Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[henri bemis]

Having dummy accounts for games would be really interesting, but it would probably be a pain in the ass for the admins, who'd need, at least (assuming no shenanigans, and we all know that everyone on the internet never gets up to shenanigans, right?) to follow the games and delete the dummy accounts when they're over.  Otherwise, I'd have 8 accounts by now.

*tackles*

woo, neko-hugs!

@Linds, maybe I will possess YOU, MWA HAHAHAHA!
@TheEvilDog - I know he's trying to murder me, but that gif is so adorable.  omg.

[de_la_Nae]

I started in a few ago.

[Loki]

I started in Mafia... 5, I think.

[J]

i started with 1, and i sat out 4 & 5.

[pwhodges]

I like the dummy account idea, although  I think there would have to be some sort of safeguard in place to prevent people from commenting in other threads from their dummy account, and to prevent people from commenting in thread from their real account.

Would it be possible to make all threads in one account subject to a neutral mod's approval? it might make the flow of the game a little weird though.

Obviously it's not practical to stop people using their real accounts to comment somewhere else, both on the game and on their game character (otherwise they couldn't use the forum at all).

I could make a mafia/game subforum, in which only the designated dummy accounts (and the GM) could post, and the GM could PM the appropriate logins to the users; I could make those users subject to post moderation (i.e. the posts don't appear until approved by a mod), and make the GM a local mod for the mafia/game forum - but I think that would slow the games down too much.

[TheEvilDog]

Personally, I'm against creating dummy accounts, for a number of reasons, mainly that it involves a lot of work and management for what is simply a game.

I'm still pitching that idea that we assign people character roles at the start of the game as well as their game roles, for two reasons: it helps people get into character and less prone to breaking character and secondly it helps break the mentality of what happened in previous games.

[J]

personally, i like things the way they are just fine.

[mtmerrick]

I think people should be able to make up their own characters, not have a pre-made one handed to them...

[Method of Madness]

Why?

[Loki]

I think mtmerrick means the "role background", not the "ability roles". For example, one might want to choose to be a smith in a village and behave accordingly (role background), but be, in fact, the Protector ability role as determined by GM.

[Method of Madness]

I know, I don't think it would be bad if every person was given a role background (open to interpretation, of course).

[mtmerrick]

Character ≠ role ≠ in-game profession

[Method of Madness]

Well, fine. So the GM assigns the role and in-game profession (which is what I think TED meant by "character role"), and people build their character accordingly.

[mtmerrick]

Ok, that sounds good to me.

I've seen quite a few mafia games where the DM assigns/takes over all 3, and that takes all the fun out of the game.

[TheEvilDog]

Exactly. You get assigned a role to play, and a profession, as opposed to "Villager". After that is up to the players.
Mtmerrick, I've run more than a few games and have long learned that the GM is only there to help the story along and if needs be, arbitrate the rules. There are two rules I have - One: make sure the players have fun. Two: Never railroad the players, fastest way to lose their interest.

[Zingoleb]

personally, I was having fun vriska-ing it up. until i got killed for it.

8astards.












































































































































































 
 





























































































































 

[mtmerrick]

you are quickly becoming the most entertaining person (IMHO) on the forum, uni

[Method of Madness]

If you had fun with your character, that's good. If the character's actions led to the character being killed by the other ones...isn't that how it's supposed to be? Unless I'm not understanding something.

[jwhouk]

I think I figured out why I don't care for these types of games (at least from a participation standpoint):

1. I'm a lousy liar.
2. I hated the game Traveller.
3. There is, as we've seen already, carryover from one game to the next.

[Method of Madness]

#3 doesn't affect you if it's your first game, since nobody has anything for or against you, and you have nothing for or against anyone else. Also, it seems that the carryover only affects it in the beginning, when you pretty much have nothing to go on, so the carryover isn't particularly worse than closing your eyes and pointing, and probably about as effective.

[henri bemis]

Speaking just as an outsider now (BECAUSE SOMEONE TORE MY HEART OUT!), and because this seems to be a new trend:  I don't really like the idea of players just posting their role PMs. That's just metagaming.

Also, I know it will be awhile, but I think I'd actually like to GM a game.  I've got a theme in mind that I think/hope could be really fun.  One of the characters will definitely have a bowel disruptor.

[de_la_Nae]

YESSSSSSSSSSS

[Zingoleb]

I've worked out the details of how I want to run my game. :3 ...I'm going to need at least fifteen people to sign up, though.

[mtmerrick]

Heh, count me in. With you in charge its bound to be one hell of a laugh.

[Zingoleb]

no merrick

[Zingoleb]

there will be fire

[Method of Madness]

Fire? I'm in.

[Zingoleb]

there will be blood

[Method of Madness]

DRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAINAGE

[mtmerrick]

Fire? But.... You're am electric type!

[Zingoleb]

I have no idea what you could possibly be talking about.

[Method of Madness]

Me?

[pwhodges]

there will be blood

There's always blood.

[J]

Also, it seems that the carryover only affects it in the beginning, when you pretty much have nothing to go on, so the carryover isn't particularly worse than closing your eyes and pointing, and probably about as effective.

pretty much this. while i can't speak for anyone else, for me capitalizing on someone's name or calling back to a previous game is really just a way of making an otherwise arbitrary pick more interesting.


i think part of the difference we're having here is that some of us are more interested in the role playing aspect of this, while others are more interested in the game side of things.

[Method of Madness]

Which is fine as long one side doesn't start insisting the other is "wrong".

[ackblom12]

i think part of the difference we're having here is that some of us are more interested in the role playing aspect of this, while others are more interested in the game side of things.

That is forever the conflict in tabletop rpgs.

[TheEvilDog]

there will be blood

Ah, but will there be Daniel Day Lewis?

[Zingoleb]

nah, fuck em

[mtmerrick]

Ok, so in the forum shipfic, Garand dumps Uni because she's been sleeping with Daniel Day Lewis....

[nekowafer]

no no no in forum shipfic I jump Unicorn's bones

[Zingoleb]

fic?

[nekowafer]

no no no in real life I jump Unicorn's bones

[mtmerrick]

So what you're telling me is that Uni really likes sleeping around.

[Zingoleb]

No.

[Method of Madness]

She'll sleep when she's dead.

(click to show/hide)

Oh wait. 

[TheEvilDog]

Nah, Nekowafer was just saying that they macerated Unicorn's body and left the skeleton behind to be jumped. Little known fact, Unicorn is actually an animated skeleton.

[mtmerrick]

ok, so an UNDEAD unicorn. got it.

[TheEvilDog]

No, animated skeleton.

Big difference.

[Method of Madness]

So it was never alive or dead?

[Loki]

I assume one is a construct akin to a golem, while the other is animated and possesses free will?