@Ominous said in Empire Discussion Thread:

What Ada should have written in response to the question

I think that this is the crux of why Ada and Warma had that interaction in the first place.

Because I disagree that Ada SHOULD have said anything differently. She COULD have, and maybe that would have helped.

But if she said what she meant, and that was misunderstood, Warma COULD have just as easily stated, hey, I’m confused here because it reads to me like you’re asking y
He COULD even go into better clarification of where the confusion was with a politely asked, “You mentioned not needing to send logs, but also that you need RP support. What’s the ideal format for getting that support to you?”

Both of them could have made other choices. But they didn’t. Ada said something. It may or may not have been misunderstood. Rather than respectfully asking for clarification, a player came at head staff sideways about it.

So, sure. Staff CAN bend further backwards to clarify a misunderstanding that instead of being conveyed as such just got snippy… Or they can say they’re not interested in supprorting snippy responses and focus on people willing to work on finding understanding collaboratively instead. Only Ada can decide which of those she prefers.

@Ominous

Especially in light of the extra info provided later, where extra detail had been provided superfluously, that’s not how I read Ada’s no about submitting logs.

I read that interaction as no, logs don’t need submitted with the job, because the @scene function should have already provided them. But since no scenes were auto-logged, she was asking if there was any OTHER verification for the RP she was expecting to have happened to go alongside such a large request for resources - including even just a basic confirmation that RP had occurred between the person who would be given the resources and the person making the request for them.

No, you’re not supposed to SEND logs, because the mechanic is there that will track them. Since I don’t see them tracked, can you tell me more about why this NPC should give you their ENTIRE pile of resources, and what RP has supported such a major ask being made, much less granted.

It’s text, so tone is always a guessing game. But that’s how I interpreted Ada’s responses.

When she made that request, she was accused of ignoring a player and accused of being frustrating, by a player who despite not having followed the game systems was still being given a chance to explain the request anyway. I saw a busy staffer offering to help a new player on a new game find a way to do what they wanted in case the game’s setup had been confusing and RP happened that somehow hadn’t gotten logged.

And instead of working with her so they could do that, the player came in hot because it wasn’t just an unsubstantiated approval.

I’m not going to say what is and isn’t worth banning on someone else’s game. That’s not my energy and time investment to navigate. But I don’t see Ada acting in bad faith in that interaction at all.

@Cobalt

Do. It!

@InkGolem

Plus, everything’s legal in Jersey.

@Gashlycrumb

Star Crossed did it briefly but well as a shifter based wild west thing.

Personally, I’d say Texas, along the Rio Grande.

@bear_necessities

I kinda loved that Zombie one, though.

@somasatori

I’m surprised, and have been for years now, that the Shadowhunters series isn’t a super popular world setting. It seems to have all the popular tropes… Vampires, Werewolves, Angels, Demons, Warlocks, Humans, and Hunters… It’s big on action and adventure, it’s full of epic dramas. It can be based out of literally ANY large and popular city. It always seemed to me like it would make a popular and easy setting, but I’ve never seen it done.

@Pacha

Curseborne has built-in bonds (can be positive or negative). But characters are limited in the bonds they can have, as far as mechanical ones go. Like any game, families, friends, enemy lists can be as large and varied as desired.

And, bonds can be with NPC’s, such as your job’s boss, or your little sister, too.

It’s like any game with factions. Coteries and mystery cults are also able to be cliques. Ships or businesses can be cliques if they exclude non-members.

Bonds are no more/less a clique than any other reasons players have for their characters to know and/or exclude others. It will come down to game culture, and depend on if the community encourages and supports inclusivity or not - same as any other system.

@Redbird said in Nwod 2e vs owod:

Now do Curseborne.

We may be working on that.

@Pyrephox

There was a zombie themed game years back (not KB’s) that had a minigame for scavenging. You could roll for it in certain rooms, and probability of quality/amount/what was based on a random value of your scavange skill, how often/recently someone else searched, and type of room.

Most of what was found converted into resource, either medical, food, or supplies that could be ‘donated’ at the appropriate IC spots for each. Or the trading post for barter credit.

But, you also could submit specialty stuff your character was looking for that would be threaded in at an appropriate found difficulty, and if others found it, have scenes for trading directly, too.

So it gave you reasons to RP with the cooks, or medics, or other scavengers, because you got a better value for that trade if a different PC ran it than if you just clicked the buttons alone.

Kind of like Jump’s investigations, and the extra benefit of sharing your findings IC’ly. I like minigames that are story-connected like that rather than just the button clicking of flights/buying/selling that don’t involve others at all.

@Rucket

Hasn’t that one been done at least a dozen times already?

@Gashlycrumb

All of that seems fair. But, I’m not sure that the expectations I would have for staff and ST’s to be inviting and inclusive would be the same as the onus I think is on players. It’s GREAT if players are or can and want to be. But. They don’t owe it to a game to include folks, as long as they’re not actively pushing people out and away.

@L-B-Heuschkel

Yes. Everything about this!

@Third-Eye

Couldn’t tell you. Read it in policies, knew it would be a bad fit. Didn’t continue reading or app anything.

@MisterBoring said in RPing with Everybody (or not):

I was specifically referring to pairs of people who join a game only to play in a single grid room, never interact with plot, often times become hostile when asked to join RP / plot, and usually get upset if plot events ever effect them.

I’m very confused by this. If they never leave, and they never interact… Where and how are you then intersecting with them? How are events affecting them, how do they even know it’s happening?

Either they’re on their own, hurting nothing and no one… OR, they are interacting, just not in the amounts or ways you want them to be.

But I’m unable to see where/how it might be both?

@Tez Agreed.

@Yam

MAYBE, but only in the most limited and rare of ways. Overall, no.

Like. If you’re one of those places with an activity requirement? Then yeah, some strikes are better than a perma-ban because someone’s kid got ill and they couldn’t make the one scene a week minimum. Aside - thank eff we got rid of that ish for the most part.

But, small, inconsequential preference rules like that? Sure. Strikes make sense.

But. Clear-cut, fully outlined, for the good of the game rules?

Nah. We’re all adults who should act like it.

If someone breaks rules that harm other players or the game, why let them do it again? Much less extra times? MUSHing SHOULD BE a consent-based hobby. Consent goes both ways. The rules/policies of a game are part of a social contract. If a player doesn’t abide by their side of that social contract, the game doesn’t need to abide by allowing them to remain.

I think a lot of this ALSO depends on the TYPE of scene something is or isn’t, too.

If it’s a one on one social scene, and I’m not at least neutral to someone OOC’ly - Negotiated, good natured IC conflict is fine - I’m almost always never going to pursue that scene or will politely turn that down.

My time and energy are precious, and they are non-renewable resources. Why would I waste them in something I do for fun and for free with people who don’t spark joy? Marie Kondo that ish and throw it out.

However, if it’s a small to medium scene about something plot-related rather than slice of lifing, as long as I don’t actively DISLIKE someone OOC’ly, I’m fine with interacting with and including just about anyone relevant. A lot of times, that’s HOW the neutral parties become friends to start out with. Plots, events, all of that should be open invitations and OOC’ly welcoming to anyone participating in good faith.

Lastly, if it’s a large scene, an event, or something strongly plot relevant? Even if I don’t like a person at all OOC’ly, as long as it’s not so awful they’re on a block list or avoid at all costs level of dislike… I’ll still include them. I’ll interact with and involve them. I don’t have to like someone to make them feel welcome in a big game plot. Meta-plot is bigger than any individual characters, and everyone interacting in OOC good faith should have the same chances to participate.

All of these are grey areas. All of these have to be individually defined based on personal tolerance levels, time, energy, and attention. For me, personally though? As long as someone isn’t totally toxic… I would always rather be somewhere fostering an atmosphere of warmth and inclusion.

@Ominous

After you cast Magic Missile at the darkness?

@MisterBoring

Protein shake, peanut butter, frozen custard, and coffee concentrate in a bullet blender.

Or, if I’m REAL lazy, protein shake and coffee concentrate.