Posts made by surreality

@Lotherio said in Historical Mu* - Looking for interested Staff:

@deadculture said in Historical Mu* - Looking for interested Staff:

I recommend 'Lions of al-Rassan' as a source, by Guy Gavriel Kay.

I'll check out the book, but if it goes to alt'earth then I'd prefer just more original, just fascimile of the time and location with idealistic view and romanticized over accuracy and inaccuracy.

I'll second this recommendation. For what it's worth, that book was quite literally impossible for me to put down once I picked it up in a way no book has been before it or since. (It is very sneaky about cliffhanging its chapter breaks!!!)

@ThatGuyThere That kind of initial one-off is what I'm talking about. I can't see anybody having an issue with anyone running a scene like that once in a while -- and a lot of what's being said in this thread makes it sound like that is just so not remotely OK ever for somebody to run. Which... would be bad, IMHO.

@ThatGuyThere The example that actually comes to mind about what I mean was one you mentioned about RP growing organically from something that happens in scene -- I don't recall the specifics, but it was something about an injury? That's the scale of scene I'm talking about, if it helps clarify.

@ThatGuyThere See, I think people should be willing to be proactive in creating their own fun.

Staff are not only there to be the servants of others at all times.

They should be allowed their own fun, too. If they're making that fun for themselves, and it isn't giving them any advantages, and is not associated with any grand, sweeping game plot, they are doing precisely what I wish more players would also do: create their own fun, and not rely on others to spoonfeed them fun. Bonus points if they (read: people staff or non-staff who are creating their own fun) invite others to join in, provided everything's properly labeled from the start.

If, for whatever reasons, players are not permitted to run their own scenes in the same fashion, obviously, that's going to be different. But if everyone is allowed to run things like this, staff should be allowed to do the same without people flipping their shit, provided they're doing so within the same restrictions and parameters that players are.

@ThatGuyThere See, I don't agree with that entirely. If you're running a personal scene, and explicitly state: "this is a personal scene for me, and if others want to join in, they are welcome to do so," that isn't really indicative of someone's over all goals for the game at large. It means that, for the space of one scene, yes, you're focusing on your own character.

If that's the only kind of scene you run, or you run more of those than anything else, or even a large number of scenes like that, yes, you may have an issue -- but simply the act of running a scene for yourself and saying so up front in itself isn't really a fair indicator of the ST having a typical or problematic disinterest in collaboration, or only wanting to attention hog/just find an audience.

@Roz It's pretty handy. It doesn't require a name to be filled in alongside the page for the link, either, at this point; there's a DPL line in the template that automatically subs it in from the necessary page with the character name.

@tek Remind me to pick up a few Chick Tracts for you from the magical Exxon megaplex we always stop at on the road to Florida. They're extra special, and they almost always have a broad selection.

@Roz BITN's was just PC I think -- though the longer Character is in use for this one. Autocomplete is definitely on for this one, though.

Using the namespace helps with the code that's in for MUX/wiki integration. That MUX code requests the namespace to help narrow down the selections, and then the page name; it helps ensure what's being drawn onto the MUX is absolutely a character page.

As it stands, there's preliminary code in to pull data specifically from the wiki to format for the MUX. There's test code for something akin to +finger that does this (currently using the overview and a few other things for the test), and character preferences will be able to be brought over in the same way, as just a few examples. Narrowing things down with extra namespaces is a big help in that way.

@Pyrephox There are m+ becomings, actually -- people can become ghouls or WB, or psychics, etc. (I know TR had them anyway, as did Reno.) They're just not supernatural becomings.

Some of the list foo needs tweaking, though -- so thank you for pointing that one out! I think I know a good way to list those that should ideally make it more clear. (Since some may be added, I haven't wanted to make a hard list yet that might not be current.)

I've been working on this for a while. It's nowhere near done, and not even all the samples are in yet (and only in some cases are there random notes re: what should be there in the first place). There's already piles of stuff that needs changing.

Since I'm heading off for vacation land and ideally will be tackling the remainder of work stuff and other changes when I get back in a few weeks, it seemed like a good time to throw this link up to see what recommendations and feedback people have about it, to better forumlate a list of tweaks to address when work resumes.

Some fairly big stuff isn't there yet.

Some stuff may be open to changes. Some stuff isn't. (Some stuff has already been changed and just isn't updated yet; the whole 'player login' concept is toast and has been revised already, for instance, as it'll be handled a different way with a reference object most likely, or a database object.)

Anyway, here's the link: http://sevendevils.info/index.php/Main_Page

Have at, y'all.

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

The only times I run things that include my character is if it's an impromptu bit of plottage that only's come about because we were bored with a social scene and decided to do something more with it. Occasionally that'll span over a few more scenes, and involve the kind of character centered progression that are usually lacking in regular PRPs.

I would separate those sort of 'prps', as well as in general any kind of private character development 'prps', from the public 'affect the world at large' style prps or staff run plots. The latter types shouldn't involve your own character, especially if you're a staffer. As for the former.. if its all about you anyway, you might as well tell it any way you like.

^ This kind of thing I have never had any issue with, and think it would be a shame to lose if people get too antsy about the subject.

I've done this, too.

<OOC> surreality's alt says, "Hey, anyone mind if I have an injured dude stumble into the bar to start some kind of random chaos?"

<OOC> surreality's alt says, "...anyone up for a random bar fight breaking out in the corner?"

<OOC> surreality's alt says, "I have a one-shot monster-of-the-week plot with bigfoot I'm going to run in a couple of days that's public and posted to +events and will be set here, anyone mind if I throw in a sighting of the mysterious beast on the other side of the park and some people running up to freak out about what they just saw? Was thinking of asking on channel to see if anybody else wants to join the scene, if that sounds like it could be fun, and it might get a few more folks involved or signing up."

...etc. I have zero issue with these kinds of things, but I think one of the key things here is to ask first. (And in the last case, make a genuine effort to be inclusive.)

@lordbelh First, thank you for reading that as intended -- which was genuinely not meant as an attack. (That's genuinely appreciated, zero snark.)

I won't rehash anything from there beyond 'I think there are other trade offs that balance things out provided there are ethical folks who endeavor to be self-aware and have good check-and-balance folks around them', which I think will also be helpful for this thread.

And we're on the same page about spotlights; IMHO, good leadership = giving as many people as possible (no matter who they are, and I mean that in the 'friend or foe, ally or enemy' etc. sense) the chance to let their characters shine. That does include staff -- but there is an element of sacrifice there in that I feel 'if somebody else wants something done or is equally suited to the spotlight, best practice is to give way to the player'.

Once in a while, if you've never had 'your turn' (which should have the same time/importance or lack thereof/etc. as anybody else's) it's fine to step in, but really... that's best suited to 'I'm off doing a fun thing over here with a few buds that is absolutely not game-critical/metaplot/a major mover of game action/etc.', which absolutely everyone on the game should be as empowered as possible to do, on their own or with outside help, and they should be provided as many tools and as much support as possible to do so.

@lordbelh said in The 100: The Mush:

people not making games is way worse than a game not being up to everybody's standards of perfection.

I'm not even going to address you putting words in @Ghost's mouth.

I am going to say that you need to look in the mirror, considering how you've behaved in regard to people who want to run games differently than you would personally prefer in some respects -- which involved deciding it's OK to insist that they're clearly inherently unethical, shady, and that it's totally spiffy-awesome to decry them as such without any evidence to support such claims, unless they do it your preferred way, simply because they're not doing it your preferred way.

Which you fucking did. To me. Which I have not forgotten, and I am going to bring to attention now, because it almost stopped me from making my game because of the how awful the utter wretchedness of 'it doesn't matter if there's no proof of anything bad, I think it's cool to insist there must be simply because people think differently than I do about how to do something' is to deal with.

So I will as respectfully-as-possible (which is not fucking easy right now) request that you check yourself, please.

@Bobotron Yes! Works the same way.

You can use directly installed webfonts as well, but you do have to be able to directly install them/etc. (Myfonts.com has some good and reasonably priced ones, and a few free ones -- you can build an installer from there that'll spit out the css for you, which just goes at the top of your MediaWiki:Common.css page, anc once you upload your fonts to the server as directed it'll work fine.)

@GirlCalledBlu There are some web pages that will crop/resize and similar, but I'm not sure if they can do that kind of compositing. I haven't checked for that specifically.

You might be able to do something with the formatting for the icon css-wise, though, if you're willing to tinker some or crop some icons to a specific size?

I ended up doing a few things that are a little quirky for a recent design, but it required a few hoops to jump through on the initial setup. It doesn't create a single image like the wikidot icons tend to be, but the end result is similar. Mediawiki can be smacked into handling the over all formatting to transplant it elsewhere in the way an icon would or in the places an icon would be; wikidot should be able to do something similar. The initial setup is a pain in the arse, but once that's done, it's only a matter of 'crop the image to a specific proportion', which can be done from the various crop/resize websites in a pinch?

Will PM the link to an example, since the site isn't ready for prime time yet.

<waves the 'just my opinion' flag>

I think one of the most important aspects of a good leader is that they create opportunities for others to shine -- as many others as possible.

The best 'leaders' I've ever played were essentially what people would think of as support personnel. They got the busywork bullshit out of the way or handled it in order to create space or remove obstacles that might otherwise be in the way of them doing so.

This doesn't mean giving people everything they want, because some people are unreasonable attention hogs. It also means telling those people no in order to allow the people who would never ask for attention opportunities to allow their characters to shine, too.

The tl;dr of this: a good leader wants everyone to have their turn to wear the tiara and will endeavor to create opportunities for this to occur. It's leadership as service, as opposed to leadership as power -- even if power is required on some level in order to accomplish the former, from time to time.

I'mma just go on record and say that having spoken to both of them generally on and off, both @Ghost and @tek are both pretty cool people, explosions or not.

That's... not really what I was getting at. I'm saying: unless it's directly related to something that occurs on a game, parental/institutional/domestic/etc. abuse really are apples to oranges here.

Abuse of policy is a thing.

It isn't even necessarily something that'll ever do someone any harm; sometimes it's even for the best. (Banning someone who does something truly horrible or damaging at that point instead of waiting for 'strikes' to accumulate if the game has a 'three strikes' policy occurs to me as an example of what I mean by this; it's still technically an abuse of policy.)

I think @Ghost is specifically addressing abuse of trust. I've never played on one of their games; I have no idea personally, or from experience.

Creating a sandbox seems to be the right call here. I know that personally I'm going to be running a beta some time later in the year that'll be invite-only through beta; that's the same kind of thing. If anyone finds that somehow abusive? Oh, well. But I don't think that's what he's getting at, but rather a sense of joining a game and expecting that things are going to work differently than they do in reality, without any warning to that effect.

<raises a hand> As a person who has been publicly mocked for being weak/whiny/too childish/etc. on these forums over the years and on various games for requesting that people not strangle my characters (because they think for whatever reason it's hot in scene) after nearly being strangled to death in real life, I'm going to ask that we really not go any further on the personal trauma front, unless it's somehow directly related to something that happens on a game.

And yes, when I got ranted at and mocked for that, it actually was pretty fucking triggering for a few hours, and I chose to step back and calm down before doing anything else, so truly, fuck whoever it was (because I am not going to even bother to scroll up) saying these things should never have the power to do someone actual emotional harm that might make them less than perfectly functional for a little while.

In short: yeah, there are circumstances in which game shit can fuck with somebody. Anybody who considers that 'totally unreasonable' as an example of such can, frankly, blow me.

Leaving for vacation on Tuesday.

• The doom code glitch is probably handled.
• Communications foo gets handled tomorrow and will resolve a pile of other problems.
• We'll be getting down to FL right around the right time to help the husband's mother unmangle her condo. (She lives in Fort Lauderdale... which is where we're going first. Looking hard for a silver lining here, and being able to help her out is probably going to have to be it.)
• OMFG do I ever need a break this year. Yay for desperate attempts to recharge the mental and creative batteries.
• There shall be fudge from that bizarre Exxon megaplex on i95 in SC, because there always must be. If only to watch with amusement as all the people who insist they aren't breaking their die+t on the trip take one look at the salted caramel fudge and go, "Fuck that die+t shit," at warp speed.
• By the time we get back, my father will have regrown his Grizzly Adams beard, which he only does to irritate my mother, and it will be funny as hell to watch her bitch about it, because she's even more over the top with her nonsensical histrionic ranting than I am.