Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread
And as far as you go, Host, you've won the debate, congratulations.
Understood. If, for any reason, you want to argue anything in relation to our debate at a future point, RJ, I would ask that you do so through PMs, to not clutter the thread with a debate that is finished (and is thusly no longer on topic). Alright, now, I feel that I should state this, or someone’s definitely going to call me a hypocrite. Debates, arguments, whatever you want to call them, are about one point of view against another. Thusly, while I may have ‘won’ the debate through RJ surrendering, which
is something I’m happy about, it’s not the important thing. As much as I enjoy winning, it’s the informing people about things part that I really debate for – and currently, RJ’s point of view is the last one on the board; even if he isn’t arguing anymore, as far as an observer would be concerned, his posts are the ones that haven’t been refuted – the ones that look right. (Yes, some of RJ’s points have been refuted, but not all of them, and not all in the same way that I would.)
Now, since I consider RJ’s points to be wrong, this basically means that my purpose in being in the debate – to determine what is correct and tell that to any who may be listening – is currently unfulfilled. (If I didn’t think the other side’s posts were wrong, why would I be debating? I mean, you can do it for fun, but I don’t have the time to do it if I’m not serious.) It is for this reason that I am going to go over RJ’s final posts, despite him no longer trying to go against my points.
RJ, first post.
This was an unexpected thing I didn't think you would bring up, as my statement about my thoughts on a template in general were not directed at you, much rather, a statement of a fact. One that I should have made earlier, before I shook my head at the first suggestion of a template from Janna. That was merely a follow up for the actual argument, which was my dislike for the lack of customization room available in the first suggestion about templates. And unfortunately for the amount of time you took to write that part of your post up, your calling of irrelevance, is irrelevant, as you seem to think my opinion would only reach to you.
I understood this while I was reading the post, the thing was, you added your mention of how you ‘didn’t mind templates’, in the middle of a paragraph made to refute my first point - entirely the wrong place for such, and so, I decided to play it for all it was worth, by assuming it to be part of your argument. It was a rather tricky play by me, and you did well to refute it last time, but now you’re in a corner; there’s not much you can say to justify putting it in the middle of a paragraph about my stuff when you’ve already said that it had nothing to do with me.
Let's look at my first complaints, shall we?
Templates, I think are better if the characters and their respective backgrounds themselves are part of the template, else, you'll be making a character that suits you, similar to the way Shiva suits me, and you'll be forced to pick from a list of templates, which, in all likelihood, won't suit the character you want at all. If I was going to join a game with templates laid out, made to prevent min-maxing, then I'd much rather have the character story, and background laid out as well. Else, I'd find that by not being able to make the character I want, skills, habits, pros-cons, and traits included, very difficult to actually think of a character description, and background that was at least semi-interesting, or added depth to the character in one case or another.
This is still what I stand by. Templates, "do" prevent pure customization, and if the certain RP, Janna's idea being the case, calls for it, it's a fate that cannot be avoided. And even though I don't like it, I'm not against it. You can mix and match these meanings however you wish to help your argument, but if you look more closely, which I'm sure you must have, given the length of time it took you to respond to this, you would have seen, was that I clearly show disliked for the idea, and still do. However, that doesn't mean I won't join Janna's RP when it comes out, which would be what someone who was, "against" templates would do. Much like Wallpaper, who was "against" animal sex, and quit AWMBI. There's a difference between the meanings, that I think you should clear up.
Points:
1. You’re correct that there’s a meaning I need to clear up, but it’s for you, and it’s the meaning of the word against. Despite what you apparently think, ‘against’ doesn't necessarily mean 'hate to the point of boycotting'. Someone can be against having something they prefer less for dinner than something they prefer more. Doesn't mean they won't eat the less preferred food when given to them. That is to say, ‘I don’t like it’ and ‘I am against it’ DO have the same meaning. Further more, this means that the idea 'I am not against templates at all' has the same meaning as 'I don't have any dislike for templates'. I'm willing to believe that you simply didn't understand what you were saying, and not just lying outright.
2. Did I just hear 'Templates, "do" prevent pure customization'? RJ, could you be
learning?
Having played in Icelus' game, using Janna's system, and having seen Janna spinning out examples of templates using that very same system, 10 points of character development already has a clear definition.
Now, when did I say that the value of 10 points wasn't defined? I said you didn't have any knowledge. Granted, to be technical I should have said 'you don't have any practical knowledge', because, like me, you've only read the rules (and created one sheet, which wasn't relevant to the current setup). As I said before, tests need to be run to prove definitely whether 20-20 is better or 30-10 is better (and more to the point, what they’re better
at). Now, I hardly have the time, but if someone else were willing, that would be most helpful...
Are you suggesting, that because your idea hardly makes for any real difference between character's abilities, that we should, "pretend," they're different?
My god! He IS learning!
(Example with Eric and Juli)
...Alright, maybe not. You remember that part where I told you that imagination would solve this? I'm going to assume that Eric is supposed to be a strongman character, while Juli is supposed to be agile. Watch, as I use my mystical powers of imagination to do what a competent GM would do...
"Juli tries to open the door." (fails)
"Juli manages to get it a little way but can't get it far enough open to walk through, or lock into place."
"Eric tries to open the door." (succeeds)
"Eric pulls the doors open."
Then with the ‘crate’, that I’ve made a tank, as that makes more sense:
"Eric tries to pick up the tank." (fails) (Now, watch this next part, where the GM knows that Eric is supposed to be strong and gives him a reason for failing.)
"Eric can't get a grip on the tank properly and can't pick it up."
"Juli tries to pick up the tank." (succeeds) (And watch again as the GM continues to RP properly.)
"Juli's lither fingers find handholds on the tank and hoists it with some effort."
And how, exactly, is this occurrence with templates any different from the same occurrence with two characters with equal stat points in some other Roleplay? Like, say, Luna and Iris from AWMBI, who both have equal strength stats – yet Luna is still thought of as more powerful than Iris, and not because of anything that’s happened to do with stats; hell, Iris beat Luna early on… in fact, little has happened with Luna and stats at all, she just ignores them to a degree and acts baddass, and then when it gets to fighting, she only does reasonably, not spectacular like one would expect.
Let me ask you something, are you lazy? Because you've used this argument before, and I think you're just running out of material.
You misunderstand, I wasn't making an argument. I was taking a jab at one of the multiple times you said something redundant. The mid-part was me saying that yes, I was arguing what I said I was arguing, and the last line was the exact same thing you wrote – only switched to my viewpoint.
As well as add to it, people who try to make OP character sheets, are normally bad role players, and shouldn't be role playing in the first place.
Except that a lot of the time, that’s wrong. I, myself, tend to make OP characters - in fact my SBS character was rejected for being too OP, something I'm working on fixing – because it's the characters with interesting backgrounds and stories that people RP as BEST. Someone will do substantially better RPing a favorite character than they will in any other role (– and favorite characters are almost always OP, because OP characters are interesting and what people wish they were –) and this includes people who are good at RPing. If I were to tell you to join an RP, you'd want to use Shiva or someone similar, right? And so you'd stat up your character and find that you had enough points to make her the way you wanted, and then sent her to the GM... Only to get back, 'too OP, make another', which wouldn't put you off playing
at all. (Sarcasm, by the way.)
While personally, and I realize now, based on your argument, that this is hard for you, that you find it hard, just to say NO to people who attempt OP character sheets. It's not hard, even a nice guy like you could do it, you just have to do it politely, and tell them to revise it, or not participate in the game altogether.
You're right, it is hard for me to do that... and you're also right that it isn't hard at all. More than that, it's actually
tempting to just say 'No, you can't use that character.' - after all, you're the GM and you don't want your game messed up. It's also tempting to let the players beat the monster, just because that's what the players should do; loosing would be wrong, despite what the rules say - and you're GM, I can change things to be the way they should be. It's certainly tempting to just ignore the rules completely sometimes, and go with what you feel is right - after all, you're the GM, all powerful and all knowing. And man, I'd really have to be lying through my teeth to say that rigging the rolls of players you don't like isn't
tempting - and you are, after all,
God, whom all shall bow before!
There are many words for people that don't follow their own rules; hypocrite and corrupt, for instance. But, as I will admit that the above stuff is sensationalist, the most relevant thing to call someone that doesn't follow their own rules is
untrustworthy. People don’t like an untrustworthy GM in general; but since almost all GMs are corrupt in this manner, and also since it’s not easy to find an RP that’s good, people go with the best GM they can get in the circumstances. Rather like politicians, really. (Oh damn, I didn’t see that last bit coming… That parallel came from completely out of
nowhere!)
Template's shouldn't have the responsibility of preventing OP or weak characters, that's the GM's job, making your point about the purpose of templates, irrelevant,
It is the job of the system to prevent OP or weak characters. It is the job of the GM to enforce the rules.
what the GM says, goes, and he/she damn sure wouldn't need a template to help enforce that rule.
UN... LIMITED... POWERRR!! Or, alternately,
I AM BECOME DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS!
So did you, fellow partner in crime.
*High fives* I'd really have to worry if you hadn't refuted that one.
If someone is not willing to go through that, then they wouldn't be willing to write very detailed, and enthusiastic material for a role play.
Now that's funny... I thought we were talking about how to make players enjoy their experience, not how much annoyance they could take before quitting. Sure, people can go through that, it doesn't mean they'll enjoy doing it. It’s far better if they don’t have to do that. Seems to me you're not thinking of the players’ enjoyment, RJ. =/
And, because I have a feeling I know what your argument would have been; there is no reason to assume that, just because the hazing ritual that is character creation is removed, all the people who can’t RP worth a damn will start pouring in. Hell, AWMBI is a good indicator that character creation doesn’t stop them in the least (zing!). If anything, character stat-ing wears people out, takes them out of thinking about their character and into thinking about their stats, and generally makes them less likely to RP well.
I will, and I'd like for you to tell me when you've made it, just to see how versatile you could make it. But let me say this, if it's anything like what I saw, then the most depth you'll see is a good five sentences, from a really talented role player.
I'm pretty sure it won't be anything like what’s come before. No one has actually tried adding proper plotlines to the system before, and plus, I'm using a modified version. Although I am keeping the templates.
Nor does having a character that you made up off the top of your head, just to make a background to fit the template, and end up making dull, and uninteresting posts, and do you know why? Because it's not their character, that they made, it's mostly yours. And there's no connection to be made, when it's not your own creation.
Again there are multiple points:
1. All, or, at least, almost all preexisting characters that are not OP or weak will be able to fit into templates. If they can't the templates are being done horribly, horribly wrong. I'm not even going to bother trying to go into detail on this one, it should really be obvious.
2. The poor RPing caused by making a new character fit a template is the exact same as the poor RPing caused by making a new character for a point buy system. In both cases, the poor RPing comes from needing a character that isn't OP or weak and also fits with the plot; the character means little to the person and they wouldn’t want to use much effort with it.
I believe that Janna's mention of her reason for the templates is due to her story, and not because you have a problem with people making OP characters. The world does not revolve around you, I'm afraid.
That's an unusual argument to make. How can I be doing this for anything close to a personal reason when I don't even plan on playing the game, templates or no? (I just don't have the time, and there are a good three other games already in my lineup to join, you see. Maybe when I'm done with those.) Not to mention, I think allowing OP and weak characters is interesting and have nothing inherently against it; it allows for the possibility of some very enjoyable events, like one weak character killing an OP one through the blessing of the dice gods, or the skillful playing of the player. Thing is,
Janna asked for help on getting rid of OP characters, and so that's what I'm arguing for.
Okay, we'll go with your logic, I'll pretend I made this character, strong, and powerful, yet not smart at all in class. But, oh no! Janna, in her role play, decided to involve a puzzle! And once he makes his roll, given how many points I put into his Mentality, and Smart stats and traits respectively, he beats the puzzle with ease, and could do it, over, and over, and over again with little trouble.
Does that make sense?
...You've never heard of idiot savants, have you? ...Or, for that matter, luck. Lets say you did put your footballer in a techie class. He is a strong person, not smart, and average of spirit. Lets say you don't even want to be rational about it, and give him no justification even though you could. (For instance: He was a good footballer, did serious damage to his spine and cracked his head in a game, and then suddenly found himself able to solve problems really easily - an unusual form of helpful brain damage, but not impossible, and certainly amusing enough that it would probably be allowed anyway.) But his stats say Weak, Smart, Average. (Obviously I'll be ignoring the last one because it actually matches.) He enters the game, and the GM, being smart and capable, has him step on a mirror and shatter it. Now when he fails so much at trying physical things, the GM has an excuse; bad luck. As for why he's so smart? Turns out, like I wrote in that first sentence way up there, that his mind, while not all that good personality wise, is able to decipher a problem just by looking at it.
And hell, now that I've thought about it, why are you actually supporting 10 points at all? I'm surprised, based on your argument, not to mention your very obvious love for Slave Hunt, and RK's method for character development, you actually said you're leaning towards the 10 points, rather than what you said before,
Also, The more complete templates are better, in my opinion.
Points:
1. There is a lot of customization in SH, it's just not in character points. It's number of races x number of classes x number of possible combinations of traits, disadvantages and backgrounds, which I'm not even going to begin trying to determine, especially since RK keeps changing the number of races and things (really doesn't make it easy). Remember, the backgrounds and traits/penalties are part of customization too. SH may actually have about the same amount of customization as the 30-10 option of this system looks like it will.
2. Wow, RJ, that was a sweet play. Take my quote out of it's initial context and it really looks like I was trying to go for utterly no customization, instead of just choosing the more complete of the two offered to me. Pretty much all the rest of my 'praise' in this post will likely be the sarcastic kind, but when I say I bow for you now, I mean it truthfully. *bows* ...Of course, I am forced to refute this; characters really should have at least some customization. It may be possible to play with everyone having the same stats... that doesn't mean it's easy on the GM. (...Although, I suppose, since there couldn't possibly be OP or weak characters, that it would be easier in that regard... still, that's going beyond the scope of what I'll suggest.)
Sure, (two characters with equal amounts of the same stat may) not (be) exactly the same, but one has to be better than the other. How would I know that? Would it just be some constant battle, going back and forth? Wouldn't that suggest that they really are the same? Making your argument void?
1.
Sure, they're not exactly the same, but one has to be better than the other. How would I know that?
Player 1: Hay GM, I'm making a marine who's muscular.
Player 2: Hay GM, I'm making a marine who's athletic.
GM: OHHH GOOD NOOOOO HOW AM I SUPOSED TO TELL WHICH ONE HAS THE GREATER PHYSICAL STRENGTH?!? WEEP! WAIL!
2. How would you know that Luna is better than Iris, or any other character with equal points in one stat to another? Again, this is not something only applicable to templates. But to answer your actual question, a back and forth battle would imply that they're close in ability, but by no means equal - you can have a back and forth battle between two people who're one point apart, and I don't see you calling them clones of each other. They may not even be close in the same manner of the stat; to use arm wrestling, they may be pushing the others' arm, locking their own in place to stop from being moved, or, hell, getting lucky and having their opponent's arm slip off the table (because there really isn’t many ways for dexterity to factor into arm wrestling).
other than how they act, it'd be hard not to call them, "Generic foot solders," or "clones", because there's no way to be able to tell them apart, based on their skills, and abilities.
Unusual that you would argue for me, but I agree - if characters didn't have distinct personalities, there'd be almost no way to tell them apart, with little regard to what their stats are. Good thing characters have personalities, then.
Well, that was fun! And once again, I look forward to your next attack. Do try to make it before Thursday, though, I might have some internet downtime, and will be unable to grace you with a reply after that time.
Host always works at his own pace, and chronically ignores deadlines.
I've had to split this into two posts. O_O