Best posts made by ThatGuyThere

I hate the posing in the declaration phase that some STs use. Where it becomes pose attempt, handle mechanics, pose result, move to next person. That just gets to be painfully slow. And I will be honest leads me to start mentally disconnecting to the scene.
I agree that handle mechanics for the round then pose the round is likely the best solution. It helps with pace of the scene and still lets you get creative with your poses.

@surreality said in Faction-Based Villain Policy Idea:

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.

Let's not forget the other big reason we will see more of it. It is often the most defined part of the system.
Even WoD which is not particularly combat heavy spends more pages on combat then on skill use. (At least as of the base NWoD book. I have not counted up pages on the GMC edition nor do I have a copy of Chronicles.)
Fact of the matter is it is always easier to run a combat then another encounter at least on a MUSH, a lot of this is mechanical, a lot is cultural.

As far as character death, honestly I tend to be on the minimalist side of things when it comes to MUSHing and I have a rep for being a killer GM in table top. The big reason is what is lost. I am not talking about the character but the ability of the player to play.
In a tabletop you die you miss the rest of the session at most. (As both player and GM I have seen ready ideas get turned into Characters and back in the game by the end of the session.) And get to pick up basically from where you left off with being part of the group. Neither of this is true on a MUSH, even if you have your idea ready to go you are looking at a minimum of four days more likely a week plus before you get approved. Then what a good month of Hi my name is scenes, and if you, god forbid, join the same group your last character was a part of you are all manner of cheating asshole.
If you want death to be more prevalent and accepted those issues likely need to be fixed first.

@Kestrel said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

a social construct that makes no sense. It's inefficient. It's a waste of time.

Social contracts are rarely about efficiency, they tend to be the result of years and years or reactions to things that happen then counter reactions.
The asking to join the scene one or the principle or respecting the scene in place is a direct outgrowth of people being pissed off as a result of others completely shitting on scenes in progress.
There was a time when the asking would have been seen as odd at least in the WoD corner of things. But those were also the wild west days of Sabbat walking into the bar and horrid forming for no reason but boredom to create combat or a Brujah just deciding hey lets create chaos or Garou of both Gaian and Wyrm allegiance doing the same thing. Of hell in some places just a mortal who got his hands on a gun. (Usually at this time the gun had to be a coded object for people to actually go with it being there. ) This was a normal hazard to playing in public, and I personally saw it happen on three separate games. Heck to some extent it still happens to this day on WoD games. On CoH about a year ago I was in a scene and two folks decided to come in a start a fight because "we decided you must be bored and decided to spice things up for you." They got upset and stormed off when I told them we would wait for staff to arrive cause my spirit mage was going to be doing spirit mage-y shit.
Now most people agree there should be consequences for IC action and those folks usually got greased but there were also folks that lost characters for simply RPing in the wrong hangout. This lead to the reaction of creating etiquette for what is and is not proper for joining public scenes.
Now those days are long in the past but a fair number of the mushers from those days are still around so still carry the baggage from those areas.

@Groth said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

What most people work hardest to arrange OOCly are abusive relationships and antagonistic relationships. It's been my impression that most MUSH players want IC conflict however they don't want the OOC drama and escalation that often comes hand to hand in it so they end up very shy unless things are OOCly worked out beforehand.

This completely most of the time the OOC talk is to find an IC relationship that is mutually Enjoyable on an OOC level not to avoid IC conflict. There is lettle better then a fun IC antagonism that both people get to enjoy on an OOC level.
Honestly for me when there is no OOC communication that is when it runs into either we get along IC, completely avoid each other, or we conflict by +job not rp since if we aren't talking OOC then we are reaching any sort of agreement on rules interpretations either so staff is having to deal with it as well.
Also I hate predetermining an outcome for a scene, hate it to the point that I will not do it unless the other party is a long time OOC friend.
But what I will do for everyone is sent boundaries before hand, example I won't agree to "Let's have our chars meet and become friends." But I will gladly agree to, "I am not feeling up to a lot of IC conflict, so lets have our chars meet, and if they don't get along we wrap things up quickly." the difference to me is that the first one is scripted, where the second my char is free to hate this other char and then I can come up with a reason why he just leaves instead of presses the issue. Maybe the other player feels more like building on the possible conflict later maybe we don't either way we had what i hope would be an enjoyable scene that night, and well to me that is the point of the enterprise.

@Apos
Now this opinion might make me an asshole, but we also need to decide how much of what is currently MUSH are we willing to sacrifice to appeal to other types of RPers.
Changing the interface sure I can deal with that, changing the basic command structure less so.
Cultural things are the same way, there are things I think we should be willing to part with but other things I think we should keep.
For example most play by post stuff is written in the past tense, that would be one of those unacceptable changes at least for me.

@Arkandel said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

@faraday said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

@Lotherio said in Cultural differences between MUDs and MUSHes:

This was actually a thing on HM from time to time. Did the big scenes where a Covenant's domain was attacked happen at 3 am in the morning for one of the political aspirants in it? "Where were you when we were fighting for our lives, you COWARD?".

Yeah, it's a douche move.

This reminds me of one point where I have to give all the credit to Kerfuffle regarding the Changeling plot on FC. After the big climactic final battle scene he said on channel that the folks who were not there we allowed to right in the parts they played in the victory since it is impossible for everyone to be there for the big scene. So even though I avoided it, mainly because the thought of a five hour plot ending combat scene is concentrated unfun for me. I am able to answer the what did you do during the battle question ICly. I hauled loads of ammo from the armory to the big guns as needed.

My backgrounds on games tend to be roughly a page. Enough to give a base for the character to start from but avoiding unnecessary detail, that is what IC conversations are for.
And this pretty much equates to both what I have in mind when i talk with a table top GM about the char I am making and what I expect a player in a table top to be able to give me. Not written out of course but in conversation during that first c-gen session.

An addition to what I earlier wrote. If you do run a one off action scene that your PC participates in, it is also on you to insure that later your participation does not become a benefit.
For example lets say I am playing on a Wild West game me and Bubba are about to RP, Bubba doesn't feel like Saloon RP so I say hey lets go for a ride and get attacked by bandits. I run the scene my PC and Bubba fight off some bandits fun was had by all. I don't think any sane person would have an issue with this.
But lets say a month down the line there is an opening for county sheriff for the setting. It would be fine for Bubba to point at cleaning out that group of bandits as a reason he should be sheriff because he did not run the scene. If my PC tried to used it as a reason to be sheriff I should be slapped down because that would be using a scene I ran for a benefit.
I think this is true weather I am staff on the game or not.

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

Is staffing a MU* different from this, other than the obvious coding?

Yes in one very significant way. When I run a table top, which I do often it is for friends. Or at worst friends of friends I am OK hanging out with.
When you staff on a mush you spend a lot of your effort on strangers and even people you actively dislike.

@Three-Eyed-Crow
I can understand that, I think lot comes down to how we as players see the characters. If they continuously fail at what they are statted to be good at through luck it gets to be irritating because damn it this character is supposed to be good at that.
While if they are doing something that they are not particularly statted for the successes feel like a bonus. I have played plenty of combat characters who have done impressive things over the years but the PC combat story I tell the most is the nebbish who through dumb luck one punch k.o.ed a neo-nazi.

Totally not pertinent to the conversation at hand since dogfightng is still shown as the main form of fighter combat in fiction, I can't read this thread without the voice of Major General Claire Chennault (commander of the Flying Tigers) in my head commenting dog fighting being romantic nonsense and just like yo don't judge an infantryman by his ability to kill the enemy one on one neither should you use that criteria to judge a fighter pilot.

Edited to clean up the word order of the last sentence.

So things being done badly on a mush is only a reason to get rid of something if you don't like it? Gotcha. You know you could save everyone time by just admitting you ditched what you didn't like. there is nothing wrong with that. But when you keep using argument like people do it wrong anyway but that have that only apply to things you want it to it just looks sloppy.

I would call cyberpunk a sub genre of sci fi.
You can do cyberpunk without a wired matrix, though I do prefer it with wired seems lower class that way.
If the tech gets too slick it ceases to be cyberpunk. take SR 4 for example, it is the best edition of Shadow Run U have played, (have not gotten to try five yet) but I do not get the cyberpunk feel from it which might be why i can tolerate the magic in it more then in previous editions.

I understand what you are saying from a thematic point of view but that does not jibe at all with my experience in mushes with mechanical systems.
Granted that is limited to WoD and Star Wars games but I have most often seen people led with their biggest gun first.
Now is it in theme for Spidey to go all out versus a jewelry thief, not of course not it is a frequent thing in the comics of Spidey either mentioning or thinking how much he has to hold back against normal humans. However if there is no significant mechanical drawback for doing it I think we would see it in game more often than not. Especially since this is an OC game so you would not have Spidey, you would have Alt-Spidey and it would be easy enough to bang out a personality and background where you would have similar powers and no compunction against using them on over matched foes.
If you are going to house rule it when/if it becomes a problem you should likely house rule it to prevent it from becoming a problem.
Also are Advantages intended to be an occasional boost? the ones with trade offs such as All out attack, defensive attack etc have nothing written into them that limits their use.

@Hexagon
One of the few places I will give CoH props is the use of reality levels.
A PC can set themselves to see the appropriate levels and in a mixed scene poses can be made to one reality to simulate things like chimerical or spiritual activities. Same with desc having components to each reality as needed.
Though all things are set to a base level so for example a wraith PC walks into a bar, everyone sees the PC object enter, if you look at the PC you see whatever nothing here description the player set but those set to see wraith things would see that line as well as the wraith desc.
For poses the basic ones go to everyone where f: would show to just the fae sighted folks. And w: poses go to just the wraith people etc.

I have never been a fan of mini-games on a mush, I don't mind if they are there even if they give benefits to other but to me the mini-game defeats the purpose of why I log on.
When i log on it is because I want to RP with other people, even a great mu* based mini-game is meh to me because if I wanted to play a computer based game without other people well I have a console for that, or any of the various games I have on PC. I enjoy both forms but to me they scratch two completely different entertainment itches.

@Misadventure
While I will cede the point that killing a gone character might not be done out of spite. I have no doubt the vast majority of them are for that reason.
Also with your logic of don't play under bad staff, give me an example of one game from any genre at any point in the history of this hobby that has not had at least one bad staffer?
So you are saying no one should play anywhere?

With the possible exception of Eldritch which I have heard nothing bad about the staff there., Sadly they just offer nothing I am in the mood to play.

@BobGoblin said in Are there any active sci-fi MU*s these days?:

This was referred to by many as the tacobus.

Off topic but I have to ask what would I infer from that?
Just from the term tacobus, I would think a bus full of tacos, or maybe a bus that they give you tacos as you ride, or a bus that delivers taco? I do't see any of these three situations being bad as I like tacos. ... Is it lunch time yet?

Commenting more in general than about saving goats in particular, for me it is more about making the stakes matter personally to the PC.
I have played character living in a van where basic survival was everything and had great fun, I have also been in literal save the world plots that were boring because my PC had no skin in the game.
For example the table top D+D game I am in is about saving the world, but my characters stake in it is that the big bad's underlings killed his best friend back when we were level 3 (current level is 17) my characters motivation is still on getting vengeance for his friend while saving the world is a nice bonus.