The excessive use of initialisms.
I read a whinge about take-out from BWW. I thought, “A big weird woman brought you food and you complain?”
I assume that’s short for Buffalo Wild Wings? Weird. In college and well after college I only heard it refered to as BW3’s, because it’s original name was Buffalo Wild Wings & Weck.
So, what do you guys think about staff not playing the game? Would that raise any red flags? I know the immediate thought is from people saying ‘oh, staff shouldn’t play’! But if staff legitimately did not want to play any characters, would you find that a warning sign or anything?
Honestly, I think at least one staffer shouldn’t play the game, meaning not having a PC but possibly still running scenes, playing occasional NPCs, etc. I think it’s important to have a sort ombudsman staffer who has a bit of distance from the game and can be a least somewhat objective in analysis. Hand-in-hand with that, though, is that a few staff should play the game, so at least some of the staff have a view of what’s going on ground-level.
My feelings are if a game is going to have child PCs/NPCs then they need to show up semi-regularly or at least get called out in the background as parts of scene sets and the like. It’s jarring when my character has gone months not interacting or even seeing a child and then, in the middle of a scene, a kid shows up fucking up the vibe.
Late to the conversation, but thought I would weigh in. My thoughts are that topics like this only work in a truly collaborative writing environment, meaning that all players are responsible for working together and writing for all parties involved in the scene. When it is Player A writing only for Character 1 who is abusing Character 2 written solely by Player B, the player-character connection is tightly bound and bleed can happen. Also, I feel it’s harder for the scene to get steered in a direction one of the players doesn’t want to go in when that player can yank the steering wheel of the offending character at any point.
Could you give a bit more on the tone and themes of the game, and a rough outline of the world? L&L is a pretty large genre. Dune, Bridgerton, Game of Thrones, Kushiel’s Dart, and a Court of Thorns and Roses are very different from one another.
Though, I am remiss in not pointing out that he is considered a fantastic lover even though he has no genitals.
@Dreampipe They go quiet at the nagging feeling that they forgot something at the start of the evening. After a few quiet minutes, they suddenly bolt upon remembering that they forgot to take the Hell Hound out for walkies and it is now probably using the household staff as chew toys to vent it’s pent up energy.
The mention of vampires and lycans in a previous post and the description of beings with wings, long claws, and water breathing in the last one makes me think this a post-human setting like Arnold K’s Centerra.
They sound like the descendants of the Oathlands and the Lyceum, respectively, or perhaps a reimagining. Hopefully each group has some nastiness to them so that we don’t have a reprise of Thrax getting dunked on morally for slavery.
I love seeing some Tannistry. It scratches that Crusader Kings itch.
Second is Player to GM, and this is going to be primarily GM tables, where GMs (whether player or staff), have tables of groups of players to run stories from, manage the stories of the PCs at them, help guide them on adventures, keep track of what they need to do and what can happen. I didn’t like how often people stalled out in Arx 1, and specifically I think the ambiguity of whether a next step existed at all caused way more harm than good. I think we can make enough mystery without not knowing whether a story is over, or if it’s waiting on it to be written or if a PC needs to do things first in order to advance.
You probably already have a solution in mind for addressing this, but Pathologic 2 and 3’s Mind Map might have some ideas to steal: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/pathologic-2-mindmap-a-questlog-people-actually-read
Pathologic are games built around philosophy, mysticism, and mysteries, and the Mind Map works really well as a quest log for that atmosphere as well as the word heavy narrative. Unfortunately, the Mind Map is built heavily around the GUI so some work would need to be done in translating it into something that works on a MU*
EDIT: Maybe have some sort of GUI on the website? But that makes the player have to leave the MU* client to go look at their “quest log.”
For my part, I recently found myself deep-diving some studies on how preferences for certain genres and literary themes correlate with certain personality traits.
Game design theory is right up my alley. Care to share the sauce?
In response to the main question of the thread, I am not sure anyone intentionally incorporates game design elements to weed out specific subsets of players. I think people just try to build the best game for what they’re looking for, and if that weeds out certain groups that the designer didn’t want playing the game anyways, that’s a bonus, as Apos and Faraday said.
This has reminded me to back it
I’m glad I posted something then, as there is only 3 days left to back it.
Adding into this, I would love to see this expand into a megagame. It may take away some of the mini-games for the wizards - for instance, of the noble court positions are played by players, then the Warlock loses a chunk of what they do - but I think there is the start of a fantastic megagame hiding in here, especially since megagames tend to be a collection of various role-specific mini-games mixed with the politics of a bunch of various factions with disparate goals stuck in a big room together.
@Thionoxial I am concerned that the side plots that can happen in a larger central hub might distract from the missions. I’m imaging several missions going on at the same time, and missions being multi-scene, multi-RL day affairs.
