Posts made by Sunny

@Insomnia

Their work isn't gaming, though. It's sex with a gaming backdrop. At least in my opinion. They still work hard -- those bodies, hair, and makeup do not take care of themselves.

On one hand, tits for a mount fucking drives me nuts. That some chicks use sex appeal instead of something else in any of my hobbies, because it perpetuates a big problem, right?

On the other hand, I think their ability to do so should be their choice. That they SHOULD totally be able to do it, and why the fuck should anyone judge them for it.

If we are going to be feminists (so to speak), we need to support the sex kittens just as much as the housewives just as much as the squarepants brigade.

The only genre I've ever played that this wasn't an issue was...

...no, wait. There isn't one. It's definitely not just a WoD issue.

If I'm doing something with a pug, it is not something that needs that coordination. I am not interested in talking to randoms. Idgaf if I can mute, or don't have to actually speak. Duh. I do not need to have basic fucking use explained, nor does anyone else here.

What I use now is fine. Blizzard is a day late and a dollar short. I am uninterested in being convinced. I was simply providing an echo of what was being said, to confirm that yes, what they have said is also true for me.

Also? I'm the fucking tank. Way to assume.

Yeah, as a female, I don't voice with randoms, period. Way too much crap over the years. My guild uses Curse, it works, is easy to use, and manages my add-ons beautifully. I don't see anything about this new feature that would entice me to switch to it.

My battery on my car is dead. I put a thing on Facebook. A co-worker saw it and took it upon herself to find a solution for me to get through until payday, at some considerable effort on her part. Asking around and stuff. I am now okay, because she went out of her way to be kind.

I work with the best people.

@fatefan said in Coming soon: Lawless Space MUSH:

I have come to realize I remember jack shit about setting up a wiki beyond getting it installed and running. This is, I think, the biggest obstacle slowing me down before I open up the game for interested testers/players/etc.

Paging @surreality and @ixokai. Since I know you both have such copious amounts of free time...

(Any advice for this person?)

Full up! If you're REALLY SUPER INTERESTED in a Numenera OTT run by yours truly, PM me. Bribery can be discussed, or I can add you to my 'if somebody drops out' list, either way. Thanks for the interest, folks.

To be entirely honest, I'm not looking to answer a bunch of questions or explain my plans and whatnot. If you need a bunch of info to determine if you're interested, you're probably not going to be interested. That said!

I am looking at Sundays being the regular session times, afternoon->evening Pacific. Saturdays are no-go and my raid schedule on WoW changes weekly, so while sessions during the week on occasion will be possible, they won't be the norm. It's going to be pretty informal, low key, no required attendance, or anything. Probably on some sort of rotating schedule for precisely when we do it. The general point is to give the people who participate a framework to roleplay when the bug bites them, with the semi-regular sessions going to make sure there's actual content to play with for the downtime stuff. Most likely I'll be running 2 'standard' sessions a month on Sundays, and then call-outs for the occasional session in between standards just whenever.

Right now, Numenera (http://www.numenera.com/) is topping my list for what I'm likely to run, but we won't settle on a game for sure until I know what group I have to work with.

Considering running an OTT game. Mostly not in touch with my old regular group. I don't know yet what I'd be running, but that will depend on who all I have interested. Something fantasy-esque I'm sure. If you'd be interested in playing in an OTT game run by me (I run a LOT less of a tight ship when I'm doing tabletop, for the record), let me know. No promises made at this point, just putting out an interest check.

@Misadventure

Yes.

The team owns the ball. Or the stadium. Or somebody. Taking something that belongs to someone else is stealing.

@Misadventure

It is, actually. People like rolling dice. It's fun.

See, I actually fall somewhere between the two types, as a tabletop GM. The story I plan is a situation. There are NPCs, they have goals and plans. There is the world, which will react to those NPCs and to the PCs based on actions. There are Things that Happen that are not in the purview of the PCs, that they often can't do anything but react to. The stage gets set, and then game on. I do fudge dice rolls sometimes ( and they know it ) to ensure not that the story goes the way I want ( the goes part is what we're playing ), but so that everyone gets to participate, do something, and generally have a good time. If there's something they need to notice, for example, I might have a target number in mind as 19, but nobody rolls higher than a 15, I might change the target number I had in mind. It's fluid.

@Ominous said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:

@Sunny said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:

I don't think that it's a cultural expectation that staff should be selfless, masochistic martyrs. @Ominous has said that she/he doesn't think that those staff (in those circumstances) should get the perks of being a player, but I don't believe anyone else is advocating such an extreme stance (or if they are, it's all blurred together, sorry). Hopefully folks are sensible enough to not be this ridiculously extreme about these issues. 'Playing in a scene that you're storytelling', rule wise, is (or at least should be) something that applies to both staff and players equally.

Not quite. I said that perhaps we need to consider our GMing approach towards these games. Instead of trying to utilize the D&D method, maybe servers should experiment with systems developed by storygames that allow for shared GMing.

The actual words you wrote aren't but a handful of posts back. They're right there. Your point may have been as you have stated here, but you certainly did express that if you're going to run a D&D/WoD-type game, then staff ought not get the perks of being a player. Beyond that, I was responding to someone else's damn words, acknowledging their reading of your statement and addressing their reaction, not your words.

Context is important.

@Monogram

Meanwhile, over in reality land...

@Derp said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:

It sounds to me like we, as a culture, just need to accept that staff are players too, and should enjoy all the benefits that other players do. Because they do a hard job, and deserve to at least have as much fun as any other player. Stop asking staffers to be selfless masochistic martyrs for your fun if you aren't willing to appreciate their need for the same.

I don't think that it's a cultural expectation that staff should be selfless, masochistic martyrs. @Ominous has said that she/he doesn't think that those staff (in those circumstances) should get the perks of being a player, but I don't believe anyone else is advocating such an extreme stance (or if they are, it's all blurred together, sorry). Hopefully folks are sensible enough to not be this ridiculously extreme about these issues. 'Playing in a scene that you're storytelling', rule wise, is (or at least should be) something that applies to both staff and players equally.

I find no fault, not even a little one, with the premise that staff should enjoy the same benefits/perks/etc. that players do. I firmly believe that this should be the case. I just also happen to believe that they should be held to the same standards and the same rules, and that the policies, rules, standards, etc should be developed with the thought that they should be applying to everyone involved equally. I do not think that anyone should get EXTRA perks for being staff, beyond those that are simply impossible to remove due to the human condition and things. I do also think that in some cases, a bit more oversight ought to be applied to staff where the rules/standards are concerned. Not different rules, just more supervision. Perhaps even stricter interpretation, where warranted. But not different rules. Not to their benefit, not to their detriment.

There are, of course, also rules that only apply to staff (because, say for example that your average player does not have the ability to look at someone else's sheet), but those are onlyappropriate (to me) in the cases where they don't apply to your general playerbase because they don't have the tools/access/need, rather than just because they're players. So rules that govern when you should +sheet someone would be appropriate; rules regarding what you can play (above and beyond the limits applied to the playerbase) would not be.

Cool, that's the clarification I was looking for. I look forward to this, and will probably even come back to actively playing for it. Redemption ties with another game for me, in terms of best mushing times I've ever had, so with further info on how you're planning on addressing this...yeah, I'm in.

Am I understanding correctly that it will be against the rules to have anything more negative than mild intolerance as IC thoughts and opinions? Or did I misunderstand?

I am confused as to how this is even a question.