pvp vs pvp

Autumn

I agree with both of you! I enjoy not knowing everything OOC about other characters so I can discover it in play, and I enjoy knowing enough OOC about other characters to make RP happen.

If I’m playing in the Vampire sphere, I find it useful to know who the other vampire characters are, so I know who to look for if I want to talk IC about vampire stuff without a lot of hemming and hawing to make sure we’re not breaking the IC Masquerade by doing so. On the other hand, I don’t want to know what their sheets look like or what their backstories are because I enjoy that mystery.

But I’m also pretty sure everyone draws the line dividing “things they like to know about OOC” from “things they like to not know about OOC” in a different place. OOC Masq is a spectrum.

Pavel

@Autumn said in pvp vs pvp:

OOC Masq is a spectrum

Basically everything is, especially matters of preference. But everyone has their way, and their way is superior because it’s theirs, etc, etc.

Jenn

@Pavel said in pvp vs pvp:

Given that how you want to play is collaborative storytelling. Just because that’s what (general) we forum users tend to prefer doesn’t make that the default for the hobby as a whole.

I try not to slip into the idea of there being ‘wrong fun’ even if it’s not a style of fun that’s fun for me.

But. I’m not sure I can see this in ways that wouldn’t be wrong fun. This hobby is LITERALLY comprised of nothing more than dice and co-writing stories with each other. Co-writing stories seems to be a definition of collaborative storytelling, unless your only and entire RP is a string of endless vignettes.

Could you expain how it’s possible to MUSH without collaborative storytelling because I’m super confused and not understanding what you mean.

Pavel

@Jenn Sure. First:

@Jenn said in pvp vs pvp:

This hobby is LITERALLY comprised of nothing more than dice and co-writing stories with each other.

That’s not true.

That’s what we primarily do. It’s not the entirety of the hobby. MUDs are included, RPIs, weird shit I don’t even know about are probably included too. Cybersphere was an example I used earlier, and that’s definitely a MU. It had/has RP, deep and meaningful storylines. It also had the risk of you just being gunned down in the street, using combat code without any RP, because someone wanted your shoes.

Faraday

@Jenn said in pvp vs pvp:

Could you expain how it’s possible to MUSH without collaborative storytelling because I’m super confused and not understanding what you mean.

There is no one true universal definition for what a MUSH is. For some it’s more TTRPG+some writing. For others it’s more storytelling with (maybe) some dice or cards or something. Different players and games fall at different points along that scale.

But even if we accept the supposition that collaborative writing is the core, how you collaborate is open for debate.

Think of an improv troupe. It’s more about going with the flow on the fly, not knowing detailed backstories and collaborating OOC about the details and stuff. I think that’s akin to an OOC Masq.

Jenn

@Pavel

I guess I should have been clearer. It was stated earlier we were talking about PvP MUSH’s rather than MUDs or other things. I’ve not encounterd a MUSH that wasn’t storytelling first and foremost, but. There a a lot of things I haven’t encountered, too.

Pavel

@Jenn said in pvp vs pvp:

It was stated earlier we were talking about PvP MUSH’s rather than MUDs or other things.

Unfortunately, as @Faraday said, there’s no clear distinction between MUSH and ‘other things.’ Does coded combat make it not a MUSH? Does roleplay make it not a MUD? Does a lack of furries make it not a MOO? There’s no hard line.

Pavel

And this is only anecdotal, but my experience of MUing earlier than the last decade… two decades… or so has been… less collaborative and more authoritative. Staff ran plot, and players reacted to it. Co-creation wasn’t really as important as it is now, sure it happened but it wasn’t the focus. So, storytelling? Absolutely. Collaborative? Not to much of my recollection.

As more and more places put the storytelling onus on players more than staff, player agency increased, and so co-creation became a requirement rather than an optional extra. So it certainly feels more collaborative than it was.

Though that could also be because we’re all fifty years older and we don’t have time to tolerate the bullshit we used to put up with.

Faraday

A few decades ago, we had more of a bell curve of gameplay styles among MUSH/MUX games.

TTRPG/often-PVP games on one end, full-consent on the other. One highly authoritative (through GMs or code), the other highly collaborative (at least until you hit a wall and someone picked up their toys and went home.)

Both extremes were (and probably still are) super popular among a subset of players, but had dramatic issues. TTRPG/PVP games became known for capricious behavior. Full-consent games often devolved like schoolkids playing cops and robbers. “I got you!” “Did not!” “Did so!”

So over time, we saw a shift toward the middle. Fewer headaches for staff, more agency for players to run their own plots (since GM staff became harder to come by), and a wider appeal to potential players (which became even more important as MU populations dwindled.)

That’s not to say you can’t make a successful game in the margins these days. I just don’t think the shift to the middle was random, or the result of PVP players going to video games or whatever. I think it was just collective experience into what kinds of games appealed broadly and weren’t nightmares to run.

Pavel

It definitely feels like Faraday’s the actual MU historian and my brain is wandering through ruins of memories like Philomena Cunk.

“At first, most MUSHes were ruled by mysterious figures called staff, who controlled everything like digital Roman emperors with slightly more access to @boot. These staff ran plots, awarded XP, and decided whose tragic backstory was tragic enough. Players were largely decorative.”