Web-based CharGen or in-game CharGen
-
@Yam Depends on if you count ‘email staff with a copy of your +sheet and they’ll plug it all in for you’ as a mysterious third thing or not.
-
I don’t think you can generalize that much. It’s going to vary greatly by game and skill of the coder.
In Ares for example, I think the FS3 web chargen is much easier to use than the in-game one. But if you’re a player who prefers client over web, that isn’t going to matter. Or if you have a visual impairment, you may find a client-based chargen easier no matter how nice the web one is. Some chargen systems are going to be nighmarishly complex on web. etc.
-
@Yam I like anything that doesn’t make me do too much math
-
@Yam
I prefer web-based by a mile. It is much easier (for most users) to navigate theme files and fill out a form on a web page than running individual commands which all continually push data further up the buffer. -
The third thing: vibes-based chargen, in which stats are inferred and implied, and dice challenges resolved through the pageantry of dance.
Okay, really, I’d just go with well-documented and either web-based with a registered login provided upon request, or well-documented and handled on-site, with approval mostly rubber-stamping after the sniff-test is done.
-
I prefer web-based, but echo what people have said about anything being fine so long as it’s clear and well-documented.
-
web based is so nice. telnet travels on the devil’s whispers
-
I want the machine to do the mathening. I do the storying, the machine does the mathening. That’s why we have the machine.
-
As someone who prefers in-game chargen, web-based is by far better.
-
Years ago, I used to be all about using MUSH Client and doing stuff in game. But after playing on a few Ares games, I was fully converted over to web based. A lot more flexibility with web based and the visual presentation was a lot easier to work with.
-
web based. I never want to use a client again.
-
Even as somebody who still plays on-client a fair amount, I wouldn’t want to do CG in a pure text interface again. It’s just so much easier on web to save things/proof things/edit things.
Also staff-side it’s way easier to make small changes if I need to, give notes to players, or see where somebody’s getting an error (either through user error or something screwy with the game).
-
@Yam Well, there you have it, folks; this website’s least controversial post!
-
@Muscle-Car
So, what you’re saying is, we should set fire to the trees?
/s -
@Third-Eye I dunno about chargen, but on the fly pose editing in the webportal is amazing!
-
Oh strap in I can make this thread controversial!
This extremely social hobby requires you to understand nuance in text, requires you to be able to read the room, requires you to take cues gracefully, requires you to be able to put yourself in another person’s shoes, and generally requires you to be GOOD at other human beings, which is actually kind of hard and involves actual work! COMMENCE FIGHT.
But it does appear that most folk prefer web. Telnet hanging on by a thread.
-
@Yam what are we fighting about, being good at other people? on THIS internet?
-
@Yam said in Web-based CharGen or in-game CharGen:
This extremely social hobby requires you to understand nuance in text, requires you to be able to read the room, requires you to take queues gracefully, requires you to be able to put yourself in another person’s shoes, and generally requires you to be GOOD at other human beings, which is actually kind of hard and involves actual work! COMMENCE FIGHT.
I don’t disagree with any of that, but I’m not following how that’s related to web vs client chargen?
-
I can add in even more controversy:
I prefer physical paper cgen, mailed via certified letter to the head staff. Background documentation done as a series of IC interview posts on the game’s LiveJournal, and notes for any stats that need justification or explanation in unnamed Pastebins.
Proud Member of the Pro-Mummy Alliance
-
@MisterBoring certified letter? who has that kind of cash!?
