@Pyrephox said in Bad Stuff Happening IC:

I don’t necessarily trust when a player says this, either to me-as-player or me-as-GM because often they do not mean it, so I am absolutely reluctant to actually pull the trigger on negative consequences because it is exhausting to deal with a lot of people after you do, and perhaps even more so the people who are very vocal about “Oh yeah, destroy my life, I can take it!”

Unfortunately, this is true. In my experience as a GM, some players love bad things and consequences, and others just want to be heroes. As a GM, it’s not my place to judge – it’s to provide the frame for the story they want to tell, and mesh it in with the one I am telling.

So what I often do is offer choice. As an example, I just finished a quite epic scene in which the characters all died at the end. In death, they were returned to their own timeline and bodies, so no lasting damage.

Or at least, the choice of no lasting damage. Because how do you cope with experiencing a cold, wet, traumatic death on a sinking ship in the Atlantic? With knowing you just spent 24 hours trying to save that ship, and it’s still bloody sinking?

There’s a choice there, to opt out and be like, hey, that’s any day ending in y. And there’s the choice all the players made – traumatic death poses, lots of grief and misery to explore in follow-up scenes, and utter devastation all around. They hurt their own characters far more than I ever would have dared.

Which is just the way I want it. If somebody felt it was all too much, they could just ignore the trauma part and wake up with fewer memories or not too affected. Or they could go all overboard and require all kinds of drinking binges, psychotherapy and comfort cuddles for weeks after. All up to them. And nowhere in that did I have to sit down and try to judge how far I could and should go.

I find that most players are afraid of losing control. They’re afraid of being subjected to a story that isn’t fun to them. They’re not afraid of bad things happening to characters – they’re afraid to be ground into the dirt for no reason other than the GM or other player getting their jollies. And that, in my view, is a quite valid fear.

Have to throw my two cents in with the people who already advised against sharing such a list, too. Which is not to say that you shouldn’t know who you’re banning on sight. Just don’t take somebody else’s word for it.

Instead of a list of names, decide what behaviour you have zero tolerance with. Ban anyone who engages in it.

Only banned once or twice. That said, always had a very clear policy following Wheaton’s Law (“Don’t be a dick”). People know when they’re being assholes. If they’re being assholes, they need to be somewhere else. This is a private party and if you piss on the carpet, you will be escorted off the premises. The clearer that is, the fewer people seem to feel a need to test limits.

There are a few people whom I’d ban on sight. Those are the known predators who have a history of causing game meltdowns or driving away vulnerable players. I wouldn’t invite a known predator into my house in real life, either.

On the other hand, a few people who have been problematic elsewhere, have turned new leaves on Keys and never caused trouble. Sometimes, people do learn from their mistakes and just need a fresh start.

The most arguments I’ve watched around banning and behaviour were on games where game policy was three pages long and waffling. The shorter and more concise it is, the less attempts to rules lawyer out of trouble. Because people do indeed know when they’re being assholes.

It’s also a hobby that’s friendlier to neurospicy folks than many others. The percentage of players who have autism or ADHD or any combination thereof is surprisingly high.

As I said elsewhere – if I had a single spoon to spare from Keys, I’d be over here, rolling up an arrogant Alphatian nobleman. Prince Haldemar, move over, there’d be a new explorer in town.

That. FS3 would not have been my first choice – I have a literal complete game system of my own design sitting right next to me – but FS3 has one thing that Imagines doesn’t: It’s coded and integrated with Ares.

Isn’t that the issue for a lot of us? We may have a little code savvy but not quite that much. Custom code is a buttpain to maintain a lot of the time, too.

@crawfish said in Your first game?:

@L-B-Heuschkel Heeey this was my first MU, around the same time too.

Haha, who were you? I was Kae/Tancred/Marcel et all!

LegendMUD back in about 1996 – it had a pretty decent RP aspect back then. No idea whether it does today, I haven’t visited in 20 years.

Long time no see, Jules! Hope everything is well!

Ye gods, DiscworldMUD. So many coded minigames, from crafting to shop running, to actual, literal games – poker? Board games? It was all there.

@somasatori With a lot of international players, we do see discussions that are genuine discussions. But they’re between people who disagree on fairly minor issues – not from either extreme. Frankly, I don’t think that gap is bridgeable anymore, and I’m not sure it should be even attempted.

@Yam said in Strike Systems:

I’m curious if anyone has actually legitimately witnessed a fundamental change in someone with regards to MUSH behavior, perhaps due to some fallout, maybe in the form of banning or lost friends.

Yes. On several games. But to no one’s surprise whatsoever, those people who do learn and reform also tend to keep very quiet about it, in order to leave the past well buried.

@Juniper said in Strike Systems:

@Rucket said in Strike Systems:

At this point if I ran a game and someone spoke some right wing shit id ban them.

Amen to that.

“A-bloo-boo-hoo, freedom of speech, blah blah”
Nah. Go away. I’m tired of playing how far they can boil the frog before there’s a problem.

Not going to lie here: I like to think myself pretty open-minded, but I too object to being slow boiled like a frog. Don’t be pushing around Overton windows on my game.

It’s fine to discuss politics. It’s not fine to propagandize – and while I won’t ban you for being right-wing, I somehow don’t think you’re going to feel very welcome in the general community. Most of us are too fed up with this shit.

@Yam I’m going to venture a guess that at least some of the reasoning is habit from the 1990s when it really did matter how many people were connected.

The MUD I played back then lagged to the molassis and random disconnects point when more than 50 people were online. So the guys standing around doing nothing were not in generally in favour with the rest of us.

However, this is not an issue today as far as I’m aware.

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

It’s also perfectly acceptable for Staff on a game to see players who aren’t meeting their expectations, and approach them politely and discuss the matter, and if they’re not able to reach an understanding, ask them to leave.

It is. On Keys, the requirement is, don’t idle out. Other games have tighter restrictions. Set it up the way you want your game to work. Much as I’m a laidback nature, it is on the potential new player to read your terms and conditions. The social contract they’re agreeing to, if you will.

I’m going to just quickly point a spotlight at another variant that hasn’t been mentioned so far (from what I saw): The player who wants to RP with everyone but can’t.

Whether it’s social anxiety, bad health, busy life – at least on Keys, we have a couple of folks who never or almost never actually RP. When they do, it’s one on one, with only a few chosen folks.

They’re not harming anyone, though. They just want to be part of the OOC community even if for whatever reasons they don’t have spoons to actively play. They hang around and chat, and in that, contribute to a friendly, welcoming atmosphere.

I think Roadspike put it well above; if the player isn’t hoarding plot or otherwise obstructing things for others, they’re still a gain for the game.

I think grids serve a different purpose today than they used to. Today, at least on Ares games, the grid is a showcase – it tells new people what the place looks like, what the atmosphere is like, and what staff thought was important to the stories being told.

My em-dashes, my semicolons, and my words of more than three syllables. Ain’t giving them up in order to write ‘less like AI’. LLMs are mimicking me, not the other way around.

We don’t have storytelling staff in the first place. We have a plot that is very easy for players to tell stories in – and we expect them to do so. They do. There aren’t any rewards besides the joy of storytelling itself.

Of course, this works because no one expected our game to ever become more than a small handful of friends hanging out and telling their stories to each other. Keys is a sandbox, a framework for people to go off playing plots and stories of their own making and then returning to the central hub to interact and catch up. It probably wouldn’t work with a very large playerbase – we’re typically sitting around 30-60 active characters at any given time, so we’re hardly taking over the hobby here.

In short, I agree with others above: Players should help drive story and entertain each other. You don’t have to leave it all to them – but even if you were paid to sit online 40 hours a week, storytelling, you wouldn’t be able to keep up with everyone. It’s not unreasonable to expect people to perceive the hobby as a two-way street.

I need a mix. Depending on my mood and fatigue levels, I may want grimdark horror one day and vanilla slice of life the next day. My preference goes to settings that can accommodate most moods.