@ghost said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
I don't see this happening in the MU community, though.
Of course not, some folks hate the idea of giving their email address to games. Besides any measure of proof of identity can be falsified enough to pass a bouncer relatively easily. It wouldn't take much to fool game staff.
@ghost That's where we get into the battle between accessibility and security. Which is an unending debate here and in the meatspace, so it'll just lead to annoyance and frustration if we get into it.
What could be fun, though, is a form of... randomizer code in CG.
"I can't decide what stats I want"
Boom, full sheet done up with random stats to play with. Hit +random a bunch until you're happy.
That might be just me though.
Which, for the sake of clarity, isn't saying that things must be done my way or cater to me. If you bring an idea up in public, and I think it's pants-on-head bonkers, I will say so... usually with evidence. Doesn't mean you shouldn't do it anyway.
@mietze said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
I like seeing new stuff
I'm an old grump, I roll my eyes at the idea of 'innovation' for the sake of novelty. I also hate gimmicks.
@mietze I'd be very interested to see it in the same way I'm very interested in sociology research. I don't actually want to do the work or experience the problems, but I want to read the paper afterwards.
ETA: And from what I can tell it's not log in every day or yoink, it's yoink every day and pick someone new.
@kanye-qwest said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
@ominous said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
I shall continue to stand on my soapbox and shout that all characters should always be on the roster and anyone can pull any of them off for the night to play them. When the log off, the character goes back on the roster for someone else to play. Also I would have a time limit that auto forces a person out of the character after 24 hours to keep people form idling in a character so no one else can play them. This would take MUSHes in more of a collaborative novel direction rather than the MUD-y standard it tries to stick to now.
And most people will continue to tell you this doesn't sound fun. At all!
Portraying a character takes time. You can pull something off a roll and play it on a surface level over a playsession, but most people like to develop characters.
Aye. To steal from tabletop wording... we're after a campaign, not a series of one-shots.
It's all well and good to want collaborative novel... but it's not. It's a stage play or a film. We're all there to work together, but I'm here to play Wackford Squeers, not Nicholas Nickleby.
@horrorhound They exist. Not for me, but they're out there.
@chibichibi said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
@pacha How would you screen for someone taking a roster, never having read Mage/Vampire/Werewolf/etc and just going ham with it, ignoring theme even if the char concept is in theme? That'd be my worry.
Have an application process, the same as any other character.
@pacha said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
I think Rosters would be good because it lets the game runners set the tone of the game. If you don't want that really weird concept, or the comedy concept, or that concept that is your pet peeve, you don't put it on the roster, and it will never show up. In particular, I think of the recent problems at Liberation and how easily those could have been avoided if they had simply offered a roster of characters they wanted to see and said "Here...pick one!"
Ew, no. If you only want stories about your characters write a book. Have some rosters, but let us actually creative people make our own, please.
@solstice It happens every time a conversation drifts. Without fail.
@roz said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
Is all the discussion just surrounding -- why the OP should or shouldn't be looking for one?
No, it's just discussion about the concept.
The initial question was answered quickly. "Are there any WoD games with roster characters that exist?" "No."
@mietze said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
I think we need to get away from the idea that a game in a beloved genre must cater to all people, past and present.
I think we need to get away from the idea that voicing any kind of dissent or negative opinion is screaming bloody murder.
@faraday It's new and different to me in WoD.
And I was being facetious.
@faraday The main part of the problem though is that things are new and different and I am old and hate change so it must be the children who are wrong.
@derp said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
But it doesn't address the core of the issue which is 'I feel intimidated by chargen'.
Well I'd say it depends on why one is intimidated by CG. I get overwhelmed, especially on multi-sphere games, because I have a billion choices. I could play this kind of a mage or that kind of a vampire and I could join this group with this skill set or that group with this kind of power.
If it's the burden of choice, I guess, which could be mitigated somewhat by having the sheet already done. Stats set, with some wiggle room if you need it, but on the whole a mechanically complete character that you can do the actual character building for.
@pyrephox said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
It tends to be the mortal side of the WoD that needs more love, and break people out of their 'humans are furniture' sort of mindset, and some strong rosters with deep hooks into the meta, built by someone who can set them up not to be insta-jobbed by random supernaturals, could help a lot.
Honestly, if you want mortals to actually matter in WoD, you'll want to make a mortal only game. Mages think mortals are basically sheep, Wolves think they're pets, Changelings don't count for anything, and Vampires think they're cattle. Mortals are furniture when anything else is the focus.
And this is just a me thing, but I'd never want to play a mortal that stays a mortal. I am a mortal in a crapsack world with a shitty life. I sure as fuck don't want to play one.
@icanbeyourmuse said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
The problems you're saying with rosters is basically any character created.
Sure, but the problems we're placing on the head of the roster is that it's sort of designed that way.
A character relationship can go poof, sure, but someone new isn't going to pop up to play that character in a month and try to rekindle that initial magic. Rosters are designed to have multiple people playing a character over its lifetime.
@derp Oh, I know you're not saying they're wrong. That's what I meant, even those of us arguing against them or saying we hate them aren't saying they're inherently the devil.
I do think they make more problems than they solve, they're a headache to work with, and they're a climbing wall instead of a door.
@pyrephox said in Roster Characters & WoD?:
Just because something isn't to a player's tastes, doesn't make it wrong.
Of course not. Nobody's saying that. "I hate the roster style" is not the same thing as "the roster style is inherently bad." So don't equate the two.
I personally think it's far too much work to put on the plate of staff. Creating or approving roster characters, then reading and approving roster applications, ensuring that roster characters are kept updated, balancing to ensure there are enough roster characters of various types, etc, etc etc.
I also don't see the point, and see far more detriments similar to the ones @Solstice posted above than benefits.
Any time you make, add, or change a way of doing things you have to be careful that the change has a point. Changing for the sake of change is fine, I guess, but in this case it's a fundamental one.
I hate the roster style for the same reasons as above, with the addition of a roster character never feels like my character. I feel like just an actor, pulled in to play a role, when what I want to be is a writer as well.
My character is mine. I made it. I know it. I'm the driver and I built the engine.