@Coin said in Identifying Major Issues:
Honestly, a lot of people throw their arms up about the whole "requiring e-mail" thing, and I've never gotten the big deal. E-mails are easy to come by, easy to drop.
I just never got it.
It is not a little ironic when people are also complaining that a game based on telnet is a barrier to entry. I believe that we are projecting our own capabilities and understanding, and ignoring others as they are convenient or not convenient to us.
I...honestly don't know what you think my point was, or I honestly misunderstand what you are trying to get across. I don't disagree with what you're saying, but don't see how that relates to what I said.
@Derp said in Identifying Major Issues:
@Thenomain said in Identifying Major Issues:
There's absolutely zero reason, at all, even a little, for a game to need your email address.
You mean except for all those @surreality listed above?
Those aren't needs. Those are tools that can be handy for the player. I've never asked a player to prove that they were who they said they were with an email address, though I can understand if someone wants to. Need? No.
So no, nothing Surreality said is a requirement. As she said, and even stressed, they are OPT IN systems. Last I checked my definitions of things, this doesn't mean "need".
It's not a bar for entry.
So?
I'm serious. So what? Something not being "a bar for entry" doesn't make it a good idea. Your logic is flawed and you should feel bad, or whatever Dr. Zoidberg says,
And if I'm running a game? Honestly, there are things I will want for my own security and game features that will require this. And if you can't trust me enough to even provide a burner e-mail for that, fine. Play elsewhere. There are other options.
Your logic is still flawed and etc. etc. I don't need your permission not to play your game (something that drives me nuts; staff, I know that I can log out, and I will decide if I'm going to or not, the ball's in your court if you're going to throw me off your game).
You either missed or purposefully ignored the initial point I made: Making a burner email is not in everyone's interest, nor in everyone's capabilities. Expecting people to do so to get around a system is pretty much admitting that the system is flawed. Why not, instead, like Surreality says, make the system OPT IN. This part has nothing to do with trust.
Also, I'm sick and tired of people demanding that trust is binary, that you either trust completely or you don't at all. This logic is bad and ... you know the rest.
The staff of a game are not your martyrs, and can impose requirements on you since they are incurring costs to provide you something for free. This is a perfectly reasonable requirement to be able to benefit from that.
Wow. You think you're a martyr, now. Look at you, pretending you know what that word means. I'll look impressed just for you.
No, it's not martyring asking players to do something, but don't pretend it's because it's a) easy to get around therefore it's perfectly sensible to demand it, or b) that it's necessary for 99% of Mu* systems. It's not.
--
extremely important addition: It's not. It's a staff edict, a "because we say so". Go team.
@Cobaltasaurus said in Chronicles of Darkness Game: Seeking help:
Here's some theme thing for Changeling:
I didn't think I could see an Emotion Court write-up that I thought was the least bit original. I didn't even think Dawn/Dusk or Sun/Moon were all that interesting.
Greed? That's interesting.
--
As a quick reminder, as of the last known draft of the new Changeling, emotions don't have to be used as long as the Freehold has a system to share power among the Courts.
Just to say, but I'm unaware of White Wolf ever explaining when changing the n-again from "10" is a good design decision. If you look at some of the statistical breakdowns, 9-again does not make a small difference until about 5 dice and doesn't make a large difference until about 9 dice.
While I am extremely glad that nWoD completely scrapped the variable target number (8 or nothing!), and I believe in reading between the lines to try and figure out what the intent is, I never got the feeling that n-again shifts were meant to be entirely one thing or another. In practice it increases number of success dice by a minor percentage of the dice rolled, or flattens that chance to a straight line (with No-Again).
@Derp said in Identifying Major Issues:
@HelloProject said in Identifying Major Issues:
Also who doesn't have like 10 burner emails? It's not that heavy.
So much this.
It is annoying as fuck, tho, and no not everyone knows how to do this let alone cares to learn how. We've talked about the barrier to entry, and we've talked about trust, and the required email is solidly in both camps. If we're going to talk about trust, then there's absolutely zero reason, at all, even a little, for a game to need your email address. It may not be a big deal to some, but let's be blunt and also call a telnet-based game "not a big deal". And yet if you say that in this crowd, it's a good way to spark a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth.
There's absolutely zero reason, at all, even a little, for a game to need your email address.
@faraday said in Identifying Major Issues:
@Thenomain To each their own, I guess.
I don't know what this means. I mean, I know what it means, as a truism. I was explaining how the phone number analogy can be stretched to mean "anyone and everyone knowing who we are and where we play in this hobby".
@faraday said in Identifying Major Issues:
@ThatGuyThere how is that different from a MU though? I don't see the phone number analogy relating to a MU.
I am Thenomain. You are Faraday. These are who we are, our identifiers. While we might not be afraid of someone getting ahold of us, we are sometimes concerned about defending ourselves. We expose ourselves by linking our RP to our online identities.
Not quite the phone number analogy, but it's my take away.
To agree with you, this reminds me of something Brus and others used to say on Wora: Treat others as adults and expect them to act like adults.
My spin on this is: Be patient and understanding. Not so much that you are a doormat, but enough to let people correct themselves when things do go wrong.
As far as I care, I can deal with anyone who shows willingness to try and not be a jerk. I do have a limit, where someone shows time and again that they don't care for anything but their own world-view, tho right now it only has the name of VASpider.
Cool.
Let's try to work out what works now, then. I mean, there's a reason why Fall Coast has high connect numbers in spite of I think we can agree that it's not a deeply developed game, right?
I would not trust a stat system made by me either, let's be clear! That's what I have HR for. Don't we marry to shore up our weaknesses?
ES
At this point I'm not sure I'd trust a system made by him, either!
Really, web store, I'm there to shop. Popping up a request for me to sign up for your newsletter and then getting cutesy but snarky about the "no" option is not going to endear me to you. I am thinking about spending money with you; why are you trying to get in my way?
I will not poop myself. And you were chanting for it to break, ssssssssoooooooo, you poop.
@Catsnake said in Fate's Harvest BETA Live (Full Open Soon):
I've been mostly enjoying my time on this chat.
I don't have any previous experience with this VASpider that everyone talks about here but she is apparently back to playing (after some sort of hiatus I guess?) on this chat. Evidence of such, her reblogging/vouching for/liking stuff from the site's tumblr onto her own. https://vaspider.tumblr.com/post/160786811941/were-back. And a link to a tumblr she reblogged/advertised art for on her character's wiki.
Thanks for the warning.
I skimmed it for the few functions I know that are on Penn but not on TinyMUX and didn't see any. There are some @commands that Penn has that Mux does not but as Brandymail was a staple of the Mush world before @mail, I doubt there will be a problem. And if there is, well, good thing you can code, right?
Right?!
@faraday said in Identifying Major Issues:
Or maybe it's because there's a sense of entitlement that expects staff to be their personal tabletop GM.
I missed this one; thanks @WTFE.
It's up to staff to inform members how to play the game. Not because players need their precious hands held, but because every game does it entirely differently. They need someone to lead. This is why games opened by friends and allies tend to gather more invested players; everyone there is on the same page already and there's more of it to go around. Getting critical mass helps a ton.
If staff wants the game to run a certain way, staff must help players learn how to play because only staff know how.
That won't stop me from making an open game with few rules and let the players play, e.g., minor deities working at a giant mall however they like, but most of the games were talking about are very structured.
'iconoclast' is a cool word, and it might even describe your character, but it is not a physical descriptor
I remember asking someone what "a bespoke gentleman" was supposed to mean, and got snarked at for being pedantic. I really had no idea how someone could look "bespoke"! None of us are made to order; you kind of end up with whatever you get!
@faraday said in Identifying Major Issues:
@Thenomain said in Identifying Major Issues:
let us look critically and completely into the systems that this broad category interacts with, and how they interact with it.
Fair enough, but my only point is that my broad experience with players across a dozen games and almost two decades is that the people willing to run their own plots are few and far between.
While I used to see it happen a lot, a lot a lot. Alot.
Now, finding the people who run things for kicks is like finding a unicorn, but the games where I've seen everyone go crazy are games where authors are writing people into their stories, and when those authors are staff then it's RP Orgy Time.
We didn't used to have a name for RP. Well, we did; it was called RP. If people on your game don't get out to RP, I don't know what to say. The last mud-like game I was on, it was D&D 4e, and the grid was tiny and nobody knew what they were supposed to be doing.
It could very well have nothing to do with staff beating creativity out of their players, that's just what I'm used to seeing.
@faraday said in Identifying Major Issues:
And still, only a minority of players are willing to do anything other than the military equivalent of BarRP between staff-run events.
Part of my response was: It's not you, it's other staffers.
Because it's probably not you, it's probably other staffers. It's probably not you, it's probably everything. If we're going to blame Players (a broad and vague category usually used by staffers to remove blame from themselves; I know you're not this kind of person, Faraday, but you're part of the hobby) then let us look critically and completely into the systems that this broad category interacts with, and how they interact with it.
