Posts made by ThatGuyThere

@Glitch
Fair enough though I do like a lot of the tinker code bits I have seen most places even if I do not make them myself.
For what I gather Evennia makes big things easy to do but at the cost of the small fun bits. All I can say is best of luck but I probably won't be adapting to Evennia games until all the old mush style games are gone.
No offense meant but for me the small fun bits are important too.

Alright quick example from my experience. I made a char who as a job worked in a comic store, there was no comic store on grid. No biggie I did not think I would rp being at work much. RP happens my char mentions said job people want to pop in a visit him at work scenes take place there so I decide to build it.
I co to the build nexus and dig the rooms make the exits get is all connected together, get the success and fail messages set and then put in a request to have it linked to the grid. A couple days later after build staff looks though it to make sure I did not mess anything up it gets put on grid and rp in it continues.
Or another example on a different game, in cgen spend point on having a free hold, this gets approved so before hitting grid. There the process was a bit longer. I put in a request to build it gets approved I do the building of the project in this case three rooms, grounds, house, freehold, I add the the request I am done then it gets looked over and linked to grid.
So basically the ability to @dig and create exits etc. not so much abotu altering a room there but taking an idea for a place and turning it into a room.
Also on MUSHes the billboards, mail system, and channels for the most part are soft-coded as well.

@Griatch

Exactly I that is why I said I was code base agnostic,. I have no love for mush code, but things like building my characters place of business, if it the type of place that would see rp frequently or his lair, or even being able to set my own aconnect so it pulls up the info I want right way on connection are important to me. I am willing to learn new commands to do them but not willing to give them up.
I know there are some people that are the same with multi-descers because they love having a ton of outfits.

Fair enough and part of the reason I bring up questions is to spur that thought by developers. In the MUSH community there is less of a divide between players and developers, we are all pretty one big soup. so when I mention things that might need to be added I do it at least partially because people reading this boards will be the ones making the games I play. Heck Theno has coded on or supplied code for at least 4 games i have played in the past and likely more. That is why I insert player concerns into these threads.

My second concern is compatibility with the clients currently in use but that is likely a whole different kettle of fish.

@Griatch
Well I might not be a member of the exalted ranks of game developers, but I am concerned with the tolls being used in the games i play. so much like when people talk about engines for video games I pay attention to what is going on because it effects me.
Nice condescension in your post, though still does not address my question of how is the new shiny thing better if it does not offer the features we have grown used to? Cause honestly if I logged onto a game and was told building was not possible I would log back off. And if you don't want to talk to us lowly non--developers there is a whole group for code talk. Where I am guessing most of us peasants don't post.
There are essentially two important facets of a game to me, quality or role play, which is rather independent of code, and does the code have ht tools to help facilitate that role play.

@Griatch said:

Our lack of more advanced builder sctipting tools like this has more to do with this being something quite game-specific (Evennia is game agnostic) along with no one having wanted it enough to add it yet: Evennia's command system should be flexible enough to handle it without any core changes.

I think this quote right here might be a big part of the cultural issue. I have never MUDed, so don't know that culture but literally every MUSH/MUX I have every been on from the small maybe ten player total game to sprawling monsters what have over a hundred on at any point in time have had building capabilities. So it is not something that is really game specific or even genre specific, since I have played WoD, Superhero, Star Wars and Fantasy games in my time online.
I am rather agnostic towards a new code base or interface but if the one you are suggesting takes away features that I know and use in the games right now, why as a player would I be motivated to make the switch?

I just want to says thumbs up for playing Sunder, he was my favorite Morlock as a kid.

@Misadventure said:

would you be fine if you went in to a investigation scene, rolled crappy, and then either the GM told you flat out that the investigation will bear no fruit unless something false in your lap in a few weeks, or even playing through all the dead ends etc and not getting any further? And that was that? Would you expect several more chances for whatever reason, like another crime in the string, or someone offering info? Or no?

I would be fine with playing out some dead ends then having another change with the next crime scene in the mystery.Most game style mysteries i have seen regardless of system had more then one incident in furtherance of the antagonists objective. Just like the PC don't need to win every fight they don't need to solve every thing at the first attempt. A good GM has a backup plan and a way to get player back on track if the first attempt is not successful. Look at the mystery genre, sometimes the protagonists miss things and don't realize it until later.
To be making a bad investigation roll and having it mean OK you never solve the mystery is like the oh you blew your disarm trap roll everyone dies. Character should have failures and successes and grow from them. Maybe blowing the first roll means the villain has more time to plan or had more men or guns when the times comes to face him that is fine tow there are lots of ways to have failure add to the story rather then take away from it. Maybe by blowing an investigation roll I chase a bad lead to a biker bar and make and enemy there to add a sub plot. or something.

I have been the person running mysteries, and trust me I am not an author, nor am I perfect at all. I did this in Champions (superheroes, often with wacky powers and high skills), Deadlands (often little character skill, just player intelligence or imagination), GURPS (player skills and player intelligence).

In all cases, one major lesson was this: if you spend a lot of time on something, and the players never see it, it's as if it was never there.

This is unfortunately true. I know from experience. I just finished running a campaign where the PCs by dumb luck and choice managed to completely avoid one of the subplots I really wanted to include so a lot of prep time was wasted on my end. Yeah it kinda sucks but in one of the hazards inherent in running a game.

I often relied on the noir/hardboiled detective approach which was that persistence would inevitably get one of the hidden actors to act against you directly, and as player characters you were heroic enough to survive and learn critical info. Being super heroes really helped with that. I also made experts available, and had the players direct their efforts the same as they would direct their own: was there anything in particular they should look for,m or a theory they should try to prove/disprove?

I use this tactic a lot myself to nudge player back towards the right track of things.

In the end, I probably let the players succeed by giving many chances often.
I think we are closer to being like minds then it appears, I always give multiple chances and opportunities for players to succeed and do my best to have it so that when loses occur they add to the story rather then take away. For example in the campaign I just finished the PCs totally blew the initial plot arc, both through rolls and decisions. It could have been very justifiable that it would end with then getting killed and everyone leaving unhappy. Instead I had the PC noble lose his title and some other non permanent losses and a it gave the character added motivation and he had the opportunity later to regain his position which he was successful at.

To me when running something I always liked the rule of only have the players roll when both success and failure are interesting, which to be also imply a related one, as the gm if I have the players roll it is my job ot make sure that the success or failure that results leads to interesting things.

to try to bring this back to Star Trek somewhat, look at the shows there is frequently points where the characters are stymied and suffer setback but then by the end of the episode or plot arc had their moments of redemption to save the day.
And I honestly have no clue what system I would use to simulate the feel of Star Trek in a game.

There is a big difference between wanting a sim and wanting a game with unknown elements, I have never been a fan of pure simulation systems. But knowing my character will find everything important in the scene, which Gumshoe does, true there might be complications and such but the system is set up so you find the clues even at cost lessens my desire to play through the scene. It does in table top and I can't imagine it not on line. If I know the important result, aka i find the clues, then why bother with the rest of the scene?
Also while the system in Gumshoe does not guarantee solving a mystery unless the GMs you have played with are vastly superior to the ones I have know all the clue pretty much does that. I like my table top GM but he is not better at crafting complex mysteries then authors who do it for a living nor should he be, but since I have been reading those novels since childhood knowing all the clues leads to knowing the solutions quickly. I rarely knwo then end of a mystery novel in advance but when dealing with another non-professional it is usually pretty obvious where it is going.

Never read Powers, though that is mainly cause I can't handle Bendis writing.

I have to disagree, I do think story is very important but to my tastes it needs to be balanced with a game aspect as well. While I am a big fan of rules light systems I am not of Gumshoe because it feels too predetermined, I don't want to know what that I will solve the mystery. To me there has to be the chance of failure or why bother playing?
If I want to read star trek fan fic I can find that pretty easy or read one of the dozens of novels produced over the years. To draw me into playing a game there need to be some game aspects to it.

Given that Starfleet is a large organization I don't see the problem with reports in theory.
However if the expect he player to write more the a paragraph summary then that is horrible.
True the report the character writes off screen should be substantial, but expecting the player to put a lot of effort in is a bit out there.

I remember looking at the wiki looks like it has decent set up and policies. I ended up not playing there because when I looked at the PCs it didn't appear like my character idea would fit in very well, he was a criminal type and there was either one or none others on the wiki with that mentioned.
Still it is never good to see a game go, my condolences to those involved.

@HelloProject
The real issue I can see with that is reconditioning gamers who have been programmed by the games they play to think about numbers. Not just mush or RPG games but all sort of games, talk to anyone who plays one of the Sports games regularly and they well start talking about various players ratings which are almost always numbers. Now on a superhero traits game it would fit but on those that use mechanics I could see it turning into a mess.
Another issue is at some point two people will want to use influence to do mutually exclusive things which is where the numbers come in handy, but I think that would be more easily solved the the cultural one.

@BobGoblin said:

How much 'code' is too much code?

When it interferes with rp rather then facilitates rp is my answer, granted i know that is horribly imprecise and will differ for each game but that is also the truest answer I can think of.

@ThugHeaven said:

I've seen that happen a few times and always think it could've been a little more atmospheric if everybody wasn't acting like it was business as usual.

The things is to a lot of characters that have been around for a few months on grid it is business as usual. I tend to not do a lot of plots on mushes to spread the wealth and also I tend to avoid STs I am not familiar with but even I get into two or three plots a month and most in WoD at least involve horrific or dark situations. How many does it take for a character to become desensitized? I try not to play it as too soon when it is literally the tenth horrific thing he has witnessed in six months, he would have to be a bit touched to not think of it as business as usual.

@Ganymede said:

You guys mean "Derrick Rose," right?

Yes that is the one. My defense weak as it is, is that I was just following the spelling used earlier in the thread instead of looking for myself.

To paraphrase the commenters on deadspin, It will be a tough competition between Derek Rose and RG3 for the role of Mr. Glass in any future Unbreakable remake.

@Coin said:

@surreality said:

@Coin Same -- but there are people who do continue to press the issue, and will use the argument that 'if you avoid me, you're cheating, because you lurve me now!'

Which is more or less a giant disaster for players who are ethical and honest and want to play fair.

No, what it really is is a dick that needs to be pimp-smacked in the kisser.

And how often in our hobby does staff actually pimp smack the dick?
More often then not a complaint like this results in the complaining player being told handle it yourself, or worse told they are cheating.
The Doors system is fine assuming not asshats, but in a mush that is not a save assumption my any means.
True combat works that way as well but from what i have seen staff is a hell of a lot more likely to involve themselves when combat is involved when asked where when it involves social rules they tend to try and dodge involvement.

@Coin said:

TL;DR: Social systems only work well if you're not hyperparanoid and/or a dick. You know, same as most everything else.

This right there is exactly why I am in the camp of the one roll people. It lets you find out if you are dealing with a dick a lot quicker.

D20 is fine for fantasy, but it is not my preferred system even for that. For non fantasy I really do not like it.
Granted I really do like 5th ed D+D but it is very fantasy-centric and would not work for a lot of other things.
Note I consider 5th ed and D20 to be separate systems similar yes but not the same.