Posts made by TNP

@Coin said:

We have very, very, very little black people.

Did anyone else immediately picture black Lilliputians? With or without Coin tied to the ground as Gulliver?

@Chime said:

I think race is kinda silly from the biodiversity perspective; the dna differences are negligible.

Oh, I agree. Even the most startling revelation wouldn't change my life in the slightest degree. I don't give a damn about finding relatives but it would be pretty cool to discover that I'm 3% Neanderthal. And I'd definitely find a reason to bring up in conversation having Denisovan DNA. Now that's unlikely since I don't have any ancestors from Asia that I know of but given how the Mongols swept into eastern Europe, it's possible and would be pretty interesting to find out.

On a side note, reading up on various testing companies, I've found a few that say AncestryDNA is the least reliable (which would explain why they're cheapest) so buyer beware.

I'm 50% German, 25% Romanian and 25% Ukrainian with Jewish coming from all four lines of grandparents. What their ethnic makeup is, I haven't a clue (though I like to think there's some distant Celt in there given they originally came from that region). Strange that this topic just came up at work today when a customer mentioned he just got the results of his DNA analysis through Ancestry.com. For only a hundred bucks, I'm almost tempted out of sheer curiosity.

@Admiral said:

Heh - mildly amused.
Hah - moderately amused.
Hahaha - greatly amused.

This. Never use lol. Often use heh. Heh means it's amusing. Not laughing funny but it got an amused smile for a moment.

He's right Theno. If you weren't intelligent, creative and willing to put yourself out for the benefit of others, who the hell would bother with you? You obviously have no redeeming qualities.

This isn't a perfect analogy but it's close.

Hearken back to the days of the OOC Masquerade where the basic assumption was that players couldn't be trusted to know who was what and not use that information ICly. Yes, there were other reasons but that was the de facto effect.

Similarly, non-consent assumes that players can't be trusted to play honestly (using consent to refuse consequences) and a host of similar situations. Both situations assume that most players are assholes without ethics.

That's not the case. Are there some? Sure. And on every game I've played on, problem players - whatever the problem - don't get played with by those people who dislike them and their play style. Whether it's a consent or non-consent game, everyone is free to ignore the players they have issues with. If knowing another player is doing it 'wrong', even if it doesn't affect you, is upsetting you, that's your issue. The situations where it can and will affect you are usually rare.

In summary, if you give people the benefit of the doubt and assume they'll act responsibly, most times you'll be right. Those who don't will be marginalized and made unwelcome in most cases. If it's game effecting, staff can step in. But most times, the bludgeon of rules that assume people are assholes aren't needed and looser ones such as 'consent can't be used to avoid consequences so don't' will work just fine over one such as those on pure non-consent games where you can be killed without any input on your part.

@Coin said:

@TNP

I think it's...

1. ...a mistake to conflate "plot scene" or "prp" or "a scene someone runs and is not a party" with "combat combat combat". It's silly and inaccurate. Even if your experience says that most of them are combat, that's still just your experience; it's not an absolute. I can, and have, run plots where there was no combat, or minimal combat, or sporadic, two-turn-long combat, or the looming threat of combat without any actual blows.
2. ... a mistake to assume that when Ark (or someone else) mentions "a pizza party", they are still talking about "a situationw geared towards allowing politicking, social advancement, and other non-combat opportunities for a character to achieve goals". In general, it means " a pizza party were everyone sits around and shoots the shit".

Except that I wasn't. There were no hidden messages in my post. I said exactly what I wanted to say: I don't like combat and prefer social events. I was, in effect, agreeing with Pyrephox who posted:

I think the 'in my book' thing is relevant here. There are a number of people who I know, who much prefer the social scenes over the combat scenes - hell, half the time I do, although that's more that combat scenes are very easy to run poorly, and a poorly run/played combat scene is both boring and actively frustrating, while bad bar RP is only boring.

If said party is also a 'plot scene' or 'prp' then great. I wish more over them had more than combat. I have, and do, participate in combat scenes. They are abundant. And yes, things can happen during them that are significant to the characters involved. But I'm usually bored and would gladly hand wave ninety percent of them.

Personally, I'd much rather go to the party event. I'm quite happy putting my character at risk but I hate combat scenes. Hate. It might date back to the 3 day time stop combat scene way back in the old days of oWoD on Masquerade. I also find it rather boring; I get no kick from cocaine nor typing up a ten line pose explaining how I shoot someone with a gun. It's even worse than reading someone's ten line pose about how they shoot someone with a gun.

But aside from how incredibly boring combat is, it really does nothing to advance my character. WoD especially is about character interaction within a sphere (especially oWoD with it's built in antagonism toward other spheres) and across spheres (such as in nWoD). Forming bonds, alliances, friendships, politicking, etc is what theoretically happens at that party. In the combat scene you kill things. Both the characters and the game, I think, benefit more from the party. It also makes XP bloat and the size of one's sheet less meaningful.

Vampire 2nd ed, p.274

A couple of notes on Aspirations:
• It’s important to remember that grander Aspirations can award
Beats any time the character takes meaningful steps toward
resolution; don’t punish players for taking lofty goals.

The respec rule on Eldritch was pointed out to me so yay.

That's not a fix for a couple of reasons. First, there's a huge difference between playing a super who's newly turned and one who's been one for years, decades or centuries. If you're looking to play the latter, the former isn't even close to being a substitute.

But the bigger problem is that the requirements for a mortal are the same as those for a super. The clan and covenant are probably the easiest things to know in advance if you're apping a vampire. But aspirations are required for every PC. The short term goals might not be too bad but a long term one? No. I don't know who the person is that well before I start playing him. There are some other things as well.

I'm not Zeus and my PCs don't spring fully formed from my head. I create the framework of a character that I think would be interesting, the bare bones, and then see if he comes to life and supplies the details. as I play him. I know some people do work that way. Some don't.

The opportunity to respec the smaller details within the first month if needed would be great.

So I'm really jonesing for an urban fantasy game and looking at Eldritch. I haven't done WoD in ages so am really out of the loop about the new developments. I got my hands on the God Machine book and both the vampire and werewolf 2nd editions and what do I see? Like FATE, character creation requires knowing things I usually don't know till I've played him for a while. I hate this new trend!

I think a big issue is that harmful stereotypes are often in the eye of the beholder. One man's 'flaming faggot' is another man's mirror.

Why?

Why haven't you all apped on WC yet?

You don't need to like Anita Blake. You just need to like urban fantasy (such as WoD). You don't need to have read Anita Blake, just have an idea of what it's about (such as WoD). You don't have to like FAE. You just need to plow through CGEN then forget about it all other than the RP. And unlike some place who offer a helping of urban fantasy, we're mostly sane.

And you should.

@Cobaltasaurus Oh, I know. Jakob just changed at least one of his so I know it's an option. Eventually, I'll rewrite probably all of his aspects once i get a better handle on him. And maybe his approaches. The stunts still work. I think. Mostly. Anyway, once he tells me what he wants, I'll get it fixed.

@Thenomain Nope, doesn't really help. Those two rules work better for tabletop where everyone can create as they go along. On a Mu requiring approval and with, potentially, dozens of players and hundreds of characters? That's totally not going to work. Nor are there chapters on a Mux and one Aspect isn't enough if they all don't really fit.

That being said, since we have so few people, we were allowed to RP prior to approval to get a better idea of the character. We can alter our sheets if need be (though I haven't done so yet). Work arounds don't fix the system though. And yes, it is not a pain unique to FATE.

@Thenomain said:

@TNP said:

I hate FATE/FAE so very very much. But it's the only Anita Blake game in town so I plowed through CGEN and now just ignore the horrible system in favor of RP which is the important part.

I have never seen such a polarizing system as Fate, but FAE? There's hardly anything in there to hate.

To a certain degree, that's exactly the point. I've played Champions and M&M in its various editions. I can enjoy crunchy. I've also played on supers games with traits and no numbers at all. That can also be fun. FATE and FAE are neither and fails at being a compromise between the two. However, that's just mechanics and I can ignore mechanics.

What I hate most about them are Aspects and being forced to come up with them in CGEN. I don't work that way. I only have the barest idea of what a character is like when I get him approved. Once he hits the grid, he develops and grows often in ways completely different than I first envisioned when I went into CGEN. Having to invent Aspects and predefine who he is, what he thinks, etc never works and ruins the concept as I have to force him into a mold that is almost guaranteed to not fit.

In bitching to others who also hate this system, I've discovered that's often the big reason for it.

I hate FATE/FAE so very very much. But it's the only Anita Blake game in town so I plowed through CGEN and now just ignore the horrible system in favor of RP which is the important part.