Posts made by surreality

@Kanye-Qwest Nicely done! That is really, really great work!

@Kestrel said in Tips on Güd TS:

I find it much, much worse if someone is trying to OOCly coerce a relationship or sex without roleplaying the approach IC first and do not deem the reverse coercion at all.

I think there's a line here -- and in one respect I think everyone is on the same page, and on the other, everyone's scattered all over the map.

Mainly, I think most folk are relatively chill about respectful, neutral inquiry, without the heavy breather factor attached (politely asking without awwwyiss bebe yur hawt overtones), but that's still going to vary widely.

I think we're universally all on the same page that someone wheedling, pushing, bullying, badgering, or hardcore skeeving toward that end OOC is profoundly uncool. Basically, an OOC 'not interested' shouldn't get pushed or wheedled at or bullied OOC, as that's serious creeper territory.

I think the main difference -- if I had to put a pin in it -- is that you're chill with people pressing for it anyway IC through IC means, while a fair number of the MUSH crowd would be less so, and would find that to be 'pushing for it IC after the OOC no thanks came down'.

This is sticky (pun not intended); I've seen this from both sides.

• I've had RP with no initial conversation that went somewhere IC, and that's very neutral ground if it's pursued further IC.
• I've also had instances in which the initial OOC conversation has taken place, and guidelines have been laid down amongst those involved... and then people push for things vastly outside them, or utterly contrary to them, through IC means.

There is a world of difference here between the two scenarios.

In the first, if something happens that's unwanted or squicky, it's not like the other party could have intuited so by magic[1]. It's not intentional. You know someone is not knowingly disregarding or disrespecting you on the player level, because it's a case of 'shit happens'.

In the second? Not so innocent. Player to player, limits were agreed upon. 'Out of bounds' was likely decided. Knowingly disregarding these things is already not good. Forcing them to happen anyway through IC means is now much worse, because the other player? They know it's not kosher on the player level, or it would have been in the safe zone in the first place.

It basically doubles up the squick factor, because IC force is being employed to steamroll the other player, regardless of whatever agreement was made (which means untrustworthy right off the bat on the player level, at the very least).

[1] Major taboo territory -- incest, bestiality, snuff, and similar 'you can't even legally buy porn of it' subject matter -- is still something that people should probably be prepared to assume is not automatically fair game, to my reckoning.

On the original point, I think this idea would actually help avoid the 'everything is life or death' issue, and allow people to get into the nitty gritty personal details that non-combat risk requires.

With more 'free roaming' antagonists on grid, there's a lot more personal interaction with them during day to day activities, which is a profoundly different dynamic than encountering NPC staff-run antagonists only in events or by request. This is huge.

@Duntada said in Tips on Güd TS:

I'm honestly not too surprised by it. I have several friends that often have women flirting with them specifically because they know they are gay. There's apparently as many women who have the fantasy of being the girl to turn a gay guy straight as there are guys who have the fantasy to turn a lesbian straight. (Though not as many as there are with men who fantasize of turning a lesbian bi.)

It goes in every possible direction, really. "You'd go gay for me I know it!" is another permutation from the other angle.

This is one of those areas in which it actively bothers me that people don't leave well enough alone. IC comments like that, fine, whatever, they happen RL... but pushing hard for it OOC or throwing around dice to force it really annoys me and is destined to make many players very uncomfortable at record speed.

@Auspice said in Tips on Güd TS:

I just read this and I think I should leave it here:
http://astolat.tumblr.com/post/144069870158/badscienceshenanigans-0hcicero

...can confirm, malachite is not something you want a lot of moist skin contact with (though arguably the amount of time it'd take to fuck the rock would not really constitute this even if it wasn't, uh... condomed, as it takes time for those reactions to really kick off; though that looks like it's been polished which strips much of that chemistry from the top layers but will in fact replace it with OTHER chemicals you don't want near your nethers either), and do not want to grind without heavy duty respirators and ventilation if at all. Or probably grind on.

What. I have been looking into lapidary equipment this year. What do you people want from me?!

It is sad, sad, sad, and very telling, that I focused my brain on the rock end of that particular rorschach test. Green shiny rocks are apparently higher in my brain's pecking order than pensises. Wow doesn't that just say it all.

@Taika said in The Descent MUX:

Remember the nightmare Reno had when they had to rip out homebrew wolf and put in real wolf?

...I could write a dissertation on this. Please don't make me. I'm wordy enough as it is. But I could write a dissertation on this. It is for everyone's benefit that I beg and plead that no one makes me explain because it would be one.

Trust @Taika and me also when I say: no truer words have ever been uttered.

@Apos I think that's part of it -- and I couldn't agree more strongly that players who want to dish it and refuse to take it (in any level of consent-or-not system) are, without question, behaving in a way that's, at best, incredibly childish, but is more often downright abusive.

The other part is that combat-related challenges are simply easier. Other risks need to be tailored much more specifically to individual characters in a way that requires a lot of capable player scene runners, or a lot of time on staff's part.

Take two characters. One is a shady, grizzled smuggler, and the other an image-conscious socialite. Point a gun at either of them, and they're both going to be at risk. Threaten to expose a secret, and they're both going to be at risk -- but for each of those characters the secret is going to be profoundly different and needs to be individually customized in a way that pointing a gun at them does not require.

Basically, 'physical risk' is simpler. It's more universal. It's easier. It's one of the main reasons it's what we see the most of.

@Lithium Then, seriously. Please clarify this: "Protagonists who are unwilling to risk character death, aren't fucking protagonists. They're couch warmers." -- because that's FPS mentality, and what I've been responding to.

None of the nuance being described now is remotely present in that statement, y'know?

I have seen how off-putting it is when players are told the only viable contribution they make to a game is when they're not just willing to risk, but are risking, death. I've come an inch from leaving places with that attitude toward the players, and have actually left others.

It has value, but it is far from the only challenge, the only risk, and the only approach. You can probably see why I consider that approach reductive, incredibly limiting, and unrealistic.

@Lithium There's another answer, there, though, and it's the reality answer. It's the actual good fiction answer.

When every struggle is life or death, that cheapens it considerably to the point of making it utterly meaningless.

It should mean something when it happens. It should be dramatic, surprising -- and yes, scary.

That typically and realistically and sanely means it should not be commonplace.

@Arkandel said in Tips on Güd TS:

While we're on the matter, how do you folks pick viable romantic partners for your characters?

I've gone a lot of directions on that one.

1. App in with someone as a pair.
2. Know someone on the game I trust to not be made of crazy and if the characters make sense, ask (or am asked myself).
3. (Most prevalent by far.) There's IC chemistry. If the player seems sane, it might be worth a shot. If the chemistry continues to develop in that direction and there are no OOC red flags, I'll run with it until there's a reason not to (OOC crazy surfaces, they vanish from the game, IC events separate the characters).

@Cobaltasaurus said in Tips on Güd TS:

This one is a yes and a no for me. Comments like "Wow, that was hot", haven't really bothered me. I'm a pretty open person though. I've never felt any shame about expressing whether I thought something was sexy or not. Nor have I ever felt it was wrong to get aroused by TS (Please note: I've also had this weird personal rule where I never actually got off on TS, as I felt that crossed a line).

This is pretty much exactly where I am on things, too. (We can totally be weird together if this is somehow weird.)

Story is critical for me (again, outside of Shang). If it isn't about the story, it's just not going to be comfortable.

Too much 'ooh baby' and... it's demonstrating it's not about the story. I'm not going to ever stress about, "Great pose!" or even, "Wow, that... really hit home, gonna need a minute."

I'm not going to assume somebody needs a minute with some hand lotion and a tissue unless they're super graphic about it or blunt. It isn't hard for serious IC emotional stuff to come up in sex scenes, and that usually takes me a minute to suss out in my head, and I figure it's the same for others. Similarly, it can hit a quasi-triggery nerve with somebody, and they may need a minute to process that -- something comes up in a scene some high school girlfriend said once, something their RL partner says all the time, the list is really endless and I'd never fault someone for wanting a moment to compose their thoughts if something does, for whatever reason, hit close to home -- which is the same for any other RP.

The vulnerability factor in TS can exacerbate this, which is why it's sometimes a little sad that "I need a moment" can be especially frowned upon in that context. This is partly because there's sometimes a hint of player vulnerability there as well, not in an 'overinvested' sense, but in that same basic sense that applies everywhere else -- nobody wants to be known as 'that crappy RPer'. When it's 'that crappy TSer', well, that's just awkward on top.

I keep that same divide in my head @Cobaltasaurus is describing, though; it's an abstraction.

To this day, I will swear the very best writing I ever managed in my life was in a TS scene, on Shang of all places. Almost none of 'the action' was the focus, and it was barely referenced in the posing. (It'd take way too long to explain the seriously weird scenario, or I would.) By the time we were done writing, my scene partner and I spent about an hour just wowing at the level of character development and how all manner of things suddenly made sense and so on, along with a lot of, "Holy hell I didn't know I could write like that!" from both sides. (To this day, my biggest regret in this hobby is not having to deal with the creeper crew, crazy staff, or anything like that, it's that I forgot to log that scene. So much spiky-gloves-wearing facepalm.)

It's definitely necessary for players to have a mature attitude about this; I just don't personally see (sorry to single out your comment here, @Lithium) comments like "Protagonists who are unwilling to risk character death, aren't fucking protagonists. They're couch warmers." as being demonstrative of that.

Most fictional protagonists I find compelling are not throwing themselves into a meat grinder at every possible opportunity. They have things they're willing to die for, and things they are not. They're picking battles. They are having actual cowardly moments and learning from them. Sometimes they realizing running for it and living to fight another day when they're properly prepared is the wiser course of action, or 'get the message out to our allies that the bad guys have more than we knew about' is more important than dying on that hill.

We don't call the people willing to die for every possible cause protagonists, we call them crazy.

This is an example of what I mean: 'Hide in the bushes, wait for the bad guys to pass, sneak into the building, get the info for our scouting mission' isn't something I see much of any more, no matter how realistic or sensible it is. Nope, it's 'kill all the bad guys and storm the building, then get the information'. Both are viable story mentalities. The latter is a first person shooter mentality.

It's a concern that the hobby is veering sharply toward the latter, and losing viable stories in the process. I don't MUX to play a FPS game; bringing the FPS approach to MUX and 'one true way'-ing it turns MUX into something other than a story medium.

This is very different from players being willing to let go of their characters -- which is necessary -- but the two are frequently conflated or confused and it's something I think is pretty reductive and ultimately damaging to the hobby. It isn't about 'I have to consent before you can kill me!' -- it's about the fact that countless compelling heroic characters do not treat themselves (or those around them on their side) as canon fodder out for the kill alone.

Seconding the specific point on language choice. This is pretty much the one thing I ever got uneasy about, as in, 'what language choice/writing style is going to be appropriate here'.

I just ask. Ask if there are hate-on words, in particular, and more generally about style: 'flowery, euphemistic, or blunt'? Sometimes any of the above work and it really comes down to the mood and tone of the scene itself: sometimes if people are equally flexible on the word choice/general, that just becomes another tool in the box that can be used to convey the mood and tone of the scene. This can be seriously awesome; at times that switchup from 'the norm' for the characters can be very revealing -- and I mean on a characterization level, not a 'more clothes than usual hit the floor' level.

On the personal yay/nay front, I'll second (or third or fourth... ) the idea of keeping away from things that are undesirable -- but also would suggest being cautious about incorporating 'likes'. If it doesn't fit the scene or the characters, this can come across as "I, the player, am just trying to turn you, the player, on." Depending on the situation, this can be totally awesome and appreciated -- or it can be super creepy or feel very manipulative.

I'm in the latter camp on that one, I'm afraid. If someone shoehorns a 'like' of mine they know about into a scene where it doesn't seem to make sense, or seems out of character for the characters involved? While I realize the other player is doing something they feel is being nice and they're making an effort and those things are appreciated... that's not why I'm writing those scenes (outside of Shang).

(I may genuinely be the weirdo on this. I know this.) I generally don't find TS (outside of specifically for jollies-getting on Shang) arousing. It may be interesting or challenging or insightful or funny[1] (or boring or oh-god-will-this-please-end or 'do they think that's arousing?' or any number of other things), so I'm just... writing. Like anything else, really. So it ends up being more or less super awkward.

[1] Please write more funny sex. Everyone. Everyone please write more funny sex. You will be so happy you did. Trust me on this if nothing else. Slip in the shower and bonk your head and growl and keep going. Make funny editorial commentary about your o-face. Hop around on one leg cussing like mad at your stompy boots because you can't get them off fast enough. There are endless options and even if just one of them happens it will add something to the scene (don't pile them on into a cavalcade of pratfalls obviously), and it will be a good and memorable thing. It doesn't have to be all the time, but for the love of all things holy, at least try it once if you haven't.

Because sex is funny. It is sometimes really goddamn funny. Too many people take every TS scene as the most srs of bzns. To which I just say this.

While I think players should be willing to risk a character's death, I worry about the focus on it. Namely, this seems to come up all the time as the one risk out there and all scenarios boil down to life or death, which is not only grossly lacking in nuance, it's wearying and generally tiresome and just plain limited.

I prefer to think of it this way: players should consider what their character is, or is not, willing to risk their life for. It's a good list to make in one's head when making a character, and generally, that list is going to evolve over the course of play.

Players creating characters who are not willing to risk their life in every scenario seem to be frowned upon, or looked down upon, when frankly, that's realistic, sensible, and utterly reasonable.

I know, for my real self, what hills I'm willing to die on, and I make a point of understanding these motivations and drives for my characters as well.

I wouldn't charge into a hail of bullets over nothing, and I wouldn't play a character that would do so either.

That's not cheaping out, nor is it IC or OOC cowardice; it's realistic and creates even more opportunites for story. Story over pointless/wasted glory, y'know?

Fiction is full of protagonists who pick their battles. Everyone does this.

Why, in this hobby, this is considered the equivalent of a party foul is simply beyond me. Have we really dumbed ourselves down that far? No offense intended on that; that binary is something I view to be an oversimplification to the point of gross reality distortion. Why, in this hobby, does every battle have to be joined? Why does every battle need to be a hill to die on? It's worth considering how everything somehow, ultimately, boils down to this these days in the hobby. It's so starkly devoid of nuance it's made a lot of games focused on this thinking lack any and all appeal.

@TNP said in Tips on Güd TS:

Most important: don't play a female (granted, this only applies if you're going to TS a gay guy)

It never fails to amaze me how many people try to force this anyway (from any given direction). It actively bothers me, and I'm bi, ffs.

God help me, I think I'm gonna have to do a tip per post for I am a wordy wench, but here goes #1:

Make it relevant.

Three little words with a ton of meaning, all of them important.

Like @Auspice mentions about 'no, really, it's obvious if you're enjoying the scene in more ways than one and you finish up and get bored'? It tends to be pretty obvious if the only reason you want to interact with someone at all is for TS.[1]

So make it relevant. By that I don't mean 'construct an elaborate ruse to get that character in the sack'. Honestly? Take the 'I just gotta fuck somebody right now' urges to Shang.

That's not a dismissal.

That's not an insult.

That's actually what Shang is for and they will love you for it over there.

Let it happen organically IC. Don't aim for it. If it's gonna happen, it's gonna happen. IC chemistry is real; it's a thing. There are a handful of folks I've played with over the years that I play off of well, and more or less no matter what either of us is playing, that chemistry ends up being there. It may be in the form of unrealized tension (and typically is) but just like 'you know it when you see it' RL, you know it when you see it online between two characters.

Let. It. Happen. Organically.

If it doesn't? Move on. Get over it.

Just like life, if it isn't meant to be, don't try to force it.

That's when things start to get creepy and uncomfortable for someone at warp speed[2], and it's very likely they are not going to want to play with you at all, let alone play body fluids bingo with you.

[1] Some people are totally down with this. If that's the case, all's cool! I ain't judgin'. Have fun with every blessing, you crazy kids -- follow your bliss.

If that isn't the case, it is probably not going to endear you to that person if you approach them about it -- so if you're going to anyway because you don't know what their stance on this is, be polite, friendly, respectful, and clear about your intentions if that's what you're asking for, and be prepared to gracefully accept a no if you get one.

If you actually know they're not into that -- they have a public notice to that end, or they've told you so before -- and you approach them, you pretty much deserve to get the text equivalent of a 'hmmph, you sure are pushy!', but if you absolutely must persist in asking anyway, you should still be asking politely, respectfully, and clearly. You really shouldn't be pushing it in the first place, but if you absolutely cannot control your urge to bang someone with that PB and just gotta aim for the dream, well... don't be any more of a jackass about it than absolutely necessary. (Note: It is never necessary to be a jackass. Funny how that works, ain't it?)

[2] ...and then nobody's happy, there's a thread in The Hog Pit, people start making new policies, staff gets headaches, dogs and cats living together, it's mass hysteria.

@Lithium I don't think anyone is suggesting eschewing dice in favor of something else, as, yeah, the code for the rolls is right there and there's no reason to not use it.

It's more a factor of how much is left vague and up to GM judgment calls.

Here's how numbers factor in here:

• Larger group of players == need for more than one GM.
• Need for more than one GM == need for guidelines to keep judgment calls consistent amongst GMs.

A lot of systems, by default, assume there's only going to be one GM for the game. Shifting from one to multiple GMs, by necessity, means a lot of the deliberately vague 'up to the GM/ST' situations in the books are going to need at least some clarification or additional guidelines to keep a measure of consistency. (WoD/CoD, I am looking real hard at you here; other systems are more clear, it varies a lot, but the problem is universal with that shift in who is running what.)

If you're creating the system from scratch, minimizing the instances of 'the results are up to the ST' judgment calls also means players can handle more things on their own without the need for ST oversight (which is not always available and/or timely in our medium). The more players you have, the more that autonomy becomes important. The ability those players have to be able to reliably handle the outcome of a roll or power without the need for additional oversight or interpretation to get the results allows them to do more with less top-down guidance, and that's a critical tool for players that's often overlooked in tabletop game design -- since it's not relevant at the table; play stops and starts when the GM/ST starts the game and they're typically present throughout. MUX/MUSH/etc. has 24 hour game play. Heavily coded games take this into account by having the code handle it, but in the same way, a system with clearer, more defined outcomes and result parameters can be a huge help without the need for heavy code.

@Lotherio It's more a case of the number of players. Tabletop games are not designed for groups of more than, say, a dozen, which would be a large tabletop group. For a LARP, that would be a tiny group.

Systems involving GM overhead and player-to-player resolution, as a result, often need to be adjusted to account for the sheer volume of characters in play as compared to tabletop games.

LARP deals with matters of scale far better than tabletop rules. Matters of scale are, frankly, huge. That's but one of many reasons to look at the way LARP handles certain issues.

I really liked @tragedyjones's approach to this on Reno, which is what I personally plan to steal forever after.

Nothing world-ending, but plots roughly structured like a season of a television show: the events are large and transformative, but not 'solve the riddle or everyone dies'. 6 months or so of something led by staff that has the potential to involve the majority of the grid if they wish to participate, and is primarily a spur to get things moving in broad strokes rather than a micro-managed true metaplot.

One season ends, there's some downtime, and then another begins with a different focus, ideally allowing others to become involved with a different specific interest.

A spaz of a goth chick @BITN. Soon, a dodgy street artist hiding from people who want to exploit her weirdness... also @BITN.

At the moment, that's it.