Persinette

Being the doorman for a sleazy little strip bar isn't the most glamorous job, but Johnny's life takes an unexpected turn when one of the dancers taps him on the shoulder and asks for a cigarette.

Sorry for the delay in getting the ball rolling, folks. One of the GMs - guess which, first two don't count - had a wee bit of a family emergency and had to vanish for the last week. Rest assured, though, that things are still happening and the setting is coming along very nicely.

Psh. Let's admit it - if Neil Gaiman wasn't a published author and he'd just posted it online for free, it'd be called crossover fanfic. (Which isn't a bad thing, seeing as how I think it's an excellent story no matter what you label it.)

As somebody who's written both fanfiction and original fiction, I would say this isn't actually the case. In fanfiction, you have to work within somebody else's boundaries - it's not just a pre-made framework. You have to carefully get down the character voice for a character you never created, handle issues you might not know how to (say, one of the characters has a mental illness you know next to nothing about), and you can't change the rules the world runs on. While with original fiction, if my plot hinges something being possible but I already declared it was impossible? I rewrite that part. I need a stoic character to break down over something, even though it's happened to them before and never effected them like that? I rework the character to make that plausible. And so on. But you can't do that with fanfiction. Somebody else has already laid everything out and you can't change that. If anything, it's a serious challenge. Of course, I might be biased because I find creating characters and worlds to be utterly effortless - give me a long bus ride, I can give you framework for an in-depth fantasy setting and a plot to go with it by the end. So the whole 'the true difficulty of making it yourself' thing has always seemed very odd to me.

After discussing it, Myiege and I decided that the best solution is pick the top options and mix them together into something we think is interesting. So if, say, Steampunk and Horror were ruling the roost, the outcome might be murderous automatons. Or whatever more interesting thing we came up with. So yeah. We'll see how things are at closing time.

I'll add you to the list. We're certainly thinking about giving players the chance to 'earn' more points! Weren't planning anything to do with a poll, but we'll talk about it.

Yeah, that is possibly a required element. In the original thread, some people were for it and some were strongly against - it would be really helpful for the GMs if players could give their opinion on it and talk about it in this thread. If it does end up being the case/looking likely, the GMs have some thoughts put into it already which we'd be happy to share.

Done!

The GMs will be happy to help you out with stuff. Added your name to the list!

I've added your name to the new main post, JMH! I can't see why you couldn't play a selfish, ruthless bastard - there's no rule saying that all characters need to be nice. For those who didn't see it, the new main topic for the RPG is here.

I'll add you to the list! Don't worry about filling in a character sheet yet - it's purely there as an example and for people to say 'I like that character sheet/I see these issues with it'. I've edited the post to make that clear now. If you want to argue for that as a setting, I have no objection. Sounds fun.

The sign-ups topic is now open! There you will find such delights as the first draft of both Rules and the Character Bio. Also: a chance to vote on a setting. Come one, come all!

Plans for a GA forum RPG are currently in the works! It all started in this topic then movied to this one, if you want to catch up on the backstory. We have permission to do this in a subforum, but it won't be created until we have our list of players and our setting. That's where you good folks come in. Interested in having a go? Then put your vote in for where you'd like the game to be set. We would appreciate it a lot, though, if people only vote if they're thinking about playing - don't want to accidentally end up with what the wider forum thinks is cool outnumbering the players. Multiple choice, because what's the harm in voting for your second (or third, or...) fave? Current GMs: Myiege Persinette Current Players: Clumber Sasha Distan joann414 Daithi AnimalMorph Delores Esteban scotty94 Thorn Wilde JMH asamvav111 Celethiel nostalgiclikeyou If anyone's on there and doesn't want to be, or wants to be and isn't then let me know. I've been in a bit of a muddle today. Anyone who says they want to play will get their name added to that shiny, super-exclusive list. These are the rules Myiege and I have currently drafted, plus a sample Character Bio. The Character Bio is currently really vague and has no options for things like magic, since we don't know the setting yet. (It is also for a character nobody will ever want to play. ) We're looking for feedback on everything! EDITED TO ADD: Don't worry about filling out a character sheet at this point! Its purely there for you to go 'I like the way that looks/God, what are you thinking?' and generally give any opinion you might have on it. Rules: 1) What the GM says goes. If you have an issue with one or both of the GMs, please bring it to us directly, through PM. We are meant to be objective, but if you believe that for some reason we are not, don't hesitate to bring it to our attention. There are two of us for a reason! 2) If you feel you are being treated unfairly or think that someone else has broken one of the rules, please go directly to the GM through PM. We really don't need any vigilante justice people. 3) Godmodding. This is one of the big ones, guys. Godmodding (in case you aren't familiar with the term) is when you are essentially invincible. You make it so that no one can harm you and that you are super and ultra powerful. Another form of godmodding is using another character without the owner's express permission. Including killing them or making them fall in love with someone else or making them do ANYTHING without the owner's permission. Urban dictionary has a great definition if you are interested: http://www.urbandict...erm=god modding 4) Metagaming. Another big one. Please remember that you are playing a CHARACTER in a made up world and try to place yourself in your character's shoes and refrain from using information you, as a PLAYER, know and something that would be impossible for your character to know. A good example of this would be Sammy's character revealing some less than honorable intentions in an inner monologue and then Bobby's character calling them out on it. How, plausibly, would Bobby's character know any of what was going on in Sammy's character's head? Being suspicious of suspicious characters is one thing. Being all knowing is different and is pushing limits on godmodding as well, especially if you suddenly decide that you character can read minds. Also, 'bad feelings' should be able to be backed up with in-character interaction. Just a 'bad feeling' isn't enough. Please back up your feelings! 5) This seems like a no brainer, but please respect your fellow players. As a writing game, each of us has different strengths and weaknesses when it comes to our narratives. Also refrain from taking real world grudges (if any of y'all have any to begin with) into the game, or bringing RPG-related grudges OUT of the game. It's only a game and relationships should not be destroyed by it. This is supposed to be fun! GMs are not excluded from this as well. We will try to be as objective as possible. 6) Every player must submit a full character sheet (to follow) to GMs for approval. Please try to be realistic and creative. No one likes to play with Mary-Sues and character depth is important. 7) Please let other characters get a word in edgewise before posting again - for one thing, other characters might decide your character is an unbearable chatterbox. If things get too out of hand with this we may impose a posting limit 8) If for one reason or another you are going to be absent and you know this in advance, please let us know and make sure your character is not involved in any significant plots. If you are involved in a significant plot, please let us know far enough in advance that a temporary out can be found for your character. On a similar note, please don't abandon minor plots without finishing your part in them, even if it only effects a few players rather than the whole RP. Never finishing that in-character conversation about beer vs. cider is one thing; leaving a declaration of love hanging traps the other player in a situation where they're not sure what's happening with their character. 9) Players - with their consent - may be given plot hooks by the GMs. This can be anything from 'the Big Bad has secretly contacted you, what do you do?' to 'you are driven to fulfill your dream of becoming a baker'. You can request a plot hook/objective/sub goal at any time. 10) In-Character Actions do not equal Out-of-Character feelings. When a character is being a prick to yours, remember that the player doesn't feel any such thing about you - and if you genuinely think they do, bring your concerns to the GMs in a PM. Character Bio: Name: Blahdiddyblah Age: 27 Species: Human/other mix, mongrel of several different species Sexuality: Anyone with low enough standards Personality: Likes: Getting on people's tits. Dislikes: Having friends. Strengths: Good instincts for when somebody is about to thump him. Weaknesses: Terrrible social skills and general unlikeableness. Description: Blahdiddyblah is an unbearable little oik with the manners of a portside whore. Appearance: Eyes: Yellow Hair: Dirty blond Skin: Pale brown Height: 5'8" Build: Rangy, lean Strengths: Quick, agile. Weaknesses: Weak as a kitten. Description: Blahdiddyblah is blahblahblahblahblah. Advantages: Knife-fighter Acrobat Fast-talker How they work: Despite his unbearable personality, Blahdiddyblah can usually talk his way blahblahblah. Disadvantages: Poor hygiene Low social skills Spindly How they work: If anyone ever showed Blahdiddyblah how to use a shower, he wasn't looking - not that it matters, since with his charming people skills, nobody wants to get close enough to smell him anyway.

Dude, if I'm ever lucky enough to have you read something I wrote and care enough to leave reviews? I would be grateful to recieve those reviews; particularly the first one. And I would say thank you. Because seriously, telling a writer when their characters are acting unbelievably thick is a kindness. It's such an easy mistake to slip into and can be so hard to spot in your own work.

I don't want to make any statements about most of these questions until I've had a chance to talk to Myiege, but I can say a few of my opinions straight-off. AnimalMorph: We'll make sure to save you a place! if people are okay with having to submit characters for approval, I would be perfectly happy to run with that instead of a points system. I don't know Myiege's opinion, though, and she might have some thoughts about it which haven't occured to me. But I can say for myself that I don't mind either way. Delores: I can't see why you being gone for part of September would stop you from playing! You'd be welcome to sign up after you came back, but you could also sign up before, let us know when you need to be gone, and we'll come up with a reason for why your character isn't for a while. So long as he or she isn't intrinsic to any plots at the time - so no other players are stuck because they need your character - it should be just fine.

That's wonderful! We entirely agree on something! Readers should not attack and belittle authors. Isn't it nice that we can find common ground over something I already said was the case. Problem is, I think we have a teensy bit of a mismatch in what's considered abuse. So you're saying Ron attacked the author brutally? Want to say that directly to him? What about the author who had KC Grim's review deleted because they left a hihgly flattering review with one bit of critique in it - were they a fragile flower, besieged on all sides? Are Ron and KC Grim no better than child abusers? Stop arguing with your strawman, Kitt. Please point to where I said 'reviewers should say the first thing which comes to their mind, no matter how cruel or offensive'. I know my actual words are a lot less simplistically evil, but I'd like to see them addressed at some point. Then the author needs to grow a thicker skin if they read that as personally attacking them. They may feel attacked, but emotions are not the same thing as reality. To use your charmingly offensive example, the emotionally abusive parent actually feels that the ugly things they're saying to their kid is true. They're not. Why you got to encourage authors to behave like abusive parents, Kitt? Why? I. Um. Okay, this is awkward. I honestly thought that, in a moment of passion, you reached for the nastiest thing you could think of to say. It honestly did not occur to me for a moment that you were genuinely comparing ongoing abuse which damages a person for life, the effects of which will be quite possibly passed down to their own children in one way or another, to somebody saying you're stupid on the internet. I...don't know what to say. The best I can do is say that it is staggeringly offensive on multiple levels, and I hope you appreciate the fact that you are so detached from such things that you use them so lightly. Just to make things very clear here: I am not offended that you disagree with me on whether those examples are too harsh. I'm not offended that you think an author could be hurt by them. I am offended that you equate something so trivial with screaming at a child that they are a leech and threatening to kick them out of the house. I have continued to write after people told me I 'deserved to be raped (but, of course, I had too many STDs)'. Right when I began writing, too; this was not after years of building my confidence. The problem is, it is impossible to predict what critique an author will or won't find abusive. Yes, some things are blazingly obvious - don't be snide, don't use any sentence beginning with 'you are', make sure to always aim your criticism at things within the story itself - but beyond that? It's all up to the author. In your opinion 'Having Character X fail to work out Obvious Thing Y makes him come across as stupid.' is akin to telling your child that you wished you'd aborted them. And when an author - that most delicate, gentle of creatures - is attacked in such a manner, how can they help but lash out? As you said yourself: 'If a reader is giving an honest critique of a work, trying to help an author, and is giving praise, I doubt that there would be much of a possibility of receiving abuse for their efforts.' Reviewers have nothing to fear, so long as they stay away from such devastating insults as 'That plot twist requires all the characters to be stupid.'

Just in case it's not clear: The game would not use numbers on a day-to-day basis, so to speak. They would be constrained almost entirely to character creation, and breaking the occasional stalemate where two (or three, or whatever) players are refusing to come to an agreement between themselves. Basically, for when Player A and Player B are both equally determined that this character wins this fistfight. I'll freely admit that points and skills are not exciting. They're not new. But they work. They work to help keep characters balanced during creation, and to ensure they all have strengths and weaknesses. Under a three-adjective system characters have no checks on being ungodly Mary-Sues - Beautiful, Genius, Unstoppable Bounty Hunter - but it does put checks on them being complex. You can describe your character as a Enthusiastic, Clumsy, Short Ensign, because you want to play a fresh-faced, starry-eyed kid, but you're now stuck with that. In order to get your character in there, you've sacrified your character having any skills at anything until you can earn the attention of a GM, who gifts you with a new adjective. At which point you have to decide which is more important to you: finally getting a skill, or adding, say, 'Brave' because your character's been developing in that time. It would very easily result in a situation which rewarded the powerplayer and punished the good player. With the points-based system, however, the player can put Clumsy down as one of their Disadvantages, and have several Skills. Their height goes under describing how they look. And because there is, with what we're currently considering, going to be a character description written by the player, Enthusiastic goes in there. This, I admit, I outright disagree with. Allowing a GM to take an intrinsic character trait away from a character is asking for trouble, and an absolute disaster for characterisation. Why does the Lecherous Assassin become a Monogamous Assassin? Does she meet that special someone? Is she being mind-controlled? Has the station had a recent outbreak of the clap? Taking stuff away from players like that is a very good way to make players feel bitter and/or targeted. Why is their character now a completely different person? Why is their character less boisterous? Why has he suddenly lost the ability to fire a gun? In my experience as a tabletop player, doing that sort of thing to players is almost a sure-fire way to kick off truly staggering amounts of resentment - and not just with the player you just took a trait from. If the Lecherous Assassin is having flings with three other PCs, those players aren't gonna be happy that they've lost whatever plots they were building towards there And so on and so forth.

The mechanics will probably be very basic - almost entirely writing based. My character sidles up to yours, leans on the bar and asks him/her to buy him a drink. Then your character tells mine to piss off because he's an opportunistic little floozy. No numbers involved. The possibility of a points system was to make sure that, when it came to the most basic elements of character creation, players couldn't create giant Mary-Sues. If every character starts as average-looking, average-intelligence, and with average-strength/dexterity/endurance, and there is a limited amount to 'spend' on making them prettier/smarter/stronger, you can't create a stunningly-beautiful genius who lifts cars one-handed. Myiege and I have talked a little about characters having Skills which cost them, but we haven't extensively discussed it yet. Currently our thoughts were a little along the lines of players being able to 'earn' points which they could use to 'buy' things like Skills, but that's for when people have been playing a while, not character creation. We need to discuss the best way of giving players abilities without letting them get overpowered. The issue with focusing on powers or weapons is that there's a good chance this game won't primarily focus on combat. People wanting things like their character being a good pickpocket doesn't fit into a powers/weapons-based ability system. As we don't yet have a plot decided on, we don't know what there will be in the way of villains. For example: If there were enough players, we might end up setting up factions so that people can squabble between them. Or if there weren't enough players for that, we might create a law enforement group trying to take down the spacestation and play them ourselves - not as characters, but as an NPC (Non-Player Character) threat. We haven't got to the point of working out what the game will need, yet, though. It's still in the very early stages of planning. GMs. Because the only idea a few people have said sounds cool is Space Pirates, that's the road we're currently going down. Once we've ironed out a few more kinks, it'll get posted for everyone to give their opinion on. But we were previously asking what people were interested in as a setting because it felt rude to say 'this is the dream thing I want to run, if you want anything else, tough luck'. I know I, at least, was hoping for people to discuss options between themselves. If you have any more questions, I'll be happy to answer them - at least until I go to bed!

So do you think these examples: 'Having Character X fail to work out Obvious Thing Y makes him come across as stupid.' 'That plot twist requires all the characters to be stupid.' 'The worldbuilding for Thing X is stupid - why did everyone randomly start worshipping Darksoul the Kitten-Eating Demon?' Are akin to a child being abused by their parent? Because, in all honesty, unless I have severely misunderstood your phrasing, I find the equation deeply offensive. And also, if anything, a near-perfect illustration of what I was saying here: 'and allows writers to justify overreacting to criticism' Harsh critique is not, in this set-up, a thing that happens and must be dealt with maturely; it is displaying the same behaviour as an abusive parent. A writer - in this example responding to a forum post - sees something which makes them feel high negative emotion, and responds with an extreme statement. And forgive me, but I think it is unreasonable to put readers in the position of weighing given an honest critique (often trying to help the author and also giving praise) against the possibility of getting a mouthful of abuse. And yes, I have seen authors on here behave that way. I have seen them behave worse. The justification? I AM AN AUTHOR, MY STORY, MY PRECIOUS ART. I also can't help but notice that you ignored 90% of what I originally said about authors needing to control their emotions, in order to - inadvertantly, I assume - accuse me of saying that reviewers have a right to be personally nasty to authors.

Oh, if you're happy to not play a character right now, then that works great! I was thinking that if no-one objects to us trying things out as moderators, then we pick a setting - preferably with player input! - and make up character forms, draw up some prospective rules to test out, then ask about a subforum to run it in. Does that sound good to you? (I do think it's worth keeping an S-GM system in mind for the future, though, if the RPG gets off the ground and becomes popular. So there can be enough GMs to keep it running, but not all of them have to give up the fun of playing a character. ) Yeah, I admit I'm forseeing a problem where people keep trying to play their character like s/he's the lead and everyone else is a sidekick. Which, of course, doesn't work because everyone's the lead in an RPG. Players gotta be willing to not demand all eyes on them at all times.

The word 'stupid' is just that - a word. Did you call the author stupid? Can you actually look me in the metaphorical internet eye - the webcam? - and say that you said 'damn, you gotta be pretty thick to write something like this'? Because if the answer is no, then I'm sorry. No. That kind of reaction against a non-bigoted, non-expletive word is not reasonable. There are, in fact, plenty of reasons to use the word stupid in a review: 'Having Character X fail to work out Obvious Thing Y makes him come across as stupid.' 'That plot twist requires all the characters to be stupid.' 'The worldbuilding for Thing X is stupid - why did everyone randomly start worshipping Darksoul the Kitten-Eating Demon?' 'These people don't know how to use the catapult they built, but this random kid works it out? Are they stupid?' The backlash against that one word is, and I make no apologies for this, bloody stupid. It focuses on a symbol rather than any actual underlying problem, and allows writers to justify overreacting to criticism - "Yes, I called him a gutter-licking reprobate, but didn't you see? He said my brilliant tactician character was being stupid when he ordered the light cavalry to charge into the pikemen!" Also, the hurt feelings of authors is not a good excuse for bad behaviour; especially when the review in question was an honest (if harshly-worded) critique not meant in malice. For non-fiction pieces I have written for websites, I have received staggering amounts of abuse. And not just in the comments. I have had entire forum threads created on other sites dedicated solely to calling me things I'm not allowed to quote here. If I had decided to have the screaming ab-dabs, nobody could say I was not provoked. And yet? I somehow restrained myself. Because you do that. And if I could do it when I was having my writing directly attacked by people screaming about what a bitch I was? The writer who flipped their lid at you could do the same thing. Even if you used the word stupid.

If people are up for it, do we want to decide on a setting and have me and Myiege do a test run as Primary Mod and Secondary Mod? And if the answer is yes, then I reckon it's time to work on gathering together what ideas people have, pick one Myiege and I agree we think we can run, and then start looking into a subforum. Edited: Oh, and start proposing rules and guidelines for things like character creation - maybe something to do with having points you buy character stuff with? Like, every character starts with thirty points and, say, 5 points in combat/looks/intelligence/etc, then they spend points to raise any of those. So nobody can declare that their character is a supermodel ninja genius. (That's only a rough idea of course, and it would be a very simple system because this isn't fricking GURPS.)

If people are interested, I'd also be happy to take the dead boring job of having no characters and telling everyone they can't do the fun thing. So long as it came with someone to help me keep track of everything, of course. (I know what you mean about GMPCs, Martin - there's just something about them which turns good players into insane GMs! )

If he was interested in setting up an RPG back then, maybe he'd be interested in coming on board now? The more people involved, the better the chance of getting it off the ground (I want to check out the posts, but I can't for the life of me find them. How does I internets again? )

I'd be keen on joining in on something like this, whether as an organiser or a player. An RPG to sink my teeth into sounds just the thing right now! I do figure it's probably best to keep the GM and players separate, though - the job of the GM is to run plots and NPCs (Non-Player Characters) for the players, so they need to be kept out of the line of temptation, so to speak. Having your own character in the mix makes you a little too unobjective about how you decide things go, or what cool stuff goes to which player/character. What kind of setting sounds interesting to folks? An entirely invented world, one based off something pre-existing - say, the Fallout setting or Dragon Age's or something - or a mixture of both? Fantasy? Sci-fi? Pirates? Or just good, old-fashioned mundane modern day? (I vote sci-fi pirates. Because come on, it's pirates in space. Arr, splice the quantum core! )