Best posts made by surreality

Good question! I can really only answer 'historically' at this point, since I haven't been playing lately.

There is rarely one thing. There are things that can tilt the scale in that direction, though -- and it's always one of them that's the straw that breaks the camel's back, barring over the top crazytown antics (which are thankfully somewhat rare).

Things that work against someone:

• Consistently disrespecting my time. This means not bothering to ever tell me if you're not going to show up, or making plans only to blow them off to go chase someone else.
  Annoyingly, in my experience, this is often to go chase TS with someone -- confirmed, not guessed or speculated upon. I wish these people would just tell me 'I'm not interested in RP with you when there's available epoon to plow!' so I could go do something else and not set aside time for them. (Because I wouldn't.)

• Pressuring for OOC personal hookups/etc. This is a total no-go zone, and I'm up front about this. That... changes little, for the determined idiots.

• OOCly stalking me around the MUX. This could be +where-stalking, 'I see you are unfindable what are you up to?!' or the other variations on, 'how dare you be in a room with someone with a name that might be male!'

• As a sub-heading beneath the last bit, if someone has a bad thing to say about literally anyone I'm in a scene with that isn't them. This isn't always an accusation of something, and it usually takes a few weeks for this one to surface, since one instance of it is sometimes harmless.
  There are less-than-awesome groups someone can fall into a scene with, and being warned that you've just slipped and fallen face-first into a toxic clique is not what I mean here. It's more the weeks-long progression of 'I see you're in a scene with Bob and Sandy, did you know that they totally cheated back on <game>? (Insert pile of gossip about Bob and Sandy here, repeat the next day when it's Tom, the next when it's Susan, etc.) This is a more insidious sort of 'I want to control who you play with' that's more subtle than the direct freakout over 'OMG YOU ARE IN A ROOM WITH BOB AND YOU ARE MAH PROPERTAY' but it is absolutely the same sort of bullshit control tactic with an extra dose of toxicity.

• Does not share attention well with others. Must always be the star/winner/focus of any scene they're in, no matter what it is or how many people are involved.

On the plus side:

• Creatively interactive. Picks up on hooks and throws them back. Does not always do the most predictable things (or the same thing on endless repeat).

• Sense of humor + does not always have to be perfect IC all the time. A sense of humor, and a sense of self-effacing humor (without getting into slapstick or self-pity) is a huge plus and adds a lot of fun to playing with someone for me.

• Shares attention well with others, and creates opportunities for others to have the spotlight.

Also, worth noting, in case nobody else noticed: there's now also an 'ignore this thread' option; I have no idea how long it's been there, but it's damnably useful. Not just 'don't watch', but you can prevent a thread from showing in the unread threads list as well if it has new posts.

In short: if you know a thread is just going to piss you off or is completely not relevant to anything even resembling your interests, you can render its entire existence irrelevant.

This is very awesome and I hope it stays through any future iterations of the board.

(I love y'all's kitty pics and whatnot, but can now tune out sports and video games without dropping a whole forum section, which is pretty yay.)

A general 'display images default/collapse default, click to display image' option would be even more ideal; we've had some enormous ones from time to time (and other times I just don't care enough about what's being talked about to look and scroll scroll scroll past a dozen of them in a row).

@golgoth This is really just what I can't get into. There's a certain level of detail that's handy for the reasons @faraday describes: answering the questions 'can this be hacked to/reverse engineered to/etc.'

That answer doesn't need to be technically figured in advance and available as easy reference when the game opens. It needs a 'yes' or a 'no', and either the creators can come up with a how to add to the tech info, or allow the first player to perform this feat to come up with something and add that.

Players are the exceptional characters in a world, sure, but not all players are interested in telling stories all about the tech. Some folks -- myself included -- are far more interested in telling the human (or not human!) stories of how people are affected by the danger and isolation of being in space, of how to handle matters of scarcity (The 100 is a great example of this), of first contact with aliens or alien relics or societies (any number of films and television series), and so on.

I have yet to find this in a sci-fi game, because the tech -- and the arguments springing from the tech, which are for some reason about ten times as grating as any rules lawyering game system argument -- becomes such a hyper-focus that it drowns out everything else. Firefly was not a story about tech, for example; the tech is not the primary reason why people loved that series. The Alien series of films is not about the tech, either. Tech is featured in these things; it is not their primary focus, and that's where most sci-fi games end up failing me in terms of my personal taste regarding anywhere I'd like to play.

Trek, to me, is a great example of handwavium.

How do these people get their food? Uh, from a magic box that takes food orders. (We'll figure out how the magic box works beyond the very basics later or the fans will fill that in.)

How do people get from place to place without shuttles? Uhm, they teleport! Cool! (We'll get the basics down, and anything specific doesn't need to be known from the start of the series and wouldn't even be known to most of the characters who have used these things all their lives beyond the basics we'd think of as cautions to drive a car: wear a seatbelt, don't exceed this speed, this is the safety feature people would be familiar with: the airbag... )

...and so on. This gets the nitty gritty of the technical trivia out of the way of the actual story people want to tell, and it's important, because without some measure of handwavium, all you're doing is sitting around like Gune, wondering what that thing was you built last night in your sleep.

This is really not everybody's brand of fun and I really wish there was a sci-fi game that didn't fetishize the tech so hard.

@insomniac7809 Would go with 'Serialized Drama', personally. Like a TV series, more or less.

@SunnyJ said in POLL: Super Hero MU Gut Check:

Lots of pragmatic/cynic peoples 'round these parts!

^ This.

People will seize on some random, incredibly minor thing that is perfectly normal and works fine across vast segments of the hobby, and will decry it as a sure sign of the end of the world as we know it. (Think of the 'it will destroy the game if there's a bar only one sphere can access!' from my cautionary tale of a thread as an example of what I mean by this, if you need to, @Ghost.)

In short, be willing to call out ridiculousness as such when you see it crop up in this particular form. It's a skill that will never stop being put to use, that much is certain. (Sigh.)

@ganymede said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

Telling people to stay out of the Hog Pit to avoid dogpiling is akin to telling black people to obey the law when they have been killed by law enforcement time and time again for doing nothing illegal. The problem is the dogpiling, which can understandably have a chilling effect on any kind of speech here. And let's not pretend that the dogpiling occurs only within the Hog Pit; it clearly and demonstrably has happened elsewhere, which is why we have to haul threads out of other areas into the Hog Pit.

^ This. I do agree with this entirely.

That said, any maybe to surreality's consternation, but I stand by every word I said before. The number of regular, frequent posters in the Hog Pit pales to the actual number of people that read or post here.

The number of people isn't what's at issue. It may be a smaller number. It's the bleed of the behavior to everywhere else.

I'm well-aware that I have a great deal of privilege because, for whatever reason, I'm not usually a target when I make comments, no matter how wrong or controversial my opinion might be. And I'm not going to pretend that I can walk in anyone's shoes and process experiences as they might, because I think that belittles their experience.

Here's the thing with that. It belittles their experience to ignore it far more.

You're right that you can fully understand their experience no better than I as a white woman can fully understand the perspective of a black man.

That doesn't mean I shouldn't be keeping my ears open when a black man speaks about his experience and how it affects him in an environment in which I have authority to do something about it, understand that his experience is as real and valid as my own, and do something about it.

@arkandel said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

It's not the headache that I mind, it's the nitpicking. This whole thing about administrating microaggressions seems so petty that I can't get myself interested enough to even read some threads - I'm just too lazy for that (stop gasping, @Coin). If something serious like harassment happens I definitely intend to get involved, but the he-said she-said bullshit... about some random clash of personalities, not so much.

The problem is, there's nothing micro about the aggressions people are actively concerned about.

"SHE POSTED A MEAN GIF IN THE HOG PIT!" <-- microaggression.
"Yo, there's an angry screed full of completely unfounded false accusations being made here." <-- this is not a microaggression and it's not a mere difference of opinion.
"He's vaguebooking a gripe in Peeves about me!" <-- microaggression
"She's being a passive aggressive jerk!" <-- microaggression
"He's chasing me around to every thread I post in on the board and attacking everything I say on any subject!" <-- this is not a microaggression, this is harassment

Maybe the not microaggressions things are OK in the Pit, maybe they're not -- I don't personally think posting a giant pile of personal RL character assassination without some kind of foundation or evidence (unless it's a log of an actual character being assassinated!) or making real accusations about people's real lives is remotely OK no matter where the hell it's happening on the forum, and it goes on a lot. Chasing someone from thread to thread to attack them is harassment and should be regarded as such.

Carping about someone's behavior on a game is one thing. We've seen a very notable shift away from that and into trying to destroy people RL as human beings, and not in the derpy, over the top, 'we're just foolin' around and you shouldn't take it seriously' way that used to go down on WORA, but with real issues and real accusations of vileness RL.

@meg ...I can't be the only person who just pictured fumble-dropping my phone and stumbling into the middle of somebody's steamy TS scene like that, so I'm sharing that spit-take inspiring thought with the rest of you now.

@faraday said in Original Sci-Fi?:

@surreality I really do think we're talking apples and oranges here. You're describing ridiculous levels of pedantry that, yes, would be obnoxious.

The science/tech stuff I was talking about wasn't "OMG you've got the wrong color dress for this time period" level of stuff, it was more like "OMG you're wearing jeans and a t-shirt on this Game of Thrones MUSH". It's insisting that Batman can fly (under his own power) or that morphine can cure the common cold. Some things are just egregiously wrong, and correcting people (politely) to maintain a consistent theme does not make you an elitist or theme dictator.

I completely agree with this, and this is the level of pedantry I'm describing and calling out as Not At All Cool.

Maybe my conceptual shorthand has been bad here -- but this is what I mean by 'baseline'. Baseline info would cover the things that are egregiously unthematic or deeply absurd for the setting -- 'there are no hand held mobile phones in the game, this is 1960', for instance -- without getting deep into the weeds.

For instance, for the historical game I was going to do a page on 'modes of dress'. What people would need to know could probably have been summed up in 3 short paragraphs, 5 tops, with links to external further reading if people wanted to dig into deeper detail if they wanted to specialize in that area for whatever reason for their character. That would allow them to avoid the 'why are you wearing a bikini, WTF?!' pitfalls and incorporate things into their character or descs based on that information without having to do a deep dive into sumptuary laws, how people dealt with corsets and which ones meant you were wealthy (with someone to dress you) and which meant you were poor (and thus had to dress yourself), and so on.

@Ghost Just as long as you don't use the mini-cooper to kill zombies. That trick's mine goddammit!

(No, really, my former char on Reno1 absolutely did that once. )

@Arkandel said in What locations do you want to RP in?:

The only time grid is important is when a game is already very well populated as then the chances of running into people randomly are vastly increased; in those cases yes, you want to encourage your players to be out and about instead of stuck into inaccessible RP rooms.

I actually think this is pretty relevant, though it's actually more relevant when the population is small. A small population means even fewer options open to all on the grid for random meetings and getting involved, because people will still be off in RP rooms. On a small game, this can be crushing, because then there's never any action on the grid itself.

You really want some viable, cool options on the grid. Temprooms have a purpose but I think they've sometimes been overused and have definitely contributed to the empty grid syndrome more than any private home or business do. This ends up making it ultimately harder for people to connect up IC, in the long run.

I actually support player-owned businesses a lot, but I do think it's reasonable to put a cap on certain kinds. Building a whole business for someone not playing the owner of it, just so they can have a backdrop for their day job (which I have also seen) is, I think, a lot more frivolous, by contrast. (Either talk someone into playing the owner, or pick a job at an existing place.)

@apos said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

Like for example, someone could say, 'I don't like softcode'. Fine, okay. No one would object to that.

Here's the thing, though: at one point I said, "I don't like anime PBs. They break immersion for me." No attacks on games that allow them, no attack on the people choosing to use them, just that.

"Don't you dare ever set foot on our game then you <long list of colorful adjectives and accusations> monster!"

This happened. (I'm even counting it in the 'two places' referenced earlier as one of the two.)

I genuinely want to be on the same page with you here, and believe this is the norm. I've experienced the above and similar things too often to think it is.

@three-eyed-crow said in Hello MSBites! Grade your administrators.:

I was surprised it took as long to ban Nemesis as it did, given his rage-tour across the entire forum. He was banned eventually, at least.

The thing I mentioned about 'acceptable targets to attack without social consequences' is very relevant there. I'm surprised he lasted until that day at all, since there were many instances of similar offenses before that, but he did. His standards and mode of behavior were so universally recognizable and horrid various people were able to identify him when he appeared within a log.

This person is not a healthy member to have in any community like this one, and these people do self-identify quickly. Not as in 'provide their names', but 'demonstrate the behavior'. People like him, and the 4chan crowd, who are here to cause trouble and actively do harm to others because they believe it is right and just that they do harm to others should not be coddled until they've gone through with a wrecking ball for several days and done enough damage to tell them to go. Yet, this is what repeatedly happens.

This is one area in which we could do with much more 'draconian' action, because the damage they leave behind is done and they have still achieved their goal of doing harm by being here. Then they come back, say two or three things that don't involve genocide or racism, and suddenly it's sunshine and rainbows and thirty-third chances land. Banning them, thus far, has accomplished very little beyond giving them a brief vacation and 'another chance'. It's the same pattern that let Spider ruin things across the gameverse for decades and we seem to know better now about such folk on games; it's not a stretch to say the same logic applies.

@WTFE True enough, and somehow all the more tragic for it.

Next up on Corp: The Drudgening: Who stole Sally's peanut butter from the employee's lounge fridge? It had her name on it and everything!!!

@goldfish said in Paragraphs, large scenes and visibility:

So that's why I'm slow. I'm a tryhard. The person that pulled me aside wasn't an asshole, they were kinda giving me a heads up sort of thing to keep the big combat scene moving. Because when I show up, a large scene can and has slowed because of me. I'm adapting but it is a newish thing to me.

I actually really feel you on this. (Though I also have some chatty motherfuckers sometimes on top of this, and omg that shit gets really out of hand, fast.)

The meta stuff you're describing is what I tend to call 'editorial commentary' -- 'cause I've played with you on and off, and it's not the kind of snarky meta people bitch about, which is worth mentioning before anybody gets confuzzled. Some people still love or hate it, and they can get over that, honestly.

In combat stuff specifically or something crowded that's being GM'd or otherwise needs to move fast, I try to cut everything down to the bone. It's not as expressive or character-displaying at times as I'd like, but that's the kind of time where speed is going to be prioritized over quality to some extent. Not gonna lie, if you mostly do social/personal/more freeform scening -- and let's face it, that is the bulk of what many of us do on any given game -- it's a hard switch to flip, sometimes, when those situations do crop up. (And that's the only time it's really needed.)

It is the time to lean a little more on the editorial commentary, though: it's the time to say more than show, to some extent. It's the time for '<name>'s body language is dejected and s/he doesn't seem to want to talk' or '<Name>'s stance is standoffish. Not the time to talk.' vs. the couple of sentences to convey it through more subtle inference. On the upside, if you're already used to tucking some things like this into poses, it's a little easier than it is for people who never do, and that's a plus -- it gives you a good jumping off point for adaptation for those scenes.

I'll try to get a better example of what I'm talking about here, though I warn this is all pre-coffee-kicking-in so all of it will likely suck:

As John lays out the specifics of the plan, Sue listens with a furrow slowly deepening over her brow. Her eyes are on him, intently focused, as she processes the details and turns them over in her head to weigh the pros and cons of the approach her superior officer proposes. Uncertainty is written all over her face, and her arms cross over her chest uneasily as he reveals the end game he has in mind. Her tone is quiet when she finally speaks, breaking the eye contact to avoid looking at his face as she says, "That sounds risky. Is there an alternate entrance we could use to surprise the enemy instead?"

vs.

Sue listens as John lays out the specifics of the plan. He's the boss, and it's his call, but she's visibly uneasy with this approach. Tentatively, she says, "That sounds risky. Is there an alternate entrance we could use to surprise the enemy instead?"

While the fine detail isn't there, it gets the core characterization across where it's most needed, and it's a lot faster and easier to keep up with in the flow of a quickly-moving scene or a combat scene with a crowd that needs to progress more quickly due to time constraints.

@mietze The only thing is, you can absolutely trip over someone's trigger and it is entirely unexpected. Most people do feel horrible about it when they do, and they don't know it's there.

Land mines are a thing. (Not a thing I think need a public airing, mind, but a thing.)

"I didn't know you have issues with <subject>, I'm really sorry that scene was upsetting for you, I won't bring up <subject> again, is there anything I can do to help?" is not shaming or mocking by a long shot, so there's not only the "Well I'm sorry you're a whiny baby made entirely out of butthurt who should grow the fuck up but I won't do that again" way of handling such a situation when it arises.

@Rook ...and this is yet one more reason that if I ever pick that project up again I really am going to poke.

Seriously. Someone else's egregious laziness is not and has never been my problem to solve.

@auspice I am down with whoever does it -- provided somebody does it. The 'well we know it's Rick Sanchez again but he hasn't crossed any major lines yet THIS TIME' excuse is worn the heck out. He was calling me a cunt and that wasn't enough of a line cross for his ass to be shown the door, despite that supposedly being verboten across the board for being sexist bullshit. (As in, the rules of the road for even the Pit ban this.)

@Atomic Would recommend chatting with @faraday about Ares. Pretty sure it can be set up on DO, and by all accounts, she is amazingly helpful. Also has a fair bit built in and ready to go.

@Wizz said in City of Angels MUX (CofD/nWoD 2E):

@Cobaltasaurus said in City of Angels MUX (CofD/nWoD 2E):

Demon is fundamentally not very good on a MU* from everything I've heard about it. The aspect of ULTRA secrecy above and beyond the other splats is often times not fun, ignored, or taken to the extremes. The idea of the ever presence of angels and the god-machine is also a lot of staff work.

Yeah we really just need a Demon MU*. And it should really be set in the 80's BECAUSE WHY NOT TWO THINGS I CAN NEVER HAVE

I would love to see this set in the 80s, because OMG 80s LA. I know this is very unlikely to happen, but... I still pine.

@Warma-Sheen I have to second @WTFE on this. You're putting forward a demonstrably false hypothesis, and then trying to use that to prove something else entirely here that is well beyond its scope.

I've seen convos like this going back to the 90s on every game I've played on. Not with everyone on every game, no, but it was always a thing and only once did I see someone remotely surprised by it, way back in.. 1997, I think? Yeah. But not since then have I seen any surprise if I ask someone something, or someone asks me something, etc. about where things might go if it's somewhere extreme or unpredictable (and in more recent years, if it includes a common trigger issue of some kind, ex: racism/torture/rape/etc. as well).

I have seen this when proposing the start of a scene quite often: "Want to RP? Yeah? Cool! Any preference of subject?" or "I can see two things we should probably address IC with the pack, one's more conflict-based and the other's more chill, have any preference for tonight?" and so on.