Rambling
Should be doing offline gaming tonight. I'm not sure the opportunity will arise, but I sort of want my wizard to incinerate something (and that's not even the violent lashing out that it sounds like). It appears we'll be missing one or two regulars, so I'm not even sure if we'll be roleplaying, but it'll be something.
My experiment on Furryfaire is not going overly well in my perception. My character has manage to fall in with two (of the half dozen or so) other present, but it's still hard to make any solid connection with them. One bounces between off-putting suggestive affection and "aren't I just cute and kid-like?!" while producing crystals with magical properties out of thin air. The other seems a little mentally-flighty and appears to be able to paint things into temporary reality. While I acknowledge making a shy techie hoomiku is not the best way to be a social butterfly and make friends, being around those two is a good way to feel pretty useless and irrelevant. I've had another person say "you should bring your character to play over here," though I'm not sure that would work out all that much better. If only "over here" weren't so ICly distant, I could justify finding out.
Perhaps I'm just too lazy these days, but I sort of miss adventure with some direction - something that's rare enough on MUCKs outside some very small groupings where one person effectively takes on a GM role.
The wiz side of the MUCK is something I'm sort of trying to avoid thinking about. It doesn't seem to help whether I worry about it or not. Friction between two main parties only seems to be growing and (in spite of my Omega werewolf comparison recently) I don't think I have it in my to try to play peacekeeper. As far as I'm concerned, the "head wizard" of a MUCK does indeed have the right/power to decide what systems are used and what direction the setting takes (unless specifically delegated). I think it would be foolish to not take other people's opinions into consideration a final decision has to be made somewhere.
I have flat-out disagreed with some decisions made from "on high" before, made my case, and ended up sucking up the fact that I was on the losing end of those debates. My sympathy for those who find themselves in such a position under new management only goes so far. If I had to just accept A, B, and C, I find it perfectly fair if they have to accept X, Y, and Z. Just because there's a head wizard that actually wants to make some choices and changes, as opposed to the last one (or two?) while pretty much didn't, doesn't make that wrong.
On the other hand, it really is good to work with people rather than alienating them. A MUCK with no players is sort of pointless. If a big change in the setting is made (or rejected), it helps if there's some understandable reasoning behind the decision rather than just looking like whim. And it's important to clearly convey any big changes in direction to the player base, preferably with whatever advanced notice and useful reasoning there may be. It's a fine line to walk. Spam a board with updates and people will start skimming and miss things, but if it isn't made clear that play is meant to be conducted in a certain way/place/whatever, people are going to miss that.
Of course, sometimes it doesn't matter how a change is approved. If it's not accepted by the player base, it may as well have been rejected. I remember a bit thing about the awakening of spirits in everything across the world. I have never seen anyone play out the effects of this. And my understanding of what happened leads me to think it would have changed the world radically. The aspect of emotional spirits alone would make bad moods summonable/dispellable, potentially perpetuating, and change how people interact with one another. Seriously, it's a mess that I have trouble envisioning all the implications of. Thus I was never able to get myself to buy in to the idea. Judging from what I've seen of others in the years since, no one else really did either.
And, well, as promising I seem to be rambling. Almost time for lunch anyway...
My experiment on Furryfaire is not going overly well in my perception. My character has manage to fall in with two (of the half dozen or so) other present, but it's still hard to make any solid connection with them. One bounces between off-putting suggestive affection and "aren't I just cute and kid-like?!" while producing crystals with magical properties out of thin air. The other seems a little mentally-flighty and appears to be able to paint things into temporary reality. While I acknowledge making a shy techie hoomiku is not the best way to be a social butterfly and make friends, being around those two is a good way to feel pretty useless and irrelevant. I've had another person say "you should bring your character to play over here," though I'm not sure that would work out all that much better. If only "over here" weren't so ICly distant, I could justify finding out.
Perhaps I'm just too lazy these days, but I sort of miss adventure with some direction - something that's rare enough on MUCKs outside some very small groupings where one person effectively takes on a GM role.
The wiz side of the MUCK is something I'm sort of trying to avoid thinking about. It doesn't seem to help whether I worry about it or not. Friction between two main parties only seems to be growing and (in spite of my Omega werewolf comparison recently) I don't think I have it in my to try to play peacekeeper. As far as I'm concerned, the "head wizard" of a MUCK does indeed have the right/power to decide what systems are used and what direction the setting takes (unless specifically delegated). I think it would be foolish to not take other people's opinions into consideration a final decision has to be made somewhere.
I have flat-out disagreed with some decisions made from "on high" before, made my case, and ended up sucking up the fact that I was on the losing end of those debates. My sympathy for those who find themselves in such a position under new management only goes so far. If I had to just accept A, B, and C, I find it perfectly fair if they have to accept X, Y, and Z. Just because there's a head wizard that actually wants to make some choices and changes, as opposed to the last one (or two?) while pretty much didn't, doesn't make that wrong.
On the other hand, it really is good to work with people rather than alienating them. A MUCK with no players is sort of pointless. If a big change in the setting is made (or rejected), it helps if there's some understandable reasoning behind the decision rather than just looking like whim. And it's important to clearly convey any big changes in direction to the player base, preferably with whatever advanced notice and useful reasoning there may be. It's a fine line to walk. Spam a board with updates and people will start skimming and miss things, but if it isn't made clear that play is meant to be conducted in a certain way/place/whatever, people are going to miss that.
Of course, sometimes it doesn't matter how a change is approved. If it's not accepted by the player base, it may as well have been rejected. I remember a bit thing about the awakening of spirits in everything across the world. I have never seen anyone play out the effects of this. And my understanding of what happened leads me to think it would have changed the world radically. The aspect of emotional spirits alone would make bad moods summonable/dispellable, potentially perpetuating, and change how people interact with one another. Seriously, it's a mess that I have trouble envisioning all the implications of. Thus I was never able to get myself to buy in to the idea. Judging from what I've seen of others in the years since, no one else really did either.
And, well, as promising I seem to be rambling. Almost time for lunch anyway...
It goes a bit beyond that hon.. there's a bit of the control freak in that too. I figure that our characters should be allowed to act as we wish without having a veto over our heads because he doesn't like it. If we're capable of doing something, and have the means to do it, why can't we just do it? Fuck, his character nuked an entire section of the city a few years back! He wasn't told 'I'd really like it if you didn't do that'. Kyle got Aranous swallowed up. Just last year, the Shademire was cleaned up and purified. But, no. I Don't Like This comes into play. And then there's the threat that any of our characters with pure supernatural blood or divine sparks are now his to use if he wants, and when Mark makes a new character, he tries to add stuff to the background that Mark doesn't want, and doesn't even have to be part of the character. (Oh, you're only Kithain if Jhazza had you brainwashed, because Kithain do that to its members? Say what?) Changes to the setting? Fine. But make them IC and logical. Not just 'I liked D&D, so I'm making this more like D&D here'.
ReplyDeleteOh, I'm sure there are plenty of other things that could be touched on. I think my primary point at the moment is that some major points go both ways: A head wizard has the right/power to steer the setting of the MUCK, and also a responsibility to let players play. To me, this does not mean saying "yes" to everything one or more players/PCs want to do. It also doesn't mean saying "no" to everything that doesn't align to personal vision. There's a balance to be found there. Personally, I very seriously wish someone would have had the sense to veto a few things on the MUCK over the years. Example: If the overarching vision of the setting includes Kithain as a unified, inflexible faction that brainwashes hidden commands into their members as a part of training, that's the sort of decision a head wizard (or appointed setting wizard or whatever) could make. And that would mean any Kithain character would thusly be brainwashed. But... 1) That vision need to be made clear to staff and/or players so there aren't contrary expectations. 2) An effort really should be made to keep continuity in some fashion. Why did the faction go so hard-line? What happened to any dissenters/moderates (like Jhazza)? What effect does this have on other existing characters/factions? 3) ... Personally, I feel that's sufficient break from previous portrayal that I would argue/vote against it, but I'm just one voice. If there's sufficient value to the MUCK to go ahead with that (or I was just "outvoted"), it's something I'd accept and move on from. But just "this is the way it is now" ... doesn't work well if at all. Best case, it alienates people and creates some rather questionable kinks in RP. I don't even remotely have an understanding of what the "problem" with your character was, so I can't even touch on that... I will, however, pull out another example from years back... We went through a time lapse and someone decided West Wood would be a port town. Given the previous map, that involved a massive adjustment to the coastline. I complained. While plenty of "well, this could have happened magically" justification was given for how a canal and port could be made, I was never convinced of why it should be done. No PC had ICly (to my knowledge) initiated such a change. I was never given an explanation of how it betters the MUCK or benefits RP or anything else. So to me, it's always been an arbitrary "because I said so" change. And that has bothered me ever since (as one can tell by my recollection of it probably).
ReplyDeleteThat works if things are spelled out. If I remember, you commented on the West Wood thing, and Alynna wound up doing a 'construction project' in-game to make it possible. But as for the Kithain suddenly getting into brainwashing members (which ran contrary to their ideological beliefs), or the Joshuites being all jerks, or the cosmology suddenly realigning, that really should have some in-game events leading up to this. But, whatever.
ReplyDeleteI only ever talked to you about West Wood - was never made aware of Alynna's involvement in canal-building. *shrugs* And the Kithain thing - I think I said that I agree with that. Seems way out of left field to me.
ReplyDelete