"My Guy Syndrome"
-
@Pavel once again, my point was only that i didn’t think the people in the conversation bringing up the “yes, and” tenet were meaning a version that was devoid of common sense and reasonable guidelines. just as a general effective philosophy of MU* RP being by nature a collaborative multiplayer improvisation
she/her | playlist
-
@Roz said in "My Guy Syndrome":
i really don’t think anyone was likely intending citing this to mean they think everyone should literally be saying yes to everything every single time
I was challenging it even as a general rule / starting point. “Yes, and…” is a perfectly valid improv technique, but that’s not the framework that most TTRPGs (and by proxy many MUs, which have one foot in their TTRPG roots) operate within.
It’s not: “My character wants to shoot the Cylon.” “Yes, and…”
More often it’s “roll for it” or even “no that isn’t going to work.”
Again, I’m not saying you can’t approach things that way, I just don’t think most MUSHers do.
That aside, I think @Trashcan raises an important point that “No, but…” is an equally valid improv response.
-
@Faraday said in "My Guy Syndrome":
@Roz said in "My Guy Syndrome":
i really don’t think anyone was likely intending citing this to mean they think everyone should literally be saying yes to everything every single time
I was challenging it even as a general rule / starting point. “Yes, and…” is a perfectly valid improv technique, but that’s not the framework that most TTRPGs (and by proxy many MUs, which have one foot in their TTRPG roots) operate within.
we’re not talking about TTRPGs, though; we’re talking about MU*s. they may take systems from TTRPGs, stats and dice and such, but the social structure of how players have to persistently interact is entirely different from a tabletop experience.
That aside, I think @Trashcan raises an important point that “No, but…” is an equally valid improv response.
yes, i do agree there. i think that’s really just an expansion of the same philosophy. it’s about the collaborative building on what the other player is offering.
-
Glad to see we’ve squared away that Yes, And & No, But are the same fundamental concepts.
-
@Ashkuri said in "My Guy Syndrome":
The My-Guyer’s actions
Such a person shall henceforth be called MyGuyver.
-
@Roz said in "My Guy Syndrome":
we’re not talking about TTRPGs, though; we’re talking about MU*s. they may take systems from TTRPGs, stats and dice and such, but the social structure of how players have to persistently interact is entirely different from a tabletop experience.
Yes, I realize MUs are not TTRPGS (obviously). I said it was because of the TTRPG influence, which I believe came over along with the “stats and dice and such”.
Seriously - have you seen “yes-and/no-but” as a commonplace principle in your MUSHing experience? Because I haven’t, even on games with a cooperative focus.
-
@bear_necessities said in "My Guy Syndrome":
I’m going to push back a little here. … I also do my very best to know my place and try and decide if my presence in that scene is going to add to it. So if in your example the RP is happening in the biker bar, and the RP is happening because a gang of bikers is having a scene for their faction, and you are not in the faction, does your character add value to the scene?
@Faraday said in "My Guy Syndrome":
I still think there’s nothing wrong with politely bowing out of a scene where your character just doesn’t fit.
Fully agreed on both points. “Yes and”-ing yourself into a scene is great… if you fit yourself into the scene and respect the other players and characters to do it (and if they’re okay with it in the first place/the scene is open). People who come into a scene and take it over are at least as bad as My Guys.
-
@Faraday said in "My Guy Syndrome":
@Roz said in "My Guy Syndrome":
we’re not talking about TTRPGs, though; we’re talking about MU*s. they may take systems from TTRPGs, stats and dice and such, but the social structure of how players have to persistently interact is entirely different from a tabletop experience.
Yes, I realize MUs are not TTRPGS (obviously). I said it was because of the TTRPG influence, which I believe came over along with the “stats and dice and such”.
Seriously - have you seen “yes-and/no-but” as a commonplace principle in your MUSHing experience? Because I haven’t, even on games with a cooperative focus.
Yes, absolutely, to such a degree your question baffles me so I ask:
What do you think this looks like in practice?
she/they
-
@Faraday said in "My Guy Syndrome":
@Roz said in "My Guy Syndrome":
we’re not talking about TTRPGs, though; we’re talking about MU*s. they may take systems from TTRPGs, stats and dice and such, but the social structure of how players have to persistently interact is entirely different from a tabletop experience.
Yes, I realize MUs are not TTRPGS (obviously). I said it was because of the TTRPG influence, which I believe came over along with the “stats and dice and such”.
plenty of MU*s have been entirely divorced from TTRPGs. like – plenty of them haven’t had stats or sheets at all. that was the majority of the games i played growing up
Seriously - have you seen “yes-and/no-but” as a commonplace principle in your MUSHing experience? Because I haven’t, even on games with a cooperative focus.
i would absolutely say it’s commonplace in nearly all of the games i’ve played. despite arguing about MU*s =/= TTRPGs just a second ago, i would in fact say that this philosophy has also extended to most of the TTRPG games i’ve played at, too.
maybe we’re just understanding the philosophy differently? to me, this is just a description of the basic philosophy of cooperative storytelling and trying – where appropriate, yes – to build upon what your fellow players are giving you. we even have a common phrase that gets trotted out for when people play against this philosophy in a particular way: no-selling. no-selling is frustrating and obnoxious for players because it tends to be a refusal of story rather than building on story.
“no, but” is a hugely common piece of advice given to GMs, both in tabletop and on MU*s – the idea that you be able to give characters something to keep moving forward, even if it’s a more difficult or more dangerous path, in cases where they fail.
-
@Ashkuri Oh. I’ve usually experienced this in contexts where I wasn’t even questioning the would-doingness of the character in the first place….
…not until the player themself brought it up, that is…
-
@Tez said in "My Guy Syndrome":
What do you think this looks like in practice?
I think maybe we’re just using different definitions. I’ve literally never heard of yes-and outside of improv acting. Here are a few quotes that reflect how it’s always been explained to me:
a rule-of-thumb in improvisational theater that suggests that an improviser should accept what another improviser has stated (“yes”) and then expand on that line of thinking (“and”)… one should not reject the basic premises introduced by the other person (Wikipedia)
There are no wrong ideas in improv. Every suggestion, no matter how outlandish or seemingly insignificant, is an opportunity to explore and create. By saying “yes, and,” improvisers open themselves up to endless possibilities and tap into a wellspring of creativity. It’s not just about agreeing with your scene partner; it’s also about building on their ideas, no matter how wacky they may seem. (Backstage)
That is just so far from my experience MUSHing I can’t even.
ETA: This “yes and” thing has probably tangented too far to be useful, but the reason I was brought it up originally is because I really don’t think this is the default MU behavior. Folks will consider other players, sure, but mostly they just do what’s fun for them, within the bounds of what they think their character would do. I think that’s why you get a lot of straying over into “my guy” territory.
