Whenever this question comes up, it really boils down to one thing: Are all the gathered people having fun?
If no, then it is a problem. If yes, carry on.
The problems in the former are often situational and subjective, and it usually simply reflects a difference in attitude rather than anything inherently "bad."
@silverfox Why would we have a party for moving the dumpster to a different alleyway? We're still IN the dumpster. And it's on fire. And covered in bees.
I'm a full-time student now (because everyone needs a hobby while going through a midlife crisis, right?) and jesus christ the work load. I don't mind having assignments and essays and shit, that's to be expected. But why do they have to all be due on the same goddamn day?
@silverfox said in GMs and Players:
How do different people define NPC? It seems like there isn't a commonly accepted definition within the last set of pages.
There are various kinds of NPC, in my reckoning. Your PC's background mother is an NPC of one kind, and the King of Battania is another kind. Your special group's NPC butler is yet another kind. It all depends on what kind of player that usually portrays the NPC and what that NPC's purpose on the game is.
When I'm talking about 'staff NPCs' what I usually mean are those NPCs that have a large impact on the game itself. The Prince in a VTM/VTR game, the King on a L&L game, that kind of deal. NPCs that are often seen to be played by multiple members of staff (on games that have a staff team as opposed to a singular staffer) as the need arises.
Different games do things differently, but the idea of NPCs being 'quasi-PCs' makes me a little grumpy. PCs should drive plot, NPCs should serve it.
@krmbm said in GMs and Players:
YMMV.
This is basically the only answer to... anything brought up in this thread. There are apparently dozens of ways to interpret exactly what an NPC is, what TS is, what a story is, what the point is... And anyone that doesn't do things the way you do is wrong, etc, etc.
There's a difference, to my mind, between TS and an IC sexual/romantic relationship.
An NPC can absolutely have an intimate relationship with a PC. They don't need to spend hours typefucking each other for that to be true, and to have an impact on the story.
@gremlinsarevil said in GMs and Players:
But staff breaking out the Vampire Prince to go have sexy times with a specific player or whatever else... that's gonna make a lot of people uncomfortable and best just avoided.
Especially if/when other staff use that same NPC.
Your PC is yours. Do whatever you want with it. NPCs are the game's, not yours.
@aria said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
At one point, I had to explain to one of my college roommates that no, he would not be able to tell if his girlfriend cheated on him based on how her vagina would feel and no, would not fit him differently.
There is one way! If the vagina is blocked and has evidence of a penis coming out of it (or into it, depending on your perspective) then there's a chance she's presently actively cheating.
@derp said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
To be fair, most men don't know how their own body works, much less a woman's.
I know all the bits of mine that don't work. So by 50 I'll know my whole body rather well.
My RL gripe is that time moves ever onwards.
Avril Lavigne's "Complicated" is twenty today. This is unacceptable.
@tnp said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
Go to the US southwest.
It was at this point that I stopped reading because I couldn't stop laughing at the idea.
@derp said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
@tinuviel said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
Speaking of old timey diseases that I was sure we got rid of along the way, polio is apparently still here.
updates his 2022 bingo card with Biblical Pestilence and Burning Nuclear Reactor next to World War 3
I'm expecting to come down with bubonic plague any day now.
Speaking of old timey diseases that I was sure we got rid of along the way, polio is apparently still here.
@derp said in GMs and Players:
How long did they basically run the Reach and its various iterations behind the scenes?
In seriousntess, a lot of the examples above come from a desire from staff to 'be nice' or 'give a chance'. No, fuck that. If you fuck up so drastically that it makes @derp and I agree that you're a fuckwad, you don't get anymore goddamn fucking chances.
@silverfox said in MSB Peeves:
We are only 10,980,663 in the world according to Alexa.
That's a hell of a queue to play Despacito.
@coin said in GMs and Players:
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
For example, if someone calls me mean things I'd probably handle that much better than another person. So what I'd consider abuse shouldn't be the totality of things when a player complains to me about an event.
Poopyhead.
***Navy Seal Copypasta***
@ganymede said in GMs and Players:
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
So while evidence of rule-breaking is important, we as staff/runners/people do have to be aware that different people will digest different levels of abuse differently.
This.
There is no one standard. Staff will employ what standards they are comfortable with. No one is owed a uniform standard of proof or process. Some will demand more evidence than others.
And that’s okay.
Even evidence notwithstanding, some people won't see X-thing as abusive, toxic, or bad, whereas others will. Perception of an event is important when considering events, as well as what actually happened.
For example, if someone calls me mean things I'd probably handle that much better than another person. So what I'd consider abuse shouldn't be the totality of things when a player complains to me about an event.
@saosmash said in GMs and Players:
In my general experience, most disputants will exaggerate at worst, largely due to the magnification or distortion of their own memories.
There also comes the issue of differing experience levels. Someone having experienced, say, super bad times WORA-levels of abuse and mistreatment could view some 'casual' creeper bein' creepy levels as hardly anything worth noticing - whereas someone with limited exposure to abusive personalities would view it as the worst thing ever. Thus creating a disparity.
So while evidence of rule-breaking is important, we as staff/runners/people do have to be aware that different people will digest different levels of abuse differently.
Every single occurrence of an abuse complaint will be handled uniquely by anyone that handles it. Who it comes from, who it is against, what the impact will be, what evidence is given, what 'testimony' is gathered. All of this will make each complaint new and fresh and will cause the resolution to deviate slightly from whatever policy is laid out. No policy is going to be one hundred per cent iron clad against all situations, nor should it try to be.
I will ban anyone an accuser says is just as myopic and, frankly, farcical as never investigating or listening to any report.
When studying history, there are levels of sources. I imagine the same extends to the legal and other communities as well. All that is being said, from what I can parse through the emotional knee-jerking, is that evidence from outside the game is treated below evidence from the game. It's still evidence, but it is not sufficient on its own.