Supergirl is a treasure.
i am scared, I completely agree with Coin about something. 
Honestly it is my favorite TV show at the moment, of course it does not hurt that it has introduced one of my top 5 favorite DC characters already this season, But then I have always been an LSH mark.
I am thinking Cavs, I see the Warriors getting upset in the West, not sure by whom, and really i don't see anyone but the Warriors beating the Cavs.
@Karmageddon said in Dead Celebrity Thread:
That's because he was too busy protecting his schlong. #priorities
He had them right. An arrow either place is likely fatal and if I have to lose one of those things and survive, as a guy it is good bye eye every time.
I am going tv as well. Not sure why but definitely getting more of a TV vibe from it.
I love that instead of the debate I watched Scooby Doo meets Batman, ahhh childhood nostalgia.
I also fear I choose the more intellectually fulfilling option as well.
@Jennkryst
That is true it then becomes an issue over which you are willing to accept.
To me I go with the exponential cost even if it provides some min/maxing benefits because in theory there is a person looking over the numbers to curb the worst excesses.
I find it odd you seem to be anti min/maxing yet for me nothing encourages min/maxing more then linear xp.
In exponential systems I will round out a character both to make the character realistic and because of the hey it is cheap to round out compared to dropping one more point in what i am best at.
In a linear system, I see no reason to ever not put the extra point in what I am best at versus rounding out skills.
I am definitely in favor skill groups. I know they can be used to min max but they also can be used for easy rounding out of ones character. If I want to be skill socially but not have it be my characters thin I can drop a couple points in influence and while I won't be a groups face I can not suck when called upon to make a roll. Without skill groups I have to look over the skill list and try to pick out everything I will need a point or to in for basic these are skill any character would have to survive in the environment level and I will guaranteed miss one or two which then lead to it being a pain in ass to make a character.
Given the normal issues with getting a starting critical mass of players on any new mush I would definitely not get rid of tools the published game already has in place to simplify the prospect.
Along those lines when I started a Dreaming campaign a couple of years back one of the PCs printed out a sheet before the game then during c-gen he realized it was one for a hybrid of Dreaming and Lost. No idea where on the net he found the sheet but that likely means rules are out there somewhere.
I don't think an attraction would put me off playing a character. a relationship might but an attraction can be played with out it ever developing into actual romance.
@Misadventure
I am not that concerned with the form the randomizer takes.
I did play Torg back in the day as well as Pre-Savage Worlds Deadlands and Castle Falkenstein both of which used cards for all or part of the system.
Along those same lines for solo stuff is the Mythic GM emulator that in part will use random words to prompt things.
@Misadventure
Not use i would put it exactly in that way but yes.
And for me it is also keeps things from getting predictable. Lets say I am in a plot run by GM A and having been in GM A's plots a bunch I know their patterns, all storytellers have them weather they run games, write novels or make TV shows, with out some randomizer these patterns become what you get while every work has some deviation they also become predictable.
I know the storytellers I enjoy the most in whatever medium are the one that are able to consistently surprise me in ways that make sense. (Note the ways that make sense caveat, random for the sake of random tends to annoy me) Dice and other forms of randomization help to accomplish that in my view.
@Pyrephox said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
@Kanye-Qwest said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
They are definitely meant to be mini-games that are opt in. Why do you feel like you'll be screwed if you don't participate?
I think there's a bit of necessity there, as tasks are a way to get resources, and resources are necessary to do some things - but those things are also meant to be opt in. The most rp/story 'necessary' use of resources I can think of is investigations, because it costs 25 social to start one (with a discount for each point of the investigate skill you have). But, you can get enough social resources to start an investigation by doing @task/work 7 times a week for ...well, 3 weeks if you don't have any of the investigation skill.
I'm honestly very curious what is making you feel you'll fall behind if you don't do tasks.
Out of curiosity, why DOES an Investigation cost social resources? I've never quite been able to understand that, conceptually. Originally, I rationalized as oh, I'm probably getting scribes or underlings to do a lot of the heavy lifting for me. But that doesn't really make any sense, because that's never factored in as far as I can see, with chance of success. Chance of success seems to come strictly from a PCs own stats and skills with no bonus or penalty due to the organization they belong to. Now, you can pay /extra/ resources to get a better chance, and that makes more sense in a way, I can see how that plays into it, but the initial cost seems to just be a random speedbump like the designers thought, "Hey, we need something for people to spend social resources on."
My guess and I am not affiliated with the game in any way is that it takes a far bit of time and effort to track down the people you need to learn stuff from and likely more pressure/influence/bribery/blackmail to get them to talk.
Unless it is something that can be researched completely in a library it takes a fair bit of effort. Heck even with modern tech a lot of investigations stuff requires things like stakeouts etc.
Now that could be RPed out but I can also see the logic of this work costs this many units of whatever.
@Misadventure said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:
I have a friend who literally likes to roll the dice. Just likes the physicality of it.
For me part of it is the physicality of it, but also the hey where will this take the game aspect.
I am not wedded to the idea of dice in games but I am definitely in favor of a randomizer of some sort. To me that is what makes the game a lot of fun is that no one not even the GM controls the thing completely. The game itself has an impact through the mechanics.
I know that view is not universal, plenty of GMs will fudge dice etc to keep things headed the way they want bit honestly those are the games I drop out of both on line and in table top. Stories are awesome, but stories that take a live of their own through random chance even more awesome. And yes I have seen stories take on their own live through the randomness of roll both on line and in table top.
One of my favorite examples was in a D+D table top I ran. The rouge of the party went off on his own and ended up killing an innocent and feeding the body to a mimic, then his dice completely turned against him. Like three sessions worth of crap rolls. The player decided since that character does not know his fate is controlled by tumbling polyhedrals that the character would seek redemption to lift the curse he was obviously afflicted with. Character then begins on that story path and sure enough regression to the mean kicks in and he starts getting a more normal spread of rolls. the character ended up becoming religious and taking cleric levels. this whole character growth arc would not have happened without a randomizer since the players stated goal was to eventually take over the local thieves guild and I had written out a subplot to build to that but game has other ideas and that is why I love to RP because no matter how much all the folks want something to go one way there is no guarantee that it will.
Proving once again I don't know my audience, I really liked Pitch. And that's despite the fact I'm not fond and don't watch baseball (being European and all).
In most sports shows/movies lack of being a fan of the sport is a plus to the enjoyment. Have not watched the Pitch so not commenting on it in specific but on sports fiction in general.
I think it would be an interesting idea, after all I prefer NWod mechanics for the most part to OWoD but OWoD's world is so much more compelling to me.
A lot will come down to the implementation decisions. After all WoD Fandom is a fractious lot. The things one person loves about OWoD is the thing another hates. For example I hear a lot of people clamour for something like the Cammie/Sabbat war in NVamp, while as much as a love OWoD the Cammie/Sabbat thing holds no interest for me helps make NVamp the only new version I prefer to the old. (I like both versions of Changeling equally since they are to me mirror image games, Dreaming is about trying to cope with being both human and fae, while Lost is about trying to cope with being neither human nor fae.)
@Admiral said in Coming Soon: Supernatural: Lost & Found:
If I was going to do a Supernatural MUSH I'd just set it in like, the 1980s. And make it based out of the road house.
<crescent kicks a bunch of people> ... Oh sorry saw 1980s and Roadhouse in the same sentence and misunderstood.
Tyler Hoechlin's Superman > Henry Cavill's Superman.
Yeah, I said it.
FITE ME.
I agree, though I didn't think he looked right as Clark, I did think he did a very good job as Superman.
@Lithium
Is your anti-WoD stance systemic or setting?
I just ask because if you mean the setting instead to the system there is Kushiel's Delight though the last news from that corner of the world makes one less than optimistic but it does fit if you are anti-WoD the setting rather then Anti-Wod the system.
Also I assume Shadowrun Denver is still in existence though have no actual knowledge on the topic.
I am between those extremes as well when I GM. I usually have a beginning written and I know how things will go if the PCs do nothing then the story evolves as I factor in how PC actions interact with the other things going on and then alters what the NPCs are doing.
For example the last long term campaign I ran the story plan evolved a major war starting up between the PCs kingdom and the neighboring kingdom. There is almost nothing that the PCs could have done to stop the war. The background of that was put in place by NPCs years before the opening scene. However the PCs were able to make major changes to how it came about, and the relative strengths for it, which definitely changed the story. Including the PCs taking out the enemy war leader in the second session because of an completely unrelated thing and an incredible die roll.
Though I really do fit the first example because if I roll the dice I abide by them, though if I don't want a PC to die in a bar fight I will just narrate the bar fight rather then dropping dice.