulk of the people around these parts, you're in the wrong place. You can argue an intent at inclusion all you want (oh, it's not stopping you from using our forums or contributing!) but why the fuck would we want to do that? We have this place. We have a community. We've been going strong for plenty of time, even if it hasn't been on this site.

You keep saying 'I'm not saying games without these things are bad, but...' It's the 'but' there that's killing you with a lot of this audience. Well, that and the condescension that drips from every other word. Yay, you encourage all of the text based games out there even if they don't fit. DO I GET A GOLD STAR?!?!?!

Our games don't fit your standards, for the most part. I'm planning on one of the most heavily automated soft-coded systems for one of my games, and Smoke still wouldn't qualify. Trying to talk any of us into changing our games to suit your site is silly at best and offensive at worst.

ETA: If this were the hog pit I would have added quite a bit to this. There are a couple of choice words I'd be throwing around. I'll just let everyone use their imaginations. We do that, around here.

@saosmash

Lords of Waterdeep is hands down my absolute favorite board game ever. I -- enjoy it so much for so many reasons, including the assistance in getting my tabletop group further interested in the actual lore surrounding the world we were playing in for our game.

Oh ffs. Are we going to be presenting 'people should only have 1 alt' as 'the proper way to play' versus 'if you have multiple characters you're bad at this'? Ugh ugh ugh. Come on, people. There are plenty of valid reasons for people to want more than one PC.

Setting the policy to 1 does accomplish things and it's not a bad policy choice if those things are what you desire. The things it accomplishes are not end-all be-all superior to other modes of play.

There are reasons people do it differently.

Updated!

HA. I finally got myself a Moire again. Whee! Trying an OC out. It has been a while since I've actually managed to make a character. Pretty pleased with myself.

Yes, this is the Nymeria game, to save anyone else the time of going and looking.

Chrono Cross remaster wut wut?!?!

All I've heard is rumors but apparently NVIDIA had a leak and the leak implied that SE might be working on this. The THOUGHT is spectacular.

@thatguythere

Go into the category. In the upper right, there should be a 'watching' option somewhere. There's an option to not show in unread. It won't disappear entirely from your sight, but the existence of it should no longer inconvenience you.