@surreality That word is certainly a United States-centric problem.
There's something to be said for imposing one culture on others. And that's an ethics discussion that I'm willing to have. But this political talk needs to talk a long fuckin' walk off of a short pier.
@deadculture But isn't the art of moving goal-posts far beyond any reasonable arena the done thing in this hobby?
@insomniac7809 said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:
@tinuviel said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:
@insomniac7809 said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:
@deadculture said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:
After all, that's what 1984 is about, the totalitarian point of view in which the potential of a word to hurt means it has to expunged from the lexicon outright.
That is not what 1984 is about.
It's a valid reading of the text. Anything that 'hurts' the governmental machine is removed. Emotions, words, people, etcetera.
Well, first off, that's really stretching the analogy when we're going from "removing things that hurt people" to "banning things that 'hurt' the hold of a totalitarian regime."
Second, the point in 1984 isn't really removing the anti-Party concepts so much as it is to keep them as something that's constantly abused, degraded and tortured ("boot on face" etc) for the sake of glorifying the Party. Removing hurt isn't the point in 1984, inflicting it is.
Like I said, it's a valid reading. That doesn't mean it's the only one. An element in the Party's ability to cause harm is its ability to expunge harm done against itself. A rather vital element, I would argue.
But this isn't really the literary discussion circle.
ETA: Also I wasn't judging the analogy, just the analysis of the text.
@seraphim73 said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:
If you're not going to have a collaborative system, I think you need to do as others have suggested (@Ganymede, I think?) and make social skills/stats only work on NPCs, probably discount their XP costs, and make sure they have some serious bite against NPCs.
With this kind of system one would need to construct an environment that is heavily, heavily influenced by NPCs. Otherwise the idea of manipulating and exploiting the NPC resources is rather pointless.
@ganymede said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:
if you don't take them too seriously
This is a franchise whose players are rather famous for seeking mutual destruction rather than lose.
@derp No, we want it actually known.
@surreality Stop agreeing with me. I lose my power if I don't have something to rail against.
@arkandel said in Social Stats in the World of Darkness:
MU* and table-top are simply different mediums
Media.
The plural of medium is media.
I would argue, however, that comparing how one adapts a tabletop game to their group with adapting the same tabletop game to a MU is perfectly sound.
@coin Is that why they're always late and smell of pee?
If one wishes simply to utilise some key facets of a particular period, be it 1930s gangsters, then one needn't concern themselves too heavily with societal mores outside of those explored by that particular genre; in this case, alcohol, corruption, organised crime, and the like. Other matters less consequential to the stories you desire to tell can be left to the wayside as needed.
These sorts of games would, given their historical vagueness, would enable more 'modern' social mores to come into play with the PCs as they wish, and it should be heavily noted where historical reality ends and where fictional handwavey history begins. Historical organised crime, fantasy-style race relations for instance.
@kanye-qwest I mean, those are strictly ahistorical. That's kind of the point.
@apos said in How old are MU* players?:
Like most MUSHes that aren't a 'do it yourself' style sandbox would just flat out collapse if their player bases doubled or tripled, which makes games always want new people but at a pretty controlled and steady rate, rather than huge influxes.
We see that quite often when The Next Big Thing (tm) opens. Big influx at the start, interest peters out, and a happy medium is sometimes met.
There's a distinct barrier to entry too, with MUing. Getting a client, finding a game, learning the ropes, etc etc. Very few games have actual... 'friendly' tutorials like a standard video game does.
@surreality said in Historical settings:
In a modern setting, it's also present.
Indeed, but almost nobody is saying "So we're setting the game in 2018... but we're not including anything that actually happened that year in the background." Which is unlike what some people always say the minute a 'historical' setting is described.
@thenomain said in When Staff No Longer Cares:
Make a game that takes the parts that you like and create your own original thing.
I'd also add that one should build their game with the idea that 1) It will eventually end, and 2) You might not be the one to guide it there. If a game relies entirely on you to function, then all it takes is a week off with the flu to send your work crashing down.
@bored said in I owe a lot of people some apologies.:
And, in terms of administration, what the fuck actually counts as 'misconduct'?
Using their official powers in a way contrary to established codes of conduct and rules. That's the baseline I work with, though naturally no situation is guaranteed to fit. I'd also extend it to include any behaviour, official or not, that has resulted in warnings or bannings for people before.
Being a dick in the hog pit is one thing; a not insignificant portion of this community does so, thus I don't expect administrators to be above such things. Being a dick elsewhere and spreading such alleged rumours and so forth would probably get an ordinary user warned, at the very least.
@rucket While I'm a fan of not-me drama... is airing things out to the court of public opinion a wise decision? When we are the complainants, are we fit to be the jury and judge as well?
