Posts made by Warma Sheen

@Tennyson said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

FATE.. well.. brings the focus back to the story. I'm interested in seeing how it all works out.

Unfortunately, that story is often one of who can slip by the most twinky stunts through approval.

@Thenomain said in Tales of Cobalt-Colored Woe:

To those who have helped, you have my undying gratitude. I've been thinking of what I could do for those insanely amazing people who have donated $100 (and higher, holy shit!), but short of baking cookies or code services, I can't think of anything.

You've probably done it already over the last however long you've been doing this. Many of our funtimes are due in big part to you and Cobalt, specifically those of us who play WoD. So its been done.

@Three-Eyed-Crow You're right to note that this is not just a US problem. Many societies have been dealing with similar issues in their respective countries. There's a push back against the globalization 'one world' type of society and it tends to outweigh other deciding factors (like logic and reason and history and facts).

@Ganymede But it isn't true that they 'don't work' at all. They just don't work as often or as ubiquitously as they do in a tabletop. However, just because something doesn't work as well as it would in a tabletop doesn't mean it can't be used. If that were true, almost everything would be thrown out, like combat, and no one would would have a MU* to play.

The other part about the Common Sense merit which makes it less than appealing for people is the fact that on MU*s people generally shy away from applying consequences to players in order to avoid ooc conflict so the benefits of Common Sense are either mitigated by that tendency or in some cases, just given it for free. But that's not by any fault of the rules of the merit. That is owing to the way people on that game play the game.

I understand getting rid of the merit or lowering the cost or whatever. But my point since the beginning is that I think that it is much more personal choice of whoever makes those decisions than necessity.

@surreality said in House Rules vs Rules as Written:

Rant and rave and diarrhea of the mouth making assumptions that are pretty profoundly unintelligent while hypocritically trying to claim someone else is making assumptions as though this discussion or any other is based solely on scientific fact which I seem to equate to my own experiences, while at the same time saying everyone else's experiences are not only completely invalid, but a fantasy.

Besides being caustic and acidic for no reason other than you can (first clue of being unstable), you're completely off the rails about what the conversation is about and are just losing your shit for no discernible reason.

Your first point shows we're not even talking about the same thing so trying to have a conversation with you is pointless, as supported by many of your other off-topic, baseless points.

@Faceless said in House Rules vs Rules as Written:

@Warma-Sheen said in House Rules vs Rules as Written:

You won't get a benefit at the bar scene or the coffee shop scene or the TS scene, but you generally don't need the merit there.

You feel that perhaps that sexual position while sipping your latte may be far too advanced for you, despite being a thrice-virgin ninja vampire wizard demon. You seem to think that an attempt could leave you with a rather nasty cramp. If you wish to proceed anyway, then roll Dexterity + Athletics with a 3 dice penalty.

I beg to differ, I believe it's most useful there.

I stand corrected and concede.

@surreality said in House Rules vs Rules as Written:

@Warma-Sheen said in House Rules vs Rules as Written:

@surreality Doubtful. I think you're just willing to cater to worse behavior than I would be.

What I -- as player or staff -- tolerate or not has precious little bearing on what some people will attempt to get away with on any given game, period.

That's exactly what it has to do with. What you allow players on your game to get away with is what people will try to get away with. That's the culture your game develops.

If someone tries something you think is wrong for your game, just say no. It doesn't matter if they are trying it because they think they're anonymous. Say no. Its that simple. Say no. Grow a spine and say no. Don't be traumatized and paralyzed with fear of what someone might do. Just say no.

If you can't do that you should run a game or be on staff and have no business being around house rules in the first place.

@ThatGuyThere said in House Rules vs Rules as Written:

You do realize that as written common sense requires a storyteller present, right? That is not something that is happening in the vast majority of MUSH scenes, making it a prime example of something not written for a MUSH environment.

Edit for @Miss-Demeanor OWoD version is just the storyteller warns you before you do something abjectly stupid. Exact wording "Storyteller should alert you as to how your potential action might violate practicality."
No roll involved.

Just because a storyteller isn't around constantly doesn't mean the merit no longer has value. For every scene that does have an ST, the merit applies quite well - and those are usually the scenes you need the merit for. You won't get a benefit at the bar scene or the coffee shop scene or the TS scene, but you generally don't need the merit there.

However, LARPs don't always have a hovering ST and they work fine. It was never said that any of this was written for a MU* environment, but rather that there was obvious consideration in the concepts for groups larger than 3-5 at a tabletop. Just like with LARPs, although the game is written to be played with an ST present, you can get along without one for casual RP just fine. For other scenes, STs are involved. We don't change the entire nature of the game in MU*s because an ST isn't always present at every second of the day for every scene. You don't need to change the nature of the merit either. It works well enough.

@surreality Doubtful. I think you're just willing to cater to worse behavior than I would be.

@Ganymede said in House Rules vs Rules as Written:

Here's two good examples of things that don't work on a MU that would work in TT: oWoD's Dark Fate flaw and Common Sense merit. These should be House Ruled or barred.

Not sure about Dark Fate off the top of my head, but Common Sense is one that should have 0 issue and should be taken by more people, but isn't because people don't want to "waste" points.

@Ganymede said in House Rules vs Rules as Written:

But, seriously, the Autumn Court's Changeling 1E boon is shit. No one disagrees with this. It tends to be House Ruled to something with some application.

That's a good example of an HR + reasoning that I can get behind. No pretense. 'I think it sucks and I wanted to change it.'

Not: 'in a MU* environment, it doesn't offer the practical applications that a tabletop as written blah blah blah Bob Loblaw blah...'

That's what I'm talkin bout.

@Sunny Most of the powers play the same way in LARP or tabletop. The systems for determining success or failure are different, but the powers generally do the same thing. So in case it wasn't clear, I'm talking about HRing concepts, not systems for determining success (staff changing powers whole cloth, ruling they don't work on certain things or certain situations, banning them outright, etc...)

Taking a rule from the tabletop and saying 'this power wasn't made for large numbers of people' when there's a book with the same power, same application but just with a different system for determining success is a cop out.

And does anyone really believe these people who are contributing writing to WoD books have never considered that gamers aren't going to play splats against each other? Or that there won't be players using these systems against other players? How is it we play these games over and over again, and yet people seem to give the writers so little credit for developing these games we love so much. So little.

Anyway... (add inflammatory insults and name calling here because it makes my argument stronger)

@Sunny said in House Rules vs Rules as Written:

I find house rules to be a necessary thing. Most tabletop systems are not designed for a persistent world that has more than 5-6 people, and thus absolutely must be modified with that factor in mind.

I found that this idea was often applied to WoD games when in fact, large groups of LARPers were not only known about and recognized, but had books written for them. And yet in many WoD games this was continually thrown about as an excuse to change something, despite the fact that it did not necessarily apply.

I think the issue with places that have "excessive" HRs (and maybe HRs in general) is that people just want to change the game to fit them rather than playing it the way it was presented, but don't want to own up to that. So they try to justify it with explanations that don't quite hold water. There have been many HRs justified as 'this is a mistake and probably wasn't meant to be this way' despite the fact that errata (and sometimes a second round of errata) was released and that particular thing wasn't addressed.

It takes a healthy ego to assume knowledge of what an author meant, declare his/her work a mistake, even after two official revisions of their work, and declare the fix you think they would make had they caught the mistake they must have missed through those two revisions and corrections.

I'm not saying that unnecessarily changing the rules to fit a staffer's personal preferences is bad or good. I just wish people would own up to the real reasons behind the HRs rather than coming up with excuses.

Those really are the most difficult ones to tolerate though. Big stuff is important and you can understand the need to get it right or check with whoever to make sure there's awareness or consensus. But the small things like that eat away at you. Especially in CG where you can't move forward without it. I've done that before. Where a staffer checks jobs once a day and replies to it, then when you reply back in less that 10 seconds you have to wait another 23:59:50 before you get looked at again.

As someone said earlier, its unnecessary and can really be avoided. Of all the games that have happened done well and done poorly, surely there has to be learning that carries over to avoid these mistakes that have been made over and over again...

Star Wars DoD? Gooood luck. I hope you find a good friend there.

@gasket said in The Apology Thread:

I dunno. Expressing regret that you maybe got things wrong (according to The Collective Opinion Of Right And Wrong) or accidentally stepped on toes shouldn't ever be a bad thing. It shows you're thoughtful about making sure you're playing WITH others instead of AGAINST them, even if the definition of that turned out different between your hobbies and you didn't realize it until later.

If that's really what you think, then sure. Otherwise, its just pandering and placating which is blatant emotional manipulation if it is done well and it comes off fake and insulting if done poorly - which is what you see in some of the posts in the thread and what people have called them out on.

@Apos That's why apologies are sometimes better left unsaid. There's a big difference between having regrets and apologizing.

@ThatGuyThere Well that was the point. My first instinct was to apologize, because I did feel bad that there was conflict OOCly. But then I realized that despite regretting the conflict, there was really nothing to apologize for. I think there's a few things that have ended up here in this thread that people really don't feel the need to apologize for but they did so anyway for whatever reason. But then when it comes off as fake it does more harm than good. Some people have already been called out for that.

So mine was an regret-expressed non-apology.

Interesting thread.

I wanted to do one of these and then realized my apology would sound like one of those not-so-genuine ones. I didn't understand the community for a long time when I started MUSHing. I played online the way I played at tabletops and LARPs. We played hard, competitive, and to theme. And that was really fun. But it wasn't the way other people on MU*s were expecting to play. And that caused some conflict.

But I don't think that's something to apologize for. I had certain experiences and expectations and other people had different ones. That's life. Not everyone agrees. Trying to craft that into an apology would definitely be pandering to people.

And yet some people want to be pandered to. And others want to see people humble themselves.

It is an interesting thread.

@Faceless said in City of Angels MUX (CofD/nWoD 2E):

There are just some aspects that would outright require direct staff involvement, such as being Blown.

If staff has to be directly involved in TS on this game I'd really have to argue against so much micromanagement.

@Jennkryst Nope.

@Arkandel I think that's all about expectations. When the game starts, jobs get done lickety split, but as time goes on it takes longer and longer. From what it looked like to me there were a lot of people making characters on that game and jumping into activity then fading out. I can only imagine all the jobs put in by that many people and what the staff side of the jobs list must look like when people don't reply back to staff. You probably have a lot of jobs being worked on for people that won't even log in for a week or so.

I'm generally pretty patient on jobs because I know staff side can be complicated, especially when you're trying to communicate with everyone and make a good decision. I generally won't even bother with poking at things until they've been idle at least a month.

But if you hold the expectation that you should be getting responses within a week, that will obviously color your opinion of things when it doesn't happen. I'm just not sure how realistic that expectation would be, especially when you don't know the factors involved. But to each, their own. If jobs are taking longer than someone is willing to wait, I can understand why they'd up and leave - valid or not.

@surreality said in Welcome to Fallen World MUX!:

...in some ways, this is not a bad thing? <hopeful smile goes here>

It's either a pile of options, or a kitchen sink. And kitchen sink is it's own unique animal with its own unique catalogue of diseases that a lot of folk would prefer to avoid.

I think its a good thing, so long as people are active multiple places and not herding away from one to another. The more games the better. I just saw activity drop a lot in both players and staff and it was right around the same time that Reno was being advertised. Maybe it was just coincidence, but it seemed like that was the case to me, especially when it was mentioned on chan and every reason under the sun was given except the opening of a new game. It was conspicuously not mentioned. Even El Nino was given some credit for the activity drop.

But if people are playing or staffing multiple games, then that's great news, cause I really like FW and what it is bringing and it would suck to see it fade out.

@Arkandel said in Welcome to Fallen World MUX!:

I'm curious, when Incro left... did he give an actual reason?

Lack of staff response to jobs. He mentioned it several times in OOC room. I got the impression that he was the kind to put in more than the average amount of jobs though, so I don't know if that had anything to do with it.

Seems like that place is already fading and people are already moving on to Reno, the new hotness, staff included.