Best posts made by Warma Sheen

Went out to go to work and found someone had broken into my car. Took some stuff but not everything. I fucking hate being stolen from but all things considered, this was a kind thief. Left my work ID. Cleaned out my glove box, but left my registration and insurance. Took a bag of stuff I had in the back, but left my work shirts and most of my hats (but not all).

I find myself annoyed that I can't get raging pissed at whoever this person was. They saved me a lot of time and energy with some of the stuff they did not take and their consideration has me underwhelmingly thankful.

Assholes.

I'm picturing a lot of Solo and less all the other SW movies. It sounds lot of planetary government politics and capitalism with a good bit of opportunity by subcontracting Imperial and/or Rebellion jobs. Sometimes you know who you're working for. Sometimes you don't. Everyone has an agenda. You don't always know the full extent of it. Lawmen and criminals are not the same as good and evil.

The number of potential stories seem pretty limitless. I'm just a little confused/doubtful on the idea that being in the same faction will limit conflict. In other games most of the players are focused on being Imperial or Rebel. Or Sith or Jedi. Fighting the other side. That's the focus. That's where staff focus is and Indys generally left to fend for themselves. Other orgs have their own built in controls and restraints for limiting conflict in their own org. "Independent" isn't really an "org" though. Most of the "Indys" aren't organized. There's no constraints on internal conflict, if you can even call it internal. Pirate Indy's rob trader Indy's. Police Indy's arrest criminal Indy's. There's a lot of ways and reasons for Indy's to go at each other, especially once people start taking sides.

Its all setting up to be a great big ball of fun for everyone, so long as everyone understands the expectations involved. I'm sure the theme will outline where the staff wants the conflict directed, though. It is up to the players to work with the staff towards keeping the focus where it is supposed to be.

That used to happen to me often. My story isn't a great one.

I used to get angry and frustrated about it, but not much good came from it. You can't win against things like that, especially if you're coming at it with negative feelings.

Eventually, I just left MU* games altogether and moved to local and online tabletops. But the really shitty thing is that I loved MU*s the most and wouldn't want to give up on them. So I keep coming back every now and then to see if things are different, only to be disappointed. But only slightly, because my expectations are very low.

I been saying this for years and its a shame that even his message isn't getting out to the mainstream. Its tucked away on some youtube channel with no reporting on it. I am lucky to come across it off a fucking MU Soapbox post...

Hip hop has been such a huge disappointment to me. I used to love music. Now I listen to books on tape in my car instead of the radio.

I hear the same shit in every song. How much money someone makes. How many girls they fuck. How they are the best rapper evar. Same three things. Over and over and over. The only thing that's changed in the last 5 years is that now you can't understand what the fuck they're saying and you have to go online to look up their lyrics to find out they are talking about the same three things everyone else has been talking about for the last 15 years.

For those who say hip hop has always had similar things, the difference is that hip hop used to be a about the struggle of daily life involving those things and now it is glorifying those things as something to strive for. Its like someone completely missed the messages about how that was the unfortunate result of what people had to do to survive and just heard 'drugs, guns, violence' from someone they admired as an artist and thought it was something to aspire too.

Yes, there are a few songs here and there that aren't about that, but they just don't have the power that inspire and/or endure like they used to. Its super gimmicky and commercial and ultimately forgettable. Or in the case of Childish Gambino so subtle that most people don't even realize it is a satirical message until they read an article online about it.

I remember when Tupac - Changes came out and it was so different from his other stuff that I was shocked it was Tupac. But the message was straight up and powerful in your face and advising completely the opposite of what his image had been about. He even talks about the consequences of living that life and he ultimately suffers the exact fate he talks about in that song.

And of course the topper to all of this is that it isn't artists that are the major cause of this problem. Its the producers and record labels who prefer a certain type of song and whenever there might be a new sound, they suddenly flood the market with 10 other artists who sound just like them. And then they pay the radio stations to play certain songs and of course with the decline in radio popularity, radio stations are just whores now like everyone else, trying to squeeze out a profit so they just pander and pander to try to make some revenue.

SO many things wrong in this world. It makes me sad. But this is one of the hardest things to deal with - to watch an art form created from social change and empowerment corrupted into catchy tunes that give young people the mentality to want to voluntarily throw themselves into the gutter, sometimes literally.

@ganymede said in Golden Road Pivoting to Contagion Chronicles:

Normally I would concur, but the blurb for the sourcebook expressly suggests that it was created for the purpose of multi-splat parties.

I would agree here. The fun of the sourcebook seems to be focused on different supers. Plus, people just like having different options. It wouldn't have been what I thought, but that seems to be what people like.

And since you have a sourcebook that takes the 'superfriends' concepts that is often a joke for people and gives it a full on developer thumbs up, you might as well play to it fully.

@roz said in Sensitivity in gaming:

This is an entitled, ballsy imposition?

@tinuviel said in Sensitivity in gaming:

"This plot will involve violence/scenes of a sexual nature/excessive drug use/eldrich horror/etc"

It's literally 16 words. Plenty of games have a variety of potential plot themes with varying levels of darkness and horror. There are games that aren't horror games, but may have horror plots, and the game's theme wouldn't necessarily be a warning across the board.

I get that the idea of this is that it is something simple and everyone should make the little bit of effort to do it because it could help. I get that 100%. I also think that it could hurt. Those of us who have run their fair share of scenes know that running scenes are unpredictable and sometimes players can be delicate.

I'm not arguing that this is all good in principle. I disagree with the practical application and/or execution.

I dislike the idea of the onus being put on the storyteller to make a declaration of what is reasonable and/or common enough of a trigger to include in a warning. I can already see people taking offense that their trigger wasn't included because it wasn't common enough to list, sparking a rant on why it actually is very common and the person who omitted it was just ignorant/racist/biased/uneducated/etc. I can already see people taking offense that the warning wasn't specific enough (i.e. "You said there would be violence but you didn't say it would be THAT kind of violence and if I had known...")

So no, it isn't an entitled or ballsy imposition to give a general warning. But I do think it is entitled or ballsy to assume that giving a general warning will solve more problems than it creates. And I do think it is an imposition to expect a storyteller to be responsible for correctly identifying any and all offending triggers that could come up and everyone else involved would all assume to be reasonable and common. This is where issues of creativity come into play. Being in a scene is not a straight line (at least not in my opinion, not when it is good). There are twists and turns and all sort of interesting elements that fall into it. If you're limited to only the things you've given warnings about, it does hem you in. Player X did A which would normally result in B, but since I didn't give a warning about it I should stay away from that. Or if player Y brings trigger C into the scene, I now have to have the scene respond to that possible trigger in the scene of FTB it. The other option is to check each random trigger that arises with each of the players privately. Cause if you do it as a group then the person is feeling pressured, etc... Now you're stopping the scene to check with each person, waiting on everyone to respond before things move forward, hoping they didn't toss out their pose and then go afk or switch tabs elsemu until they think they need to check back for their turn...

I understand that there are ways for the plot runner to handle those situations and everything. I understand why it is important to handle triggers in the appropriate way. All of that is good for certain areas of life. But at a certain point it just stops being fun. Maybe that sounds insensitive. I certainly don't mean to be, but especially as a plot runner, having the responsibility for everyone else's triggers is a heavy burden I wouldn't want to have.

If a game wants plot runners to toss down a headstaff-generated boilerplate warning before a scene, that's no big deal. But don't put the responsibility of what that means on the plot runner. Some people will have the expectation that the scene will be limited to the triggers listed. Or the other players are also limited to the listed triggers. Players may not think the trigger warnings apply to them - or they limit themselves because of it (e.g. I would love to have my familiar help me in this fight, but violence to animals wasn't warned against so now I can't use it or I might trigger someone and I don't want that risk - oh look, I died.)

I also think the fallout from someone triggered after joining a scene where they believed they would be emotionally safe because their triggers should have been identified beforehand will be much worse than someone who joins a scene knowing it is their responsibility to step away if something comes up.

And in practical regards, there are enough barriers to people running plots that adding the responsibility (implied or perceived) for every other player's mental/emotional wellbeing should not be added to the heap.

TLDR: Trigger warnings definitely have merit, but I think it is more productive, safer, and responsible for people to be responsible for themselves and their mental/emotional well-being. Also, plot runners don't need more burdens.

The truth is that it wasn't "Endgame" itself that we're experiencing, but the whole 22 movie, 11 year story that we all went on which was so spectacular. "Endgame" itself is great, but it isn't a fraction of what it accomplished if it is just some movie on its own. This was a monumental marathon of storytelling and commitment from (most of) the actors involved that just created something so beautiful it can't even be described well (at least not by me).

My favorite Marvel group was always X-Men and there's no comparison to that Fox franchise. And I only wish Star Wars would have been done half as well. But I do agree, we probably won't be able to experience anything like the Infinity Saga for a very, very long time, if at all in our lifetimes.

@Misadventure said in MU* Mystery RP:

A mismatch of expectations only leads to suckitude.
Intent -> All Players Expectations-> Game System Design -> ST Communication

That's usually the problem I run into on a MU*. A clash of expectations combined with pretty quick and unrelenting judgement that you can't ever escape from.

So making sure the players are all on the same page about expectations from the ST and from the players both is really important for a game. That's what I find to be missing from most MU*s.

@faraday said in Sensitivity in gaming:

If it's something that is commonly regarded as a potential trigger (rape, for instance) and outside the expectations of the game's theme/rating/boundaries, then yes, absolutely, slap a content warning on that thing. But beyond that? It's not fair to place responsibility for your own mental health on the entire game.

If I was running in your game, I would suggest (or would like) a listing of those potential triggers. If the triggers are so common as to be something everyone should know, wouldn't it be better to have a place where they are listed?

As I may or may not have written before, I believe in "common sense" less and less in direct relation to distance from me. People that live on my block mostly have the same idea of what is common. People in my neighborhood less so, even less for city, state, country.

Better to list common triggers to be warned about and remove doubt.

I was a big fan of the Warriors before KD joined up. They literally changed the game of basketball and they did it without just throwing money at Superstars from other teams. After they pissed all over their own legacy with KD, though, it just made the sport boring. Watching anything before the Conference finals became a complete waste of time. And I don't wish ill on anyone but I'm suddenly much more interested in the series, even if it is only for two games. I really want to see what the Warriors can do without him against the Rockets. I would love to see the Splash Brothers step up and take the series without KD. Otherwise, just like last year we'll never really know which team is better.

But regardless of what happens, basketball will be exciting again.

Also, Boogie has always been irrelevant for me because another long term injury was just a matter of time.

P. S. I don't think enough has been said of Curry's complete lack of drama on and off the court in letting KD take over the Warriors the way he has. I love Steph. They don't make very many sports stars like him anymore. I wish they did.

I'm in the RPs for the supernatural adventure. I like the action and the danger. I like investigations and mysteries. I like social positioning and political intrigue. And I love all the crazy powers. I generally want to play something with powers.

What I don't want is a Second Life on MU*. If I can do it in real real life, I probably don't want to RP about it. I want a separation from my reality, as much as possible.

@Arkandel said in Game of Thrones:

@Lotherio Let's not be too judgy guys. I can see how producers might be burned out after working on the same project for eight years. They probably rushed some things to wrap up this massive beast with so many characters and plotlines, but to their defense they also always expected Martin to have written the books by now, too.

That's not a good defense for rushing an end, though. The producers were honest about being given several more seasons if they wanted it. They didn't. If you know you don't have the core of what made the show good in the first place, why rush through to an end if you really care? And didn't they skip a whole year before the final season?

Nah. No excuses. Be judgy!

I read it as: "We have closed our opening. We are so, so closed. Not like tomorrow closed so we'll be seeing y'all later"

@surreality said:

This is the kind of thing I mean when I say: a lot of folks have different takes on these -- and countless other -- situations, and it's probably a good idea for headstaff to lay this out somewhere if they have a strong opinion about it one way or the other. RfK gets a commendation here because it sounds like headstaff there did a fairly solid job of laying this out, even if I disagree with some of the specific choices they made.

This is definitely a big part of the failing when it comes to running games. A lack of effective management, a lack of leadership. Many positions are handed out with minimal instruction or explanation and little to no interaction afterwards.

But laying out clear expectations is just the very beginning of the process for taking on staffers into your game. If any part of the game is a collaborative effort it should be the part between the Head Wiz and the staff. We use titles like Sphere Lead or Team Lead. But rather than being a leader in their position, they are more of a pointer. They just set the direction they want things to go in and expect it to go there. Rather than being in the driver's seat, they lounge in the back and wait for arrival. And for some reason that seems to be fine with a great number of Head Wizzen, who then scratch their heads when things go wrong.

Good players don't always make good scene runners. Good scene runners don't always make good staff. Good staff don't always make good Team Leaders. But a lot of times these positions are used interchangeably without concern, sometimes just to fill the position. The idea that 'something is better than nothing' is not always so true on MU*s. Often cases a bad 'something' can be much worse than 'nothing'.

@Arkandel ***=Theon... Ugh. Theon...***

@tragedyjones said:

Dude, we got this far in 72 days. The concept for BITN was first proposed in Skype on December 17th, and now it is a thing.

My team is fucking awesome.

I'll second that. 72 days is pretty cool. I'm all for recycling, especially if it gets us cool places to play that quickly. But I think the thing that impressed me the most was that you set a date for it to open and then met it. I confess, I fully expected the date to be pushed back at least twice, so even though I was really wanting it to open up on time, I didn't think it would. I thought I'd have more time to consider what I wanted to play.

AoA has interesting points, but the policies make it unsustainable. If you want to scratch an itch for the new movie and make a character, that will be great, but I suspect the itch will fade fast, especially when you run up against the crazy policies, some of which were mentioned at the beginning.

GoD was good for a while and the best of the group, if you can manage the SAGA system. Soresu is the bright spot of the staff there with others getting progressively worse. If you like to run scenes, that's the place for you because you pretty much get free reign with your PC if you become a consistent scene runner. There's no such thing as conflict of interest in running scenes with your own character and people consistently advance their own causes all the time just by running scenes with inevitably favorable outcomes. It also has very few old players - which is both good, but also telling.

There's also another game out there, Omens, which uses a custom FS3 system. Combat goes quicker with it, but after the first several run throughs it made it seem stale and distant and disconnected. I missed rolling the old systems. Also, it seems to heavily nerf force characters in favor of blasters, which is completely in contradiction to the theme. But if you never liked how powerful force characters were compared to everyone else, this might be a game to look for.

@SG Yes. This is what news in Canada consists of. Throw in a few pics of beautiful landscapes, a few selfies, a sport report, and you've got yourself a full broadcast.