@thrax said in Numetal/Retromux:
When Staff came to speak to her she did not hide, nor keep information from them. The thing I wonder is how can they ban someone for avoiding conflict from someone known to be a problem. Yes she did hide herself, but is that in itsself worth a full gameban?
Hiding yourself from players you have a no contact with in order to RP with them is something I think deserves a gameban, regardless of how open you are with staff.
It really feels like Ganymede has just decided to let Derp drive it into the ground out of some need to avoid losing face from reversing a decision.
Well, I’m reducing my MSB activity to lurking now. Gany just basically said that the only person who needed to be apologized to on MSB for what happened was Derp.
I get two things from reading stuff from this thread.
That I definitely am not the target audience for Lords & Ladies roleplay.
That Arx, even with all of it’s trouble throughout its history, is a pretty good example of ‘doing it right’ in our hobby.
Congrats to all you Arx players and staff for doing cool stuff.
@Juniper said in Numetal/Retromux:
Most people want to be special in some way, sometimes tactfully and sometimes… not. I think we all get to have more fun when we’re not veering aggressively away from being “cringe”.
The vast majority of players in our hobby understand how to make unique special characters without trying their damnedest to drive it into everyone’s faces at 100 miles an hour.
@Cygnus said in The 3-Month Players:
Without PVP acting as a failsafe, these players often cause games to fail because no one can stand not being able to meaningfully stand up to the bully.
The failsafe against toxic players should be staff action. Going PVP just because a player is toxic seems toxic in it’s own right.
@Trashcan said in AI In Poses:
“I don’t want to RP with GenAI because it’s not very good” is not going to age well as a position.
I think the better position is “I don’t want to RP with GenAI because I’m here to RP with real people.”
@Pacha said in Empire Discussion Thread:
My assumption (perhaps false!) is that when opening a game one wants to develop a large and diverse base of players.
I feel like we’re reaching a point where new gamerunners are going to focus more on just running the game they want to run rather than running a game that attracts a large crowd.
Starting a new thread, for a new year.
First up, and this one hit me hard, David Lynch, legendary director of such weirdness as Eraserhead, Twin Peaks, and the original 1980s version of Dune.
Please stop. If you actually care, stop, step away, and come back in a few days or even a week or two. You’re making yourself look bad with each new post.
@InkGolem said in Staff Bits Linking Handles:
I think it absolutely should be considered best practice for staff bits to have an Ares handle linked.
I agree. How would you see this translate into non-Ares games?
@bear_necessities said in Neon Protocol:
what’s even worse IMO is that the staff alt will submit jobs under their alt and then they will answer themselves in said job as the staff bit. Which is just… lol crazy IMO
I got invited to be staff on a game in the very early part of the 2000s. The head staff there (during the time period where we were working on the grid and systems and prepping our glorious metaplot) let staffers create their PCs during the wind up, and he created 2 for himself. A day later, but still weeks before we meant to open, he started having conversations with these two PC bits in the public channel, as though they were completely different people. The other members of staff became concerned after the conversations became really angry arguments about stuff unrelated to the game. We had a meeting with the headstaffer a day or two later, and he admitted he was starting to have some severe mental health issues after he got fired and had to move back in with his parents.
We ended up deciding to stop the game before it even started, and went our separate ways. I ended up using the plot bits I wrote up for it in my regular tabletop group at the time, to a meh reaction.
@Jenn said in MU Peeves Thread:
No one is forcing you to take the OOC offer. But at least they’re trying to be inclusive. And without inclusivity, a game dies fast.
Totally, which is why this is probably just a me thing. I love people being inclusive, but everybody has their own social quirks and habits and stuff that have to be worked around, and I think one of mine is “Please don’t try to throw plot at me until I feel I’ve established my character.”
@Roz said in MU Peeves Thread:
has the PC always been around ICly? because i feel like that’s an important point. if the PC literally just moved to the place or something, then wouldn’t they just respond accordingly IC that they just got there?
In this particular case, no, the PC has just moved to the area in the last week and has only met 3 other people who are also unconnected to the specific plot. And the requests to have the PC join the plot have all been OOC.
@bear_necessities said in MU Peeves Thread:
IDK how to explain it better, I just feel like staff should be upfront about who their PCs are.
I agree with this. I also believe that staff should not include their PCs in the scenes they are running. In my experience it often leads to Mary Sue / Gary Stu behavior.
Possibly a new peeve of mine (I’m still mulling it over and trying to decide whether it irritates me or not):
When a player is trying to do certain scenes to help them establish a new character and get used to playing that character and speaking in that voice, but others are trying to handwave that stuff and just operate as though the character has always been around and has in depth IC knowledge of current events with no actual scenes to back that up.
@BurnNotice said in MU Peeves Thread:
Imagine a horror game where seven out of every ten characters ICly are this person
Now I want to group app a bunch of failed comedians moving together to a creepy small town to try and rebuild after getting booed out of The Comedy Store.
@Gashlycrumb said in MU Peeves Thread:
My immediate reaction to people spending XP in the middle of a scene is “Noo! Wrong!” but after taking a moment to contemplate how this relates to that all-important question “So fucking what?” I don’t see it as being a real problem.
As I said, it’s a fringe issue, and only for some people (like myself), and most people who have this as a peeve it’s a low priority peeve at best, not something that would cause me to avoid a game. That said, if I ran a game, it would have an XP room and leaving mid scene to go use the XP room and come back would be forbidden. And I would suspect that having that policy wouldn’t be a game killer.
@Gashlycrumb Yes. I find that frustrating. Even more so when someone does it in the presence of someone who’s character is focused on whatever it is. This is what they built towards, let them have their moment of triumph.
@Ominous said in MU Peeves Thread:
I think it’s more of a “Git Good Waveform.” The exact skill the XP is ultimately going to go toward is spread across multiple possibilities until the player observes a particular skill needing to suddenly be increased during a dire moment, which causes the waveform to collapse into the needed skill.
I call it the “Personal Narrative Swerve Particle”. Where a character builds a narrative of being focused on one group of things suddenly becomes a master of something completely unrelated. So like when a violent druglord suddenly becomes the world’s foremost expert on neurosurgery.
One version of this I refer to as the “Oh You Didn’t Know Corollary”, where the character in question suddenly remembers their previous life as a teacher at Harvard Medical.
