@eye8urcake said in DWOPP-spotting:

@Runescryer Even if it’s not that creepy fuckface, it sounds like it’s a creepy fuckface and either way, needs dealing with.

I think this is the more important point to focus on than actually finding DWOPP. Instead of trying to find out if a player is DWOPP, staff should be focused on verifying if a player has those tendencies and qualities, and taking action. It doesn’t matter if that person is DWOPP or not and they don’t have to fit the bill perfectly. There should be a line where when enough boxes are checked, they should be shown the exit.

DWOPP just fits the type of player that should not be welcomed in any game.

Past:

• SW1 - Howie Darklighter, Kell Draygo (Brief return at a much later date)
• SW Minos Clusters - Howie Darklighter
• SW Erebus Expanse - Forgot the bit name.
• SW Clone Wars - Howie Darklighter
• SW Brak Sector - Forgot the bit name.
• SW: A New Threat - Forgot the bit name.
• WC: Gemini Sector - Kell
• Serenity MUSH - Kell
• Steel & Stone - Kell and Erik
• BSG: Orion - Agrippa
• Game of Kings - Eldrick Lohstren (First one, before things went crazy)
• Fifth World - Erik
• Eternal Crusade - Elrick
• Creation’s Edge - Elrick
• Tales of the Round - Elrick, Steffan
• SW: Fires of Hope - Kell
• BSG: Unification - Kell, Aleksander
• Fifth Kingdom - Steffan
• Horror MU - Defender
• The Savage Skies - Keisuke
• Arx - Gaston
• The Network - Yongbin

Present:

• Concordia - Hanlin

@Lemon-Fox You shouldn’t be discouraged for trying to make the best out of a challenging situation. Despite the odds being stacked against you, you had fun with your friends for a good period of time and that’s important. Being revealed the truth will only make it easier for you make that hard decision to leave and dedicate your energy elsewhere. Life is just a series of experiences and this was one of them, sounds like you made newfriends in this hobby which is a huge plus so that is definitely something worth celebrating.

@Faraday said in IC Consequences and OOC Acceptance:

Some players will roll with things - I love that. But I’ve had some players quit over what I considered natural (non character-ending) consequences of their PCs’ actions, and others throw gigantic fits over the smallest of setbacks.

PC death is my personal hot-button because it ends the story and makes you start over from scratch. That’s not fun for me, so I don’t play (or run) games like that.

@SpaceKhomeini said in IC Consequences and OOC Acceptance:

I usually operate under the assumption that the character I’m helming is largely an idiot and does idiot things that will result in idiotic self-owns.

Sometimes I forget that I haven’t communicated this loudly enough with everyone around me and they get kind of cagey when I do stupid shit IC.

The fact that this needs to be communicated at all is kind of emblematic of the core issue. Most players in my experience don’t want their character to come off looking bad (in their opinion) because they think it makes them look bad. There’s such an over-investment in IC success, glory, and coolness that if someone is actively trying to embrace natural consequences or have their character do something stupid, it’s looked upon with suspicion or disdain.

I believe it’s not only the player not wanting to come off looking bad, which is part of it, but there are some who already have a concrete roadmap planned out for their character. Their character progression is like Lockheed Martin’s stock, the only way is up. In their mind, they already have an expectation that after one event, their character’s coolness and popularity is at this level, then after another event, they will attain a higher level, etc.

This means, if they perform an action that they feel is perfectly fine and cool, and the GM in that scene throws an unexpected wrench which may sidetrack, delay, or even mar their roadmap, then their character is ruined. They’re out. They do not want to go through the effort to take this new, uncertain Path B, because it was not part of their original plan. They play for the ‘W’, they don’t play for the collaborative story telling.

I actually like NPCs that react with consequential actions because it makes the world that is being built feel more alive. If you have NPCs that are constant doormats, then, to me, the world feels very dull because NPCs are as important as the clouds in the sky or blades of grass in the background, just a dull color in the background. Now, on the flip side, if the NPCs are too strong, then it could become too challenge and players will feel a lack of fun, progression, or just suffocated on what they can do. That’s where the skill of the GMs come into play, which it sounds like plenty of IC warnings were given and that is all you can do. The players have to pick up on those signs or suffer the consequences. If they don’t like the consequences after ignoring the warnings, then the game is not for them. Not all games are for everyone and that is fine.

It comes down to what a particular player wants out of a game. Some want to feel like they are Gods of the game where they are in control of everything and steer the story their way. I personally want to just be part of the story, sometimes being a spectator watching what is being woven together by others move forward, sometimes throwing my hat into a plot to have an effect on not just the story but also my character, maybe sometimes throw in a wrench for a taste of the bad consequences. Bad consequences are not a bad thing (of course unless it’s death), because it can also lead to a chance of further character development or character’s internal shift. Which is interesting in of itself (Jamie with his hand lopped off) because it can spice up the story and character.

I believe the number depends heavily on how many active staff you have to help manage those players. Having a dedicated team of 8 staff can handle a much larger player base than a team of 3. Staff to player ratio would lead to less of a burnout on the staff side.

I would also like to add my two cents from my experiences and takeaways from the game as I play (as much as I can due to RL time constraints). I did not see any issue with the clarification of IC theme that was added, because from the previous lore that was available, having children did add potential dire results that can affect a region, or even the realm.

“However, the moment the first child was born to this second generation of Beyonders – the Lost Generation who have never experienced even a moment of life in their respective “real” worlds– new rifts tore open the sky, dozens of them, each responsible for a new threat.”

So having the staff put some sort of thematic control over birth of children in the game makes sense. Now, I don’t know when the staff decided on the official IC system, but the game is still in Beta and I would personally give the staff the benefit of the doubt that they are treating Beta as a real Beta. Now the Betas of video games nowadays that is basically a free advertisement to pre-order the game.

The various posts on this subject though is definitely an opportunity for me to learn how some people can be very uncomfortable with this decision since the bbpost update didn’t hit me as hard as it hit some of the other players or those who are keeping an eye on the game.

@Faraday That is one of the biggest hurdles of a PvP game. Even if you try to rebrand it as a CvC game, it requires a very mature player mindset for everyone involved. It’s really hard for everyone to do something for the greater good of the story, especially when everyone’s vision of the story is different. Even if the staff lays out a clear direction or goal, everyone’s path in that direction or to that goal can differ, which will impact how much they are willing to give to have their vision of the story reshaped.

Another level of difficulty is that the longer the characters last, the richer the character’s story becomes as it continues to build over time. That also means it is much harder to give up on a character or “lose”. It may happen where in a scene, two characters with very lengthy experiences and rich stories clash, and whichever side loses or has to give way, can impact what they have built up rather negatively moving forward. Then a “loser” will result and can even leave a bad experience for them, which sucks for not only that person but also for characters whose stories are heavily involved with that character who lost.

So PvP games may work best on games with short episodes, where characters are “wiped” or killed off in each episode, without consequences that are long lasting. If you lose or die, it’s fine because in a month or two, the slate is wiped clean and a new story is created.

A mecha game. I’m excited and I need to clone myself to make more free time.

I’m definitely one of those who are guilty of not being more disciplined with my Async scenes, which I need to fix on my end. I used to be an avid live scene RPer when I first started MUSHing but back then, I had a lot more free time to dedicate to RP and the people I RP with were also mostly in the same time zone and same time slots with free time. Now, RL is a bigger obstacle which is a shame, which is also why it’s impossible for me to play on more than one game.

Things have changed a lot with technology and also how life has changed for people. My free RL time has reduced and instead of hashing out a scene in four hours, I’m mostly down to two hours on a week night where I can fully focus. Oddly enough, even before Ares, I’ve had really great scenes with fun RPers where we can pause the scene after one night and pick up the next night. Or, even before Ares, I’ve done async (before it was coined Async) where the log was copied to google docs and continued there before the log is posted on the wikidot site for the game.

This is where my personal discipline needs to be tightened up on my end, where if a good scene has to be paused, instead of going fully async, it may be better to continue with a continued live scene on the second day. Async is definitely much harder when more people are in a scene, because everyone’s schedule is fragmented and it is much harder to line up the timing. That is why I try to reserve async to one on one scenes or plot advancing scenes so everyone has a chance to contribute to progression of the plot when they can. That’s one of the strong points of async it allows more people to participate instead of people not being in the same timezone of the majority being left out.

In the end, there are strong pros and cons to async, the challenge is to properly juggle it so it works out for those involved.

@DrQuinn I definitely see them as RP hooks and also a visual presentation of character development. Both for other readers and the player of that character. I saw in another post that someone mentioned that some players treat these games partly as a CRPG that is closest to a TTRPG and I can definitely see that. When I play a character, I try to create one or pick a roster character that is more of a blank slate and let the character shape itself through the adventures and scenes they participate in.

In my opinion, vignettes can definitely help both for the player to write out how they see their character growing in the story they are part of, but also let others in on it as well. Vignettes also play a part in plot +requests the player puts in, being able to show what may have happened with dice rolls that happened behind closed doors.

PvP games can definitely work and can also be a ton of fun. However, it would require a lot more work than your usual PvE games where everyone can win. Staff will have to be on point and very hands on in PvP games, to ensure that the playing field is fair in terms of rules are being followed, that any loopholes to any rule in PvP engagement are removed before it can be fully abused, and constant checking in on all players (not just the loudest or flashiest) that they are having fun or if they have any concerns.

This also means that you have to size the game to the number of people that staff can handle, not just open the floodgates to anyone who wants to join. Staff will also have to be much more picky on who can play and be very willing to show people the door who are not cooperative with the staff. This, obviously, can stir up drama and accusations of staff favoritism, cliques, corruption, etc. This also will be a heavy drain on the staff, which will have to support each other heavily and have the good players support the staff as well. It will be a challenge but can be awesome if done correctly.

@Doozer It’s been a while, shaking the rust off. I did miss it though!

@mietze I agree with what @Pavel said, sometimes there is just nothing staff can do and it is out of their hands. Through my decades of playing on games (no game running experience and very limited staffing experience), I would also also say that there is no perfect blue print to a successful game. The main reason is because the core of these games are the players, who are human, which means each player is unique in their own way, how they respond, how they perceive things.

The best thing that game runners can do in terms of fairness is to truly ask themselves, am I doing the best I can for the people who are on my game, am I still focused on the vision of my game, am I seriously reviewing incidents that occur on my game. And lastly, am I learning from mistakes I have made, which results in building experience which will only take time. Just like in life, you can do everything right and things just don’t work out sometimes, it can be hard but those times you just learn what you can from that experience and try to move on. Certainly harder done than said, but in life, you can only move forward.

If I recall correctly, I got into MUSHing in the mid to late 90s and my first game was SW1. This kicked off because I had finished reading the Heir to the Empire Trilogy (Thrawn trilogy) and I started reading more post movies Star Wars novels.

@RightMeow If I had found a Robotech MUSH, I probably would’ve played that since my first anime when I watched as a kid was Robotech.

@bear_necessities said in Banning Bad, Actually?:

@Yam we don’t ban enough. Coming off a recent game where I had vibes that another player was a notorious creeper and was doing Weird Shit that maybe wasn’t “bannable” per policy but definitely would’ve gotten them booted if it was my game, I think we should ban liberally and often.

I’m in full agreement that we don’t ban enough and definitely not enough warnings are given. Dealing with problem players takes up unnecessary energy and sanity from staff, energy that can be focused more on the other players that are having fun and enriching the story the game runner is putting together.

To me, playing on a game is a privilege, one that could and should be revoked if a player starts becoming a problem. It can be nice of the staff take extra time to sit that player down and explain to them that they are becoming an issue, but that is definitely optional and up to staff. If that player showed potential to be a fun RPer and being able to change for the better, certainly have that sit down, see how they react. If it seems like it will take too much stress and effort to try, just show them the door. There’s no right or wrong option there.

Some of the problem players seem to have an entitlement attitude, where they feel that they are the main character of the game and they deserve most of the attention, get to make the most decisions, get the most stuff, etc. Instead, players are just playing characters that are working together through their IC actions to build up the story that is being crafted, they are not there to have their character “win the game” at the expense of regardless of others. I know that in the past, before I had gotten a little older and had more MUing experience under my belt, I’ve look back at certain games, I realize, ‘Wow, I was an such an asshole.’

@dvoraen KeroKero

On a perfect game, an unlimited number of players. Think of BG3 but every NPC is a PC that is working together seamlessly on crafting the overall story, their individual story, and your story. Every encounter is not scripted depending on the actions you take but their interaction with you depends on when you interact with them, how much of their own story has been built, what the world is like at the time of that interaction, etc.

What would qualify as power over a person? Or is it just different interpretations on what power over a space and power over a player is?

I would think that banning a player they do not want on their game is power over a player in their space since they are removing the player from the game against their will.

Enforcing ICA = ICC would be power over the player too because even if the player disagrees with the judgement, admin is the judge and their safe is final. This could even result in the player losing their character against their will.

@Yam said in Banning Bad, Actually?:

@Faraday Do you recall ol’ OnceWas?

Minus one Michelin star for “unclear help file” work.

If a system is supposed to work a specific way, say it is supposed to work that way. If it isn’t, update a file or something, maybe?

This was basically enough to get him banned. This person was freshly new. This is the most hair trigger case I can think of. He was immediately shown the door, although he was sure to kinda’ buckle down on his stance. Mild, probably, but no one wanted to deal with it.

I’m unclear of what your threshold is, as I recall you were not very approving of this behavior.

That is, of course, just half of the story since we do not know Ada’s accounts. We don’t know if Ada has had past interactions with the player before or someone else have already spoken to about this player before. From one telling, it appears to be just be an one-off encounter but it’s only one telling.

Unless I missed Ada’s explanation and not just one log that was provided stating that was it.