Posts made by Tinuviel

@Auspice said in Worst Games:

GOD I CAN'T EVEN TRY TO BE YOUR FRIEND.

Not when you bring the royal family into your inaccuracies.

@Auspice Not a 'boom', really. It happened.

@SabotKick72 said in Worst Games:

I'd fall into a pit

Like all other copies of that game, apparently.

@Auspice Well, as a company they're pretty... mneh.

@silverfox

@Ganymede said in Consent in Gaming:

I don't know how much RPing you do these days, but the example that @Auspice has thrown up has become a regular thing.

To somewhat counter that point, the leadership-ish player that adores lording their authority over others with long-winded and overblown 'scenes' of lectures or whatever else is a thing that has been regular since the first time someone got into a position of authority.

There are fucksticks on both sides of the counter, and I was coming from a place of 'fuckstick exclusion' when I began discussing this topic.

@Auspice said in Consent in Gaming:

If you just want me to serve to provide you entertainment entirely on your terms: we ain't RPing. Period.

This is where the overall topic keeps fracturing. This is the actual point I'm arguing against. None of this shitty person stuff. If a person is a drag like George, fuck 'em. I will almost always, to the best of my ability, suffer consequences. But if the way the executor wants to play is something I find dull or uninteresting, I don't feel that I should have to play it that way.

And if the executor wants to play something in a way I don't, that's literally me serving to provide them entertainment on their terms.

@Thenomain said in Consent in Gaming:

When did you start Mushing?

@Ganymede said in Consent in Gaming:

Point 1: Saying what you actually mean is an important part of communicating effectively.

Well, not all the time.

That said, if all a person is saying is "that's doesn't sound like fun" with no follow-through, then that's excellent and effective communication in the form of a big flapping red flag. The pride flag of the fuckstick.

@Ganymede said in Consent in Gaming:

If you want to engage in RP on a game, reacting to a proffered suggestion with "that doesn't sound like fun" will likely paint you as a petulant child. It is safe to presume that the people you are engaging with can handle a mild amount of constructive criticism. Instead, try the following reaction: "I'm not really interested in engaging in that kind of RP."

I know it's odd for me of all people to say this. But @Thenomain's example was just that. An example. The base idea of "actually say something is not to your taste/interest/whatever" is sound, and that's the point.

Superman 64.

I don't think I need to explain.

@bored said in Consent in Gaming:

I don't know if this points to any useful solution, but I think it's an important point of perspective.

To be honest, I don't think there is a solution. At least not to the sub-discussion regarding 'fun/not fun'. It's preferential, subjective, and not even really a problem that needs solving. If you don't have fun in situations or with people, you stop doing those things or being with those people. It solves itself.

@Ganymede said in Consent in Gaming:

We all arguably want to be as accommodating as possible, but if someone is "depriving" me of my opportunity to do what I want to do, then I don't think anyone is going to look at me side-eyed for being a bit salty.

I mean, that is literally what we're talking about but from the reverse position.

Unfortunately, you're in a terrible position to argue about this, because I don't believe I've ever had a dull interaction with you on a game. Like I said before, it's not a matter of what is being roleplayed about, but how it is being roleplayed. If I'm bored in a bar scene, I'm leaving and probably not going to play with that group configuration again in that situation.

That said, if something is not fun for me but it is fun for you (ETA) and you expect me to just deal with not having fun. That is you putting your fun ahead of mine. The exact thing I would be accused of if I didn't want to play out something not-fun for me. (ETA) Sure, it's a balancing act, but both sides of this discussion need to work at the balance.

@Thenomain said in Consent in Gaming:

abusive staffers hiding behind sweet voices and enabling bad actors

@Ghost This is sort of why I roll my eyes when people describe MUing as "cooperative storytelling." It's true to a point, in that all of us are cooperating most of the time in telling stories. We just don't always want to tell the same stories. What I might find endlessly fascinating (like where the heck did all this tin come from for the bronze age?! [probably Cornwall]) and a source of inspiration and direction is something you'd possibly find dull as hell to have to sit through.

So yes, we are all in this together and we should do our best to ensure a good time is had by all, but punishing people for not wanting to play out the boring, the stupid, or the overlong just seems silly. Especially in a time where the majority of players have actual lives to live (unlike a decade ago) and can't dedicate eight hours a night to the same goddamn scene.

@Rinel Man, I have had variants of that conversation...

@Ghost said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

I have probably 300 pounds of RPG books.

So you only own the Pathfinder collection?

@Ghost This is exactly the kind of thing I prefer. Chat OOC about what you want to happen off-screen, and then write it up as a few journal entries or reports (if you're that kind of person) or whatever. I don't have the time to invest in the "old school" three hour meetings where everyone types eight paragraphs and I don't actually get to do anything other than sit there.

So sure if, as @faraday says, you can keep it short and sweet and get it done in an hour? That's fine. If you can't, I can definitely agree that it needs to FTB and a resolution posted on a bboard somewhere. It seems, at least in my experience, that those with that sort of power (judge, CO, primogen w/e) like dragging things out, so that is from where my "it's selfish for them too" comes.

ETA: To sum up, it's not necessarily what one is roleplaying but how it is roleplayed. Which is an important distinction.

@Ghost While I agree with both you and @Wretched in personal views on the meaning of RP, I disagree with the idea that absolutely everything that happens must happen on screen or it isn't as meaningful.

If I play a criminal, and you play a judge, and you want to run a trial and I really don't want to sit for hours posing "he sits quietly" over and over again... I don't think I should be compelled to. There are some parts of a story that can be glossed over. It's not that I don't want to play out consequences, it's that sometimes part of those consequences are so unutterably boring to sit through - even if we assume the trial, in my example, is played with the Hollywood dial turned to eleven. It's going to be fuckin' boring after a while.

ETA: Sure, this might appear selfish. But at the same time I'd argue that it's selfish of anyone else to compel another person to roleplay something they're uninterested in. It's one person, I'm almost certain you can find another person that will be excited by the idea of sitting through the minutiae of a criminal prosecution if that's what you really want to do.

@Thenomain said in Consent in Gaming:

not a single person likes people who suck

Well...