#to quote my gm | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

dimiclaudeblaigan · 8 months

Text

uh-oh she's gushing about shinon again and it's super long

So you guys know I love Shinaff. BUT!!! I would like to explain to you part of how that came to be, i.e. how Janaff's supports with Shinon were both different and important!!! In other words, a direct exploration of his development involving laguz and how he's turning out for the better post Janaff A support and RD (and how it makes the most sense to have their A support slotted between the beginning of PoR and the end of RD for a full progression of his development)!

First of all, Shinon only has three supports; so unlike most characters, every line counts and needs to hold more weight to his conversations.

Rolf and Gatrie's supports portray different sides of him: the mentor and the friend. What we see in these supports is stuff we essentially already knew about him, but we're given more depth. The thing to note here is, again, we already knew these things about him. This is the man we started with.

What we don't get in these supports is proper development. Janaff is the only support he has that gives him that. Janaff's supports with him are the only ones that gives him any self reflection and improvement. This isn't necessarily a bad thing for the other supports, but it's more that it props up these ones a little bit more.

Also, when you get to RD, Shinon comes off as though he's already gotten this development. He feels like he's grown as a person. While that makes sense, from a player's perspective, we didn't really see that development in him (like we would have with characters like Ike, Mist, Soren, etc)... unless you supported him with Janaff.

In RD, Shinon has Gatrie and Rolf as bonded by defaults. These are basically internal bonds in RD - ones that aren't needed by supports. You can carry over support data from PoR to RD, and characters will receive a bond with the character they A supported. For some, like Ranulf and Ike, these bonds will be there regardless of if they got an A support.

That means that even without supporting them in PoR, Shinon will bonded to these two by default. Janaff is his only other support, so if they reach an A support and that data is carried over to RD, he now has his full list of supports bonded to him. Mind you, that's a liiittle bit of a big deal (and kinda cool to me!) as nobody else can do that (or almost nobody, since I'm not totally positive what Stefan and Volke's situations are and would have to check on that in my game, as the only other characters with an extremely low amount of supports).

So why do I say that's important? Because the only character he won't have by default as a bond is Janaff. You have to go out of your way to get their support bond (and when I say out of your way, I mean it pretty literally if you don't normally use one or both of them, due to how PoR's support system works). Janaff is the only character Shinon has to build up a bond with from scratch, which is something the player has to decide to do.

Gatrie and Rolf are the base - the bare minimum. It's given to you, no questions asked. Shinon doesn't have to develop as a person to have those bonds. When Janaff arrives in 3-7, if they were A supported in PoR (and your data was carried over), he and Shinon automatically have their bond show up in the bond list on each of their profiles as of the turn Janaff is on the map. This also means they can get a double A support, which is, again, something Shinon has very few options for.

Without Janaff, Shinon doesn't get that extremely direct development. In RD it's assumed all the characters had development of some sort (example, Shinon is much more chilled out and takes a much more active role in watching out for the GMs and making sure they're properly funded). However, with the way Shinon's development toward laguz went, you'd think something must have happened for him to change his mind.

However, it's an uncontestable fact that Ike stated everyone in the GMs decided to stay knowing full well they'd be fighting for the Laguz Alliance:

"I told the others they could leave if they didn’t want to work with laguz, but everybody decided they’d rather stay. Don’t worry about it, Ranulf."

If they didn't want to work with laguz (Shinon and Soren would be the primary candidates he brought this up for), they didn't have to go. They didn't have to take part. They didn't have to be there. Shinon decided to stay despite fully aware they would be the only beorc there. That's development already... but if he supported Janaff, it starts to make more sense and feels like a proper linear path for his development.

"But DCB, he was racist toward Lyre!" Sure! He's not perfect and there's still room for growth. In fact, Shinon started out calling her a sub-human but referred to her as a laguz when Gatrie was the only one left to hear him, so he either:

is trying to keep up appearances in front of laguz he doesn't like, using sub-human to their face but not using that term in private anymore (or to laguz he doesn't hate, i.e. Janaff in their A support where he catches himself about to use that term. Though he wasn't quite ready to say "laguz" yet, he stopped himself from using "you sub-humans" and instead said "you guys").

slipped up in using sub-human (from habit*) and called her a laguz when speaking to Gatrie because he's becoming more used to using that term regularly. That is to say, it's becoming more natural for him to say.

If you got his A support with Janaff, it makes sense that he slips up sometimes still but is trying to speak more properly about laguz. Getting out of old habits is hard. Feeling differently about something you've had a steady mindset for (in his case for 27 years as per his support with Janaff) is hard. There will be slip ups.

*It's possible Shinon uses "sub-human" as an insult aimed at individuals he doesn't like while not meaning it toward others (i.e. he doesn't like Kyza and Lyre). Yes, this is a big flaw! He could very well be using a racist term to express distaste toward someone specific but not mean it toward the whole of laguz. It's still racist and shouldn't be done, but the fact that he turned around and said "laguz" only a couple sentences later (if that) means that something is kicking in and some gears are turning.

Again, if you look at his A support with Janaff, he wasn't even at the point of using "laguz" at all! If you consider their A support part of his linear development, he starts as he is in PoR, supports Janaff and goes through their conversations while seeing laguz differently now, and ultimately ends at respecting Janaff. Despite this, he's not ready to use "laguz" yet because he experiences with laguz to date, prior to Janaff, had all been presumably negative enough for him to develop this racist mindset.

Linearly, that brings us to RD. He's suddenly fine staying with the GMs and fighting a war on behalf of the Laguz Alliance, even when he was directly given an out. Next, we have him refer to a laguz as a laguz - something he wasn't able to do yet in PoR.

Does the linear progression stop there? Not if you supported Janaff! Following those things, again, when Janaff arrives in 3-7, their bond will show up in their profiles. These bonds are separate from RD support bonds in that they're basically saying these characters were bonded before the events of RD and thus have special bonuses near each other, regardless of if you support them in RD.

So where does this lead us? Well, like in PoR, we start to lose focus on the GMs as a whole and only end up with focus on a few of them. Our next line of progression can only come from supports again. These are notable and extremely important if he's supported with a laguz.

If it's Janaff you support him with in RD, he gets one of his standard support quotes in battle. Maybe you're thinking that sounds unimpressive and unimportant... but this means he's responding to Janaff as someone he's familiar with and not treating differently from the others (which is not the case when responding to several others, which I'll get to). Normally you'd expect him to treat a laguz differently, but he speaks with Janaff like he would to any beorc.

It gives off an air of familiarity - like they already know each other, are passed all that nonsense and aren't even thinking about it anymore. This is, of course, the case regardless of if you supported them in PoR (but again, I find their PoR supports to be important in terms of a proper, full linear progression of Shinon's development, which is something not every character actually even gets, i.e. they don't get a fully fleshed out and ongoing development story between both games if they're not a main character).

It's almost like it's considering that you may have gotten their PoR supports. It has to leave it up in the air as to whether or not you did, because it'd be odd if he was suddenly treating Janaff like they weren't as familiar with each other after getting their PoR supports. In other words, by default, their relationship in RD is not as bad as it starts in PoR in their C support. It feels like they've already supported and are closer now to be at this point.

So why is it important that he acts no different with Janaff than anyone else? Because he does act different near laguz kings. He's given special, personalized lines to the laguz kings and refers to them sincerely as laguz. Important to note is that the laguz kings only become playable in part four (Tibarn and Naesala) and Endgame (Caineghis).

These are characters he would have absolutely no chance at having any development with in either game prior (even if you consider time spent in PoR, Tibarn and Naesala are not playable until the final chapter and you can only pick one of them. Caineghis, plain and simple, is not even an option). That means his supports with them are the very beginning of their relationship.

This is by part four. There's been development since part three in his character that we don't see. He's now openly referring to them as only "laguz" (remember, he was back and forth earlier in RD). He treats them with respect.

"But DCB, of course he does! They're kings! They're powerful!" But the Shinon we started out with in PoR wouldn't have cared less. To him back then a sub-human was a sub-human. Even as allies, he wouldn't have respected them (re: his C support with Janaff). Instead, here, in RD with these supports, he can talk with laguz directly, refer to them as such, and give them respect.

He also doesn't start out being intentionally racist toward them. He's at the point, by the time he can support the laguz kings, where he skips right past the active "sub-human" bullshit.

What do I mean by that? Well... I mean with Tibarn, he almost says sub-human but catches himself and doesn't just say "you guys" like he did with Janaff in their A support (which came before his C support with Tibarn if you consider his development linear and including Janaff). He corrects himself, and instead uses "a king" - similar to his "you guys" pull back, but outright referring to him as a king is actually a step above that (and again, this is their C support).

King Tibarn. It seems like a sub-hu– I mean–a king such as yourself can hold your own.

He's learning! He's growing! He's maturing! He's realizing he can get out of that mindset! All his experiences prior to PoR, based on his supports with Janaff, would imply he's only ever known that he has to protect himself against them. He never got to actually meet one. When he did, it was hard to pull himself out of old habits for new experiences. He was trying for Janaff, but he wasn't quite there yet. Here, he does something very similar.

With the other kings, he just outright refers to them as kings with no stumbles.

Hey, Lion King! Of anybody here, it seems like you’d be just fine.

Raven King, you seem all right. No need to be babied, I hope.

Mind you, the latter is pretty standard Shinon in personality. It's unrelated to Naesala being a laguz. However, both are these are completely respectful as a person talking to another person.

For his B supports we have:

I thought you were the all-conquering King Caineghis! And yet, you mess up. Bizarre. You better stay by me.

Hawk King, whew, even you mess up sometimes. Kinda makes me nervous. You better stay by me.

Raven King–your fighting? Not good. Just…stay by me and let me handle this.

Bizarre, he says, that one of the strongest people he knows is having trouble. He's actually surprised. No comment about how sub-humans suck or anything, not here!

Similarly, even Tibarn messes up sometimes. He's surprised. He expects basically perfectly from Tibarn (so this presumes he has positive expectations of him from what he knows of Tibarn).

Naesala's fighting isn't good? Well what does PoR Shinon care! Let him die! But that's not RD Shinon (and remember, these quotes could've been anything else considering he got specifically personalized quotes with these three, and personalized quotes for RD supports are somewhat few and tend to be for specific pairs).

Stay by me, he says! The same things he'll say to anyone! To any beorc and to any laguz. Again, personalized quotes did exist and they were there for certain pairs. Those pairs got special quotes specifically for their relationship). He didn't avoid saying "stay by me" just because they were laguz.

Mind you, his support quotes with these three are much more respectful than usual Shinon. He's very, uh, hilariously Shinon (there is a word for this, however at this time I cannot think of it 😔. I am not thinking of sarcastic, I am thinking of... something else. Granted, these lines are directed to Reyson and Rafiel, who technically can't fight... so I'll give him a break on that one) in most of his quotes, and some don't sound particularly respectful ("Prince ___, it’s really hard to watch you fight. Why don’t you stay by me and let me handle this?").

Now for the A supports (and BOY HOWDY I'M EATIN' GOOD HERE)...

You know, I’m not one for making friends and being nice. But, Caineghis, I gotta say, you are one bad laguz. In a good way! Hang in there.

I gotta admit… I didn’t like you when I first met you. But, Prince ___, I hope you make it through all this. I was wrong about you.

You know, I really don’t care who lives and who dies. But, Hawk King, for a laguz– hey, for anyone–you seem pretty decent. I hope you make it.

You know, I never thought I’d say this, but… King ___, I’m thinkin’ you should live. Don’t ask me why! Just a crazy notion. Maybe I like you?

Not one for making friends and being nice in general, with beorc, but he's befriending a laguz? Well now! What would PoR Shinon pre-Janaff say!

If you need me to explain the lines to Reyson and Rafiel to you, I have no hope for you at this point. If you can't read "I was wrong about you" and understand what that means, you might need to go back to school. In fact you definitely do.

For a laguz - no, scratch that because that doesn't fucking matter anymore - for anyone - you seem pretty decent (<-- this is the way Shinon talks to everyone).

Maybe he likes Naesala? Maybe they're friends? Maybe he just admitted he's fond of a laguz? Maybe he just said he likes a laguz??? Gosh jolly, early PoR Shinon is rolling in his grave!

So uhhh, what does this have to do with Janaff? Well, like I said, I feel like their supports slot perfectly into Shinon's development that's going to exist anyway. It's like the middle part of it that you get to see but also may miss out on. It's like jumping from PoR to RD and wondering what on earth happened in between to bring Shinon to that point... and if you consider his A support with Janaff, it makes sense that that's what happened. It fills that gap, and it also slots in perfectly with where he is in his development as a character between two games.

Timeline:

PoR start - Shinon hates laguz. He seems to hate them for reasons unknown. Greil dies; Shinon leaves. Chapter 18 is reached and Shinon is recruited back into the GMs. Despite that the GMs are now working with the Crimean army which has actively allied itself with the beast and bird tribes, Shinon whatevers his way through that fact and rejoins. He'll tolerate, he guesses. Fam is here.

Cue Janaff supports. New birb, who dis, except he's rude! Yes folks, it was Janaff who was rude first (his lines were also very Janaff... who is very like Shinon, so it makes sense that would get a negative reaction from Shinon even if he was a beorc). Shinon is set off and now thinks he was right to hate laguz. Look at this annoying birb face and his dumb lil hat!!! Better threaten to kill him just to be safe...

B support, they're having a conversation and learning from each other because Janaff came over to apologize. He knows he was in the wrong to nag at Shinon just for being an unfamiliar face. Shinon is still pissy though because it's a goddamn birb with a hat!!! Their conversation is a mix of ugh fuck this annoying guy to actually talking things out... and Shinon admitting why he hates laguz - because he's always needed to protect himself from "those half breeds". Sounds like his only experiences were very negative, so he ends up racist. Well, Janaff was also racist until very recently for similar reasons, and he used to think all beorc liked to kill. He, too, had misconceptions that bred a racist hatred. Now, though, with Shinon talking to him, he's realized he was wrong about beorc and is open to seeing things differently. Shinon backtracks, realizing he's having this conversation with the birb with a hat and wonders why.

A support, they talk more and it's getting better... and Janaff not only admits to relating to Shinon - which is a nice touch because they're two sides of the same coin who are both still very much learning about each other's races - and mind you Janaff was racist at 110 years old so he's been doing this shit for a while! It was because he talked with Shinon and learned more about beorc that, on top of what Ike did for Leanne, he's being more open minded now. Janaff, understanding where Shinon is coming from (ignorance and misconceptions), is much more polite and kind to him. Shinon, in response, backtracks when he almost uses the racist term "sub-human" so as not to offend Janaff, leaves off here respecting him and, when Janaff has to leave because the support is over, calls him back because he wants to hear more about the world from him because Janaff has lived for so much longer. Maybe the birb with the hat isn't so bad at all after all!!

From here the GMs fight with laguz allies until the end of PoR. Two or three years pass idk shit's inconsistent I guess, and we get to RD.

By this point Shinon has already been in an army that allied with and fought alongside laguz, and maybe that's tempered his feelings. When given an out from joining the other GMs in their aiding of the Laguz Alliance, and as the only beorc, he chooses to stay with the group.

At this point he's back and forth with "sub-human" and "laguz". There's definitely improvement, but old habits still get out sometimes. Still though, he's progressed from "you guys" to outright using "laguz".

The laguz kings join in the fight against Ashera. Shinon can support them, getting personalized quotes specifically for them (and for the herons). With Tibarn, he catches himself and corrects what he almost said - something he did once before with Janaff as per this linear timeline. That's the only instance left of a mistake in his wording. By now he's not using "sub-human" at all (B and A support with Tibarn or C-A with Caineghis or Naesala), or he's freely and without stumbling using "laguz" with no "you guys" esque backtrack.

This is obviously only one aspect of Shinon's development, i.e. the development of him growing out of racism similar to Janaff, and there are more aspects to him that did develop and grow throughout both games, but this post was specifically to highlight the importance of having Janaff there as part of his growth. Without it, it's like a blank, empty spot in his development where you don't know how it started happening and to such a degree (how did he go from outright using sub-human to using laguz at all? It feels like there had to be something in the middle of that growth, and without Janaff's supports it's just missing.

With them though, it's quite clear how he reasonably went from sub-human to "you guys" to laguz with some slip ups (ones that he corrects himself with if he actually respects the person, in this case Tibarn. He didn't bother correcting it with Lyre and Kyza because he didn't like them, which again, is still a flaw, but that was prior to his ability to support the laguz kings. It would be more reasonable to say he's starting to grow out of using "sub-human" just to specific people as an insult by this point.

Mans ain't perfect, but he's trying and he's working on it. Why is that without Janaff involved in his development? I 'unno, I guess he just had some random offscreen development between the games. With Janaff though? It actually works, fits and makes sense. It feels like that part of his development is meant to be there, as it compliments his development going forward.

that's it that's all i had to say bye now

#Shinon #there is quoted evidence so nobody can say im just bias and making shit up 😤#anyway he's a multi faceted character AND gets development which FE does NOT usually do for non-main characters!#they especially don't usually get BOTH of those things!#Shinon's extremely lucky in that regard (especially bc not even all of the GMs were given this treatment and good fortune)#It's also very fun seeing Shinon and Janaff develop simultaneously. you get Janaff a SINGLE chapter before you can #get Shinon back (actually use him again) and the very first time you can ever use Janaff is ON the chapter Shinon returns #cooooincidence? maybe but I choose not to think so #Janaff feels so integral in Shinon's character growth in this regard #at this point my brain has cemented their supports as canon #anyway they're a great couple they never kiss and they definitely don't admit to being in love #they think y'all are delulu for thinking they're dating but actually they're the ones who are delulu #i have a do not separate policy for them in part four so shinon always ends up in the hawk army #which rly i don't need to do bc it's not like i need as many shrieks as i end up with #so really janaff doesn't HAVE to be with ulki and tibarn but it feels right #also it's like the one time i have everyone from a respective class type (archer classes) in every army #ALSO also I think it's an interesting situation to have Shinon in the final chapter before endgame 1 #maybe it would be cool to write about someday. him seeing the feral drugged laguz and how nastily mindless/cruel/violent/etc they are #compared to the people he knows and starting to realize this was how he used to see ALL laguz #and now seeing it's only these mindless drugged ones and how the people he knows are nothing like this...

8 notes · View notes

thefirstknife · 1 year

Note

Not to steer the new teaser conversation in a Negative direction, but how do you feel about the comment made by Yanes about titans and their "fantasy" that's been going around amidst the widespread disappointment with the Titan strand subclass?

Here's the article where this is mentioned!

This is what I see people spreading around:

But yeah, Titan mains, we love you. We do. But remember that we try to reinforce your core fantasy. And at some point, your guy's holding the fist on the cover of the game.

This is all the text that precedes it:

Finally there's the Titan Berserker, which excels at creating Woven Mail. Its melee ability, Frenzied Blade, can be used three times to Sever a lot of enemies quickly, and one of its Aspects generates Woven Mail for you and nearby allies whenever you destroy a Tangle. Another Aspect launches a Strand projectile from your barricade, Suspending any enemies you hit. This class sounds incredibly powerful on paper, but it's actually been a bit divisive, largely due to comparisons between its Super, Bladefury, and Titan's Stasis and Arc Supers. I put the question to Yanes, who says Bungie's aware of feedback about Titan abilities looking overly similar, but he maintains that Berserker is a whole new beast.

"Bladefury is much more about giving you the survivability tools to really lay into those guys and then giving you a range option, which is not something you generally do in these roaming Supers, to Suspend things from afar and damage them," he says. "That's their heavy attack, that double blade uppercut you see them do in the trailer. I think that's two of the core ways we've tried to shift them away.

Obviously we haven't personally tried it out and we can only judge it from what we see, but that does seem like there are significant differences. New Titan stuff seems to be not only oriented towards damage, but also debuffing enemies and helpful for allies. It also seems to be focused on speed and range, something that arc and stasis supers don't have (arc has it ... sort of, but Fists of Havoc feel fairly restrictive with how long and how far you can go around). Titan stasis also feels very heavy and slow to use, as well as being possibly disruptive to your own teammates when you spawn a million stasis crystals and obstruct the view. Strand seems to be going in several different directions which is interesting.

Is it ultimately similar? Yeah, you still get your fists engulfed and start punching. Obviously, strand has stuff that others don't, but at first glance, it's similar. This is also an issue because the last super Titans got was stasis and that's the roaming punchy super. Now we've not had anything new for 2 years and we're getting another of the same type. However, I'm not sure which other fantasy people were expecting? Like, this is a genuine question, I would love to know what other directions to take that aren't already taken. Titans have ranged supers, throw-yourself-at-enemies super, stationary protective super, roaming punch supers. They have different abilities on different subclasses with throwing things, shoulder charges and normal melees, several different barricade options and the new arc dash.

I guess people wanted strand to be that Titans will maybe throw something? If we wanted repeats, I guess people wanted something like Sunbreaker. I wouldn't mind that, but I don't mind the current Strand stuff either. At least without trying it, I can't pass judgement until I give it a shot. The only thing we can worry about immediately is this super's viability in high end content. So far, roaming supers and close range stuff in general really isn't good in GMs, though Titan strand comes with survivability options and buffs for allies so maybe that changes things.

Outside of that, we can't really tell if this will be good or bad, it's just based on vibes and people expecting things that Bungie really never told us to expect. Titan combat fantasy IS to punch things or alternatively to stand your ground. Those are the two core fantasies for Titans in battle. Strand seems to be mixing them both which is really interesting to me. We'll see how it turns out.

As a final note, I do think that stasis and strand should eventually get a second super though. Light subclasses have multiple options and that's ultimately what gives us more reasons to use them. Arc Hunter was immediately revived when we got a second option. I feel like making a second option for stasis and strand is much more important than making a billion aspects and fragments. Also, a lot of people would probably be cool with stasis and strand Titan if there was something else to pick. Having a second super to pick for different situations would really help a lot.

#destiny 2 #titan #strand #long post #ask #wanted to put the whole quote from the dev because people are copying just one sentence as usual #strand seems to be really unique with all the cc options as well as buffs for yourself and your allies #it might give this roaming melee super an edge in higher end content that others don't have #i would really love to go berserk (pun intended) on enemies in a GM with strand titan #being able to suspend enemies and wrap yourself in a buff would be really interesting #we'll have to wait and see #i would absolutely love for a ranged option as well though. just for variety's sake #stasis getting a second super is my dream #and now strand as well

22 notes · View notes

torpedopickle · 1 year

Text

I want to talk about how Dungeons and Dragons Honor Among Thieves is an excellent use of meta humor applied seamlessly to a story without ever breaking immersion.

Mild spoilers. I'll keep it vague so nothing will be spoiled if you choose to read on

This movie integrates many things that someone familiar with D&D would recognize from the narrative structure of a campaign.

There are some things in particular that demonstrate this particularly well

At one point, the party is joined temporarily by the character Xenk. But he really feels like he'd be an NPC party member controlled by the GM rather than a player. So when the other characters banter and quip, this character doesn't really join in or get their jokes cuz he simply wouldn't have the agency to. More examples of this would be how he's much more capable than the others, but he doesn't overshadow them. He provides aid if it's desperately needed, and will sometimes bail rhe party out of situations they can't manage on their own, just like how a GM should utilize an NPC companion. He even has a quote that perfectly reflects this. "I've given you the tools. Now you have to be the ones to use them". There's even a more direct joke about his NPC behavior. When he leaves the story, he walks off in a random direction, going straight forward, even stepping over obstacles and terrain unnecessarily. This all amounts to him feeling like a very clear GM controlled NPC, however he is presented in a way that still makes him feel entirely faithfull to his own world and does not break immersion

Other ways the movie plays around with the GM campaign structure would be the approach to backstory. The only time a character outright explains what their backstory is, in full, directly to us, is at the very start, to give context for the story going forward, as the character even puts it himself. Backstory later in the movie is told to us whenever it's relevant. Characters will toss in another fact or two about themselves in situations where mentioning a past experience would fit in. Much like how players usually prefer to build their characters.

And one of my favorite instances of being meta about D&D campaign structures comes in the second act.

the characters are faced with a complex and dangerous obstacle. The GM's stand in, xenk, explains the method of progressing through this obstacle correctly. But in true D&D fashion, the party immediately does it wrong and now the campaign has been derailed and the GM's setup squandered. So now they straight up don't have a way forward in the narrative. Logically, it should end there. But that'd be a shit campaign, so the GM would naturally bend the rules to get things back on track. So after the party fails the obstacle, one of them goes; "Hang on, that stick we've had with us the entire time isn't a stick after all! It's actually a magic staff that solves our EXACT predicament at this EXACT time". That is such a clear cut meta joke about GM's having to get things back on track cuz players are all chaotic evil. Is it a plot contrivance? Absolutely. One of the biggest ever. But it's what D&D is built on

#dnd #dungeons and dragons #dnd honor among thieves #honor among thieves #ramblings

2K notes · View notes

zedecksiew · 2 months

Text

(Don't) Incentivise Ethical Behaviour

In the ongoing project of rescuing useful thoughts off Xwitter, here's another hot take of mine, reheated:

"Being good for a reward isn’t being good---it’s just optimal play."

The quote comes from Luke Gearing and his excellent post "Against Incentive", to which I had been reacting.

My thread was mainly intended as a fulsome nodding along to one of Luke's points. It was posted in 2021, and extended in 2023 after Sidney Icarus posed a question to it. So it is two threads.

Here they are, properly paragraphed, hopefully more cleanly expressed:

+++

(Don't) Incentivise Ethical Behaviour

This is my main problem with mechanically rewarding pro-social play: a character's ethical choice is rendered mercenary.

As Luke Gearing puts it:

"Being good for a reward isn’t being good---it’s just optimal play."

Bear in mind that I'm not saying that pro-social play can't have rewarding outcomes for players. Any decision should have consequences in the fiction. It serves the ideal of portraying a living, world to have these consequences rendered diegetic:

The townsfolk are thankful; the goblins remember your mercy; pamphlets appear, quoting from your revolutionary speech.

What I am saying is that rewarding abstract mechanical benefits (XP tickets, metacurrency points, etc) for ethical decisions stinks.

A subtle but absolutely essential distinction, when it comes to portraying and exploring ethics / morality, in roleplaying games.

Say you reward bonus XP for sparing goblins.

Are your players making a decisions based on how much they value life / the personhood of goblins? Or are they making a decision based on how much they want XP?

Say you declare: "If you help the villagers, the party receives a +1 attitude modifier in this village."

Are your players assisting the community because it is the right thing to do, or are they playing optimally, for a +1 effect?

XP As Currency

XP is the ur-example of incentive in TTRPGs. It began with D&D's gold-for-XP, and has never strayed far from that logic.

XP is still currency. Do things the GM / game designer wants you to do? Get paid.

Players use XP to buy better mechanical tools (levels, skills, abilities)---which they can then in turn use to better perform the actions that will net them XP.

Like using gold you stole from goblins to buy a sword, so you can now rob orcs.

I genuinely feel that such systems are valuable. They are models that illuminate the drives fuelling amoral / unethical behaviour.

Material gain is the drive of land-grabbing and colonialism. Logger-barons and empires do get wealthier and more privileged, as a reward for their terrible actions.

If you want to present an ethical choice in play, congruent to our real-life dilemmas, there is value in asking:

"Hey, if you kill the goblins you can grab their treasure, and you will get richer. There's no reward for sparing their lives, except that they are thankful."

Which is another way of asking:

"Does your commitment to the ideal of preserving life outweigh the guaranteed material incentives for taking life?"

The ethical choice is the difficult choice, precisely because it involves---as it often does, in real life---sacrificing personal growth and gain. Doling out an XP bounty for doing the right thing makes the ethical choice moot.

"I as the player am making a mechanically optimal choice, but my character is making an ethical choice!"

A cop-out. Owning your cake and eating it too. The fictional fig-leaf of empathy over a calculated a decision to make profit.

Sidney Icarus asks a question which I will quote here:

"... those who hold to their beliefs of good behaviour don't feel rewarded, and therefore feel punished. And that's not a good feeling. It's an unpleasant experience to play a game where the righteous players are in rags, and the mercenary fucks have crowns and sceptres. So, what's the design opportunity? How do we make doing the right thing feel pleasant without making it mercenary? Or, like reality, do we acknowledge that ethical acts are valuable only intrinsically and philosophically? I have no idea how to reconcile this."

I would suggest that the above dichotomy---"righteous players in rags, mercs in crowns"---is true if property is recognised as the only true incentive.

Friends As Property

Modern games try to solve the righteous-players-in-rags "problem" in various ways. Virtue might not net you treasure or XP, but may give you:

Contact or ally slots, which you can fill in;

Relationship meters you can watch tick up;

Favour points you can cash in later;

etc.

How different are these mechanical incentives from treasure or XP, really?

Your relationships with supposedly living, breathing beings are transformed into abilities for your character: skills you can train; powers you can reliably proc. Pump your relationship score with the orc tribe until calling on them for reinforcements becomes a once-per-month ability.

Relationships become contracts. Regard becomes debt. Put your friend in an ally slot, so they become a tool.

If this is what you want play to be---totally fine! As stated previously, games say powerful things when they portray the engines of profit and property.

But I personally don't think game designers should design employer-employee relationships and disguise these as instances of mutual aid.

Friends As Friends

In the OSR campaigns I'm part of, I keep forgetting to record money. Which is usually a big deal in such games, seeing as they are in the grand tradition of gold-for-XP?

In both games, my characters are still 1st-Level pukes, though it's been months.

I'm having a blast, anyway.

My GMs, by virtue of running organic, reactive worlds, have made play rewarding for me. NPCs / geographies remember the party's previous actions, and respond accordingly.

I've been given gills from a river god, after constant prayer;

I've befriended a village of monsters, where we now live;

I've parleyed with the witch of a whole forest, where we may now tread;

I've a boon from the touch of wood wose, after answering his summons.

I cannot count on the wood wose showing up. He is a character in the world, not a power I control. Calling on the wood wose might become a whole adventure.

Little of this stuff is codified my stats or abilities or equipment list. They are mostly all under "misc notes".

Diegetic growth. Narrative change that spirals into more play.

This is the design opportunity, to me:

How do we shape TTRPG play culture in such a way that the "misc notes" gaps in our games are as fun as the systemised bits? What kinds of orientation tools must we provide? What should we say, in our advice sections?

A Note About Trust

The reason why it is so hard to imagine play beyond conventional incentive structures has a lot to do with trust.

Sidney again:

One of the core issues is the "low trust table". I'm not designing just for myself but for my audience. For a product. How much can I ask purchasers and their friends to codesign this part with me?

Nerds love numbers and things we can write down in inventories or slots because they are sureties. We've learned to fear fiat or player discretion, traumatised as we are by Problem GMs or That Guys.

The reason why the poverty in Sidney's hypothetical ("righteous players are in rags") sounds so bad is because in truth it represents risk at the game table. If you don't participate in the mechanics legible to your ruleset (the XP and gear to do more game things), you risk gradually being excluded from play.

You have no assurance your fellow players will know how hold space for you; be considerate; work together to portray a living world where NPCs react in meaningful ways---in ways that will be fun and rewarding for everybody playing.

You are giving up the guarantee of mechanical relevance for the possibility of fun interactions and creative social play.

The "low trust table" is learned behaviour--the cruft of gamer culture and trauma.

When I game with folks new to TTRPGs, they tend to be decent, considerate. I think there's enough anecdotal evidence from folks playing with school kids / newcomers / etc to suggest my experience is not unique.

If the "low trust table" is indeed learned behaviour, it can be unlearned.

Which rules conventions, now part of the hobby mainstream, were the result of designers designing defensively---shadowboxing against terrible players and the spectre of "unfairness"?

How can we "undesign" such conventions?

Lack of trust is a problem that we have to address in play culture, not rulesets. You cannot cook a dish so good it forces diners to have good table manners.

This is too long already. I'll end with an observation:

Elfgames are not praxis, but doesn't this specific dilemma in the microcosm of our silly elfgames ultimately mirror real-world ethics?

To be moral is to trust in a better world; to be amoral / immoral is to hedge against the guarantee of a worse one.

+++

Further Reading

Some words from around the TTRPG community about incentive and advancement in games:

However, the reason there is a big debate about this is that behavioural incentives in games clearly do work, either entirely or at various levels. This applies outside gaming, as well. Why do advertising companies and retail business use "rewards" structures to convince people to buy more of their products? Why do people chase after "Likes" on social media?

A comment by Paul_T to "A Hypothesis on Behavioral Incentives" from a discussion on Story-Games.com

the structure and symbolism of the D&D game align with certain structures and values of patriarchy. The game is designed to last infinitely by shifting goalposts of character experience in terms of increasing amounts of gold pieces acquired; this resembles the modus operandi of phallic desire which seeks out object after object (most typically, women) in order to quench a lack which always reasserts itself.

D&D's Obsession With Phallic Desire from Traverse Fantasy

In short, my feeling is that rewarding players with character improvement in return for achieving goals in a specific way impedes some of the key strengths of TTRPGs for little or no benefit in return.

Incentives from Bastionland

When good deeds arise naturally out of the players choices, especially when players rejected other options that were more beneficial to them, it is immensely satisfying. Far more than if players are just assumed to be heroic by default. It gives agency and meaning to player choice.

Make Players Choose To Be Kind from Cosmic Orrery

Much has been made about 1 GP = 1 XP as the core gameplay loop driver of TSR D+D. But XP for gold retrieved also winds up being something of a de facto capitalistic outlook as well. Success is driven by accumulation of individual wealth -- by an adventuring company, even! So what's a new framework that can be used for underpinning a leftist OSR campaign?

A Spectre (7+3 HD) Is Haunting the Flaeness: Towards a Leftist OSR from Legacy of the Bieth

Growth should be tied to a specific experience occurring in the fiction. It is more important for a PC to grow more interesting than more skilled or capable. PCs experience growth not necessarily because they’ve gotten more skill and experience, but because they are changed in a significant way.

Cairn FAQ from Cairn RPG / Yochai Gal

+++

Thank you Ram for the Story-Games.com deep cut!

( Image sources: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/neuron-activation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majesty:_The_Fantasy_Kingdom_Sim https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/special-reports-pdfs/10490978.pdf https://varnam.my/34311/untold-tales-of-indian-labourers-from-rubber-plantations-during-pre-independence-malaya/ https://nobonzo.com/ )

PS: used with permission from Sandro, art by Maxa', a reminder to self:

#theory #ttrpgs #d&d #politics #ethics

247 notes · View notes

inkdemonapologist · 3 months

Text

[BatIM Cthulhu AU] A couple of doodles from session two, which UNSETTLED SAMMY A LOT ACTUALLY...

There have been small changes, throughout New York -- doors opening on the wrong side of the street, houses ending up just a block away from where you remembered them -- but the only people who can even tell seem to be those who remember Carcosa. Joey, Sammy, Henry, Jack, Peter, and Norman all experienced the strange shifting realm when a Mardi Gras party attempted to bring dread Carcosa to New Orleans, but Susie wasn't there. She can't see the changes we see, and the entire rest of the city agrees with her. That door was always there? The car was always that colour. That's where I remember the address being before, and there's no record it was ever different.

She trusts what the boys are reporting must be true, that maybe there are changes she can't see or remember, and both she and Sammy are terrified. These are only little things, but as more and more of the city slips into the world of the King in Yellow, what else might be rewritten...?

Anyway EVERYONE'S HAVING A GREAT TIME. If you're here for Out Of Context Quotes from our session, I have some of those too, here, under the cut!!

[Sammy is played by me, Joey is played by Boo (inkyvendingmachine), Henry is played by Maf (inkcryptid), Jack is played by Mochi (whatyouwantedmetosee) and Thren (haunted-hijinxer) is our GM!]

[Jack] I love how detective Pete is for a guy who is NOT a detective. [Sammy] He just got assigned that by Joey Drew and now it's true. [Joey] Exactly! That's how it works.

[Sammy] The idea of JDS having its own employed detective is really funny to me. "Why do you need that? You're an animation studio." "Well, you know, things come up,"

[GM] Everybody went home I believe, except Joey went to the Studio, which is like home,

[Sammy] Do we have any plan, other than just go in to work, [Jack] I though you were gonna say "other than go insane"...

[Joey] If Prophet's not the one going for the ink, then why is Sammy going for it?! Do they have a SECOND prophet situation??? [Jack] PROPHET...... TWO!!! [Henry] Prophet 2: Electric Boogaloo [Sammy] *tiredly* We don't need any more Prophets..... We don't need any more Sammys..... we have enough.....

[Jack] You just need to sip some ink and tell them it's the wrong number. Like, you've got the wrong guy. [Henry] New stone, who dis?

[Sammy] It was the false king who called through the ink, not our Lord! [Joey] Interesting... [Joey] Joey's going to ask Bendy if he can... feel this? Is he getting calls? *dad voice* Is someone calling you? Don't put your number on the internet!

[GM] Bendy says he wasn't made to be a receiver the same way Sammy was. [Jack] So technically, it's "New Sam, who dis"!

[Joey] Okay, Joey's going to note this all down in his... Notebook Of Nonsense That Plagues Them,

[GM] I'm choosing to believe that whenever Norman called in, he gave some sort of outlandish excuse, and whoever answered the phone didn't... write it down... [Sammy] Like the heckin', grian excuses-- [Joey] "I'm cutting my grass, with scissors" [Jack] Yeah!! He's cutting his grass! With scissors! In winter!!! [Sammy] And then Sammy's like "Do we know why he called out?" and the receptionist is just like "No We Have NO Idea" [Jack] With the most tired sigh. Second only to Grant.

[GM] Fun fact, Norman would answer the phone. [Sammy] Norman actually was just like, "ohhhhhhh i know THIS is some supernatural bullshit happening, I'm gonna stay home"

[Joey] Joey's going to ask Estelle if he looked like-- and give a vague description of Avedon. [GM] .............................. [GM] She is SO impressed that you knew this. [Joey] *delighted cackling*

[Jack] I love how cute Joey is about this kid. Just like... the cool Bendy Uncle! He's not related at all, but, [Joey] I feel like this is kind of how Joey just gets around kids? Maybe Joey does really want kids, just, y'know, doesn't know how to do it when gay? [Sammy] Obviously that won't happen, so-- [Joey] Yeah, [Sammy] --so then you START AN ANIMATION STUDIO, that's the only other option! [GM] Yeah, then all kids are your kids!

[GM] Alright, you've made many phone calls. [Joey] Yeah, [GM] And you only rudely hung up on one of them!

[Sammy] Sammy can surely track that down; he's used to digging up musicians. [Jack] Jack's there to assist with the Talking to People in a way that makes them want to cooperate with you, and not run in fear!

[GM, speaking for Peter] *lists all of the information Peter's dug up* And that's about what he managed to get, today! [Joey] And nothing weird has been happening... to him? [GM] WELL, OKAY. ABOUT THAT,

[Peter] Could you describe again, the strange person who was at the party? What was that guy like? [Joey] *thinking very hard* Which... strange person...? I mean... Denis was there?

[Norman] Try not to fall in a swamp this time. [Joey] I'll let you know if I find one! [Sammy] There's fewer of those in New York, so, I think we're good. [Jack] I mean, you never know,, [Sammy] ...yeah, that's true..... [Joey] HEY, Joey will let him know if he finds one!!! [Sammy] If LAKE PONCHARTRAIN opens up in the MIDDLE OF NEW YORK CITY, that will certainly be something to let all of our friends know!

[GM] Make a social-type checks to have a word with them beforehand! [Sammy] I don't know, if I should do that,,, [GM] SAMMY can make an Appearance check! [Sammy] *laughing* LETS SEE IF IM HANDSOME ENOUGH to get let in!

[GM] Everybody's like "You guys!" You're greeted with nostalgia, and eagerness! and people are trying to small talk you, I'm guessing Sammy's not going for that. [Sammy] I mean, you can try to small talk.... AT him... [Sammy] He doesn't... y'know... it's like playing a game of catch where you throw the ball to somebody, and they just hold the ball. [Sammy] Like.... okay! [GM] I did the thing! [Sammy] Cool, catch successful. [Jack] No give, only throw!

[Sammy] Look, I was trying to drink ink this morning, so I feel like this is a step up.

[Sammy] Sammy will enjoy it! We should do this more often! [Sammy] "We should do this more often" says man who will always be too busy to do this more often,

[GM] They're impressed that, at a job where there was a gunshot right in front of the stage, the thing you want to ask about is where they sourced their music. [Sammy] I LOVE that Sammy's reputation is such that this makes perfect sense to them.

[GM] His name is Alan Leroy. [Sammy] Okay, Leroy works, because then I'll remember it, because of Leroy Jenkins. [GM] This is what's been going through my head the entire time, too...

[GM] They say he's a crazy-talented musician who blew into town a year or two ago? He's really nice and easy to get along with, and when he really gets going he can make sounds come out of his instrument like you've never heard! [Sammy] These... are all.. compliments that would be really impressive except that they can all be interpreted in really concerning ways.......

[GM] If Jack wants to look harder, he can.......... [Jack] I'm doing it, Jack can make little a bad decision! He hasn't made any yet this season!! [Jack] *rolls* That's an extreme success. How much sanity do I lose!!

[Henry] We're ghost hunters. The, the pale guy is a ghost, we're goin' after him. Ghost hunters. [Henry] ...This is why you don't let Henry lead the conversation!!

[Jack] It's occurring to me that we don't know if this guy is alive??? [Joey] YUP! This is a good time to find out! [Henry] Fun! [GM] When have you EVER gone up to somebody's house and found them dead inside? [Jack] Jack hasn't yet... [Henry] The very first scenario! [Sammy] Yeah it was a pretty bad situation as I recall, we were briefly accused of being involved! [Jack] Maybe you guys. Jack's different, though.

[Joey] We wanted to make sure he was doing alright. .....does that need a Fast Talk roll? [GM] Yeah, I was about to say-- [Joey] *rolls* *STARTS CACKLING* [GM] What did you do, do you roll a three again? [Joey] I DID ROLL A THREE! :D THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I ROLLED! [GM] I thought it was the Three Laugh!

[Henry] Henry is tired. Henry rolled a 93. [GM] Well he's out late, you know, he's a family man! He has normal hours, he hasn't been staying up late, living at the studio for the last few years! [Henry] He's regretting not accepting Joey's offer to just go home. [Joey] *muttering* See, Joey knows best!

[GM] Okay, so you guys notice, right off, that the car isn't there. [Sammy] UM. HM. [Jack] Which car did we take again? [Joey] The Mercedes... [Jack] *relieved* Okay good. [Jack] .... I MEAN, NOT GOOD, BUT...

[Joey] No, no I think it's OUR car... it's just... more yellow now... [Jack] I don't like that that means it's getting yellower... [Joey] ...........................So when do we take the sanity hit? [GM] Yeah, that would be now!

[GM] The woman says she's looking forward to when he has his own ship, and they can sail away together! [Henry] [Henry] ...I'm married,...

[Joey] Joey has his face pressed to the window-- no, he probably has the window down, it doesn't matter how cold it is -- and... CAN the window go down? Hold on. [Joey] *sounds of typing* "Car... door... window... down... history... when."

[Henry] Okay, these dice are BANNED. I rolled a 90! [Jack] What if you subtly replace the dice...? [Sammy] With slighty yellower dice!

[Joey] OKAY! There ARE rolling windows, so Joey does have the window rolled down, and he's intensely watching the colour of the car. [Joey] AND ALSO, he's STILL sitting in the middle seat, he's just going to lean over someone to do this. [Sammy] Ah. It's probably me.

[Jack] No, no, Pete and Jack can get kidnapped later and take some massive sanity damage together. ✨Cute date ideas!✨

[Joey] Joey's going to inform Norman that they're going to come over, they need additional eyes on something, [GM] Well, he's good at keeping eyes on things! [Joey] So they'll be over soon. [Sammy] I like how Norman gets a heads up, but with Peter we just show up at his apartment. [Joey] Exactly! [Jack] That's because Joey's kissed Pete. When Joey and Norman kiss then that's -- not good for Sammy, probably. [GM] At least Pete and Sammy are neutral. Non-reactive. [Sammy] Norman and Sammy are "it's complicated" on Facebook.

[Sammy] Okay, we gotta go get Linda, so Susie's not alone, [Jack] We're just playing "how many NPCs can we force Thren to play at once!" How many can we shove in the back of this car.

[Jack] Jack's gonna get home and find out his cats are different colours, [Sammy] Oh NO, [Jack] Comes back and Beans is a tortie now. [Sammy] Or Beans is just an orange cat, [Jack] Oh no! Her braincells! [GM] She needs those! She has all of them!!

[Joey] Depending on who's the affected party, Susie or them, it is actually useful to have a second, like, [Sammy] Someone to compare with? Yeah. [Henry] We don't know WHO the control group is, but ONE of us is the control group!

[Joey] As trusted as Norman is, he isn't one of Joey's... white-knuckle-clutched-keepsakes of a person,

[Sammy] *sarcastic* Okay, everyone ready to go to sleep? That's not a scary prospect right now, right? That's something that we're all really confident about doing? Cool, that's great. [Henry] Yeah, yeah, that's definitely not gonna, it's gonna go great...! [GM] Nobody's even cut their hand on a slick stone! It's fine! [Henry] NO ONE BETTER CUT THEIR HAND ON A SLICK STONE! We got enough problems!! [Joey] (Looking at you, Prophet!)

[Henry] Is Joey,,, sharing this plan with anyone? [Joey] ouo Has anyone asked him?

[Joey] Let's send Henry then! [Henry] Alright. Send Henry to Carcosa! [Sammy] *exasperated* yeah that's fine.... [Joey] It's not FULLY sending him there! It's just making a connection. [Joey] A little bridge! [Sammy] Uggghhhh... Sammy doesn't think we need any bridges to Carcosa. [Sammy] We've got enough Carcosa. [Sammy] Put some back.

[Sammy] This is what happens When You Give a Joey a Dream Spell.

[Sammy] We can't actually guarantee that New York isn't going to sink. That's not out of the question. [Jack] Is the Joey Drew specialty NOT "promising things that aren't necessarily things you can promise??"

[Henry] Actually, before Henry leaves he's going to give Joey a hug. [Joey] He doesn't get to leave. [Henry] Oh. [Joey] But Joey will take the hug!

[Henry] You know this man gives good hugs. You're getting a good Henry hug. [Jack] Gonna crunch all of Joey's terrible, very bad bones. [Henry] He's gonnna try not to crunch all of Joey's terrible bones! [Henry] But, I dunno. [Henry] Roll for damage.

[GM] The lurker knows this is serious, but he's also excited, because he has heard what a slumber party is from Henry's kids.

[GM] Now it is Friday, the 28th of December. [Sammy] Okay. Cool. Let's all make an effort to not ring in the New Year in Carcosa. That's MY New Year's Resolution: Don't Be In Carcosa.

#call of cthulhu: haunted hijinx #sammy lawrence #susie campbell #sammy x susie #norman polk #joey drew #when in doubt just keep drawing #quote post #theres no reason for dramatic lighting the cthulhu doodles have just become my Attempt To Figure Out Clip Studio practices lmao #i stuck a cap on sammy forever ago while pondering winter outfits #and it was so cute on him that now it might just have to be canon

145 notes · View notes

ttrpgbrackets · 7 months

Text

Propaganda under the cut

THE ME THAT BELIEVES IN YOU:

At any point after buying this, make an impassioned speech to someone at your table about their inner strength, the courage to continue, and the fortitude to never surrender. The amount of power you spend goes directly to them and they receive a directly proportional multiplier for their next move (20 power X20 Multiplier etc). If you give them your remaining power, you fucking die my dude, and it’s really sad. Leave the table and get a soda. If you die, that power AND that multiplier are DOUBLED.

What makes it Cool?

come on. youre sacrificing yourself while making a cool speech so your friend can punch a planet to death. bonus points if you quote the original TTGL speech.

Pay to Win:

If you go to Paypal.me/RevRyeBread and send me 1 dollar you can auto roll a 10+, heal harm, tell your gm what happens, or refresh your locked links

What makes it Cool?

it's just plain funny. send the game maker a dollar to do well. the name tells you exactly what you should expect from it and it DELIVERS (so long as you pay)

#indie ttrpg #ttrpg community #ttrpg design #tumblr bracket #round 1

183 notes · View notes

luckthebard · 1 year

Text

So a few thoughts on C3E51, and narrative and encounter design. First off - I loved the episode and thought it was incredibly exciting and engaging and a fun gameplay time. But to engage with a few of the criticism points I'm seeing, I will also say:

At this point I'm assuming the encounter was always planned to end with some version of the outcome we ended up with. Is that railroading? Sure, I guess, but it's also pretty standard D&D encounter design. The "win condition" here wasn't stopping Ludinus entirely, but rather to what degree they could mess up and stall his plans through sabotage. And frankly, I think they actually did pretty well! They destroyed the key in the Feywild and some of the batteries here, and it seems like Ludinus's plan did not go perfectly for him; so I imagine now they have time to react to a very slow and imperfect version of what he was trying to unleash. And that is the next narrative beat we had to get to in order to continue the story.

I know they rolled very low this encounter and many things did go wrong but even with that I came out of the episode thinking of this great quote from Star Trek: "It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness; that is life." And that's sometimes an important story beat to hit! It certainly propelled Vox Machina forward after the fall of Emon, and the Apogee Solstice events seem to be performing a similar narrative role for Bells Hells.

To back up my interpretation here, there are a few things Matt did as a DM to signal that a failure here was not an Ultimate Failure and the point moving forward would be reacting to something fixable. The first was Ludinus's reaction to the machine breaking and his quickly covered up fear and uncertainty - he's trying to convince himself he "won" by the end but not as confident as he could be. The second is the fact that Matt took a lot of pains to point out in detail that team Orym, Laudna, Ashton could still see the beam of red shooting up into the sky at Ruidus. The moon prison hasn't been broken, it is breaking, and their efforts likely determined how badly and how much time they have to address it.

Anyway, wanted to push back against the "the encounter was unfair" or "railroading is bad" I've been seeing - the encounter was the encounter and served its purpose, and I recommend highly listening to Matt, Brennan, and Aabria talk about "railroading" in their GM roundtable to get a sense of it as a neutral rather than negative game design strategy.

There's a part 2 to this post but it was also long so it's HERE

#I actually had a whole other half of this discussion that I'm just going to make its own post about the former PCs and their role here #but this was already getting too long #meta #game master strategies #critical role #cr spoilers #oops initially posted this with some of the other post's thoughts still included #please go see that one for more elaboration on that

399 notes · View notes

rennybu · 26 days

Text

commissions are open!

let me draw your characters kissing and/or crying!!! more info below :~) please contact me via email, rennybu (at) gmail.com, or DM me if u have any questions!

That's all 6 slots filled, thank you so much!! i will update this post as the queue moves, and make an announcement when fresh spots are available.

6/6

Link to my detailed ToS. Some quick info is listed in this post, but please read in full!

Payment via PayPal invoice, in Canadian dollars.

Full payment is due after you have seen and approved of a rough composition sketch. I'll send you milestone updates as I work.

Blood/injury, body horror, nudity, pinup/suggestive (nudity or no), are all OK and I'm happy to discuss subject matter if you're unsure! (media tags on this blog are a good reference for what I am willing to draw. BG3 about covers it LOL)

Please email me with your idea if you're interested! ([email protected]) - I can answer questions and offer price quotes in DMs, but emails let me stay better organized.

I am very excited to bring your visions to life! 🫶🫶🫶

Additional examples under the readmore! plus my entire #aart tag

And lastly, here's an example of how useful and helpful stick figures are in getting your concept across!!! From sketch to final;

These gorgeous villains belong to @jawsandbones, who is a wonderful GM and a delight to work with!!!

#artists on tumblr #dnd oc art #original character #commission info

83 notes · View notes

red-heart-sunglasses · 8 months

Text

I love TTRPGS. I love finding a new system and learning it and finding new ideas for the plot. I love bugging my friends for when the next session is and for any shred of information about their story that they're willing to give me. I love writing stupidly long lore docs and making silly picrew after picrew and I love sending writing back and forth with a friend as we try to make each other cry. I love being cryptic after a session, and I love being overdramatically upset when my friends are cryptic after theirs. I love hearing the voices my friends give their characters. I love putting in and seeing easter eggs of our favorite medias as npcs in games. I love celebrating after a triumphant end to a session, and I love freaking out after a terrifying one. I love making and being in discord servers with emojis that are inside jokes about the campaign, and seeing the out of context quotes from earlier sessions. I love making and seeing memes about the things that happened in the game, and what might happen in the future. I love seeing my friends draw their characters so wonderfully, and wishing I could do the same. I love listening to music and thinking about how it fits the campaign or the character or the ship I'm obsessed with. I love buying more and more and more dice, even when it doesn't fit my characters and I have no reason for it. I love coming up with an idea and sending it to my GM at three in the morning. I love everything and everyone these games have introduced me to, from podcasts based around them to songs my friends said remind them of their characters to so much more. I love TTRPGS.

#ttrpgs #call of cthulhu #ttrpg #autism #d&d #mutants and masterminds #ttrpg community #rambles

240 notes · View notes

malevolentcast · 1 year

Note

you probably already know about this but an articles been put out about rusty quills shitty business practices and general shady behavior. if you havent already, you might be getting messages about it soon. just wanted to send a heads up in advance

Yes I saw and read it.

I'm choosing to believe the motivations of those involved, in spite the poor optics of them being from another network (and even quoting what "they" pay as an example of "good" companies), were an attempt to be morally just. That is to say, I have no ill will towards the author, their editors and everyone who contributed.

To be clear; if Rusty Quill has treated employees poorly they should be held accountable, I say if not as a way to not believe those affected but because "alleged" is used more than a dozen times in the article.

Additionally, no employer should ever yell at an employee. Again, if that happened, they should apologize and do better.

That being said…

I don't appreciate articles speaking on behalf of me or, frankly, trying to rope me in without my consent or request. I recognize they weren't attempting to give me a voice, just those who are affected, however the author has only now allowed shows to reach out, after the damage has been done and chose to speak for me nonetheless. Additionally, the article says that if I remain silent, it's because I can't speak out - which is just nonsense.

From my experience; I've had nothing but great experiences with Rusty Quill. They're a network. They host my show. What else do I need them for? Contracts, NDA's and all the legal aspects that the article seemed to make such a big deal about… are very normal. I think this is part of not understanding how large companies work.

For example; I saw tweets upset that people shouldn't have to sign an NDA to look over a sample contract which… is exactly what you do when you're looking over a sample contract.

I was a General Manager of a small rental company for 10 years prior to trying my hand at Audio work and renting a water cooler had more stipulations than RQ's agreement. Contracts are meant to be all encompassing. If you don't agree with stuff, you cross it out and ask it to be changed. If you’re upset at the way large companies work, your fight is misdirected with addressing just one company. The article also mentioned something about "Taking Money Upfront" and stuff like that, which failed to mention you don’t HAVE to take money upfront - furthermore - most shows on RQ did not do that.

In any case, this isn't meant to be a dismantling of the article. I don't want to invalidate anyone's experiences or frustrations. Who knows what more may come to light, all I can speak of are my experiences and frustrations.

So why I'm frustrated? Well, I saw a few tweets and posts boycotting RQ shows, which included mine. So that sucked.

Overall however, I think the article was done in poor taste and felt like virtue signaling more than something trying to be helpful. I think, personally - and I say this with all the genuine sincerity - it seemed written from a perspective of inexperience and naivete. It is not the Watergate scandal people think it is.

And for the people who are upset that "peoples lives were ruined" when they were let go… yes I'm sorry people lost their jobs. I lost the aforementioned GM position as well when the owner of the company sold the company out from under me. Not because I did a bad job or because I made a mistake, just bad luck. It sucked, sometimes people lose their jobs. That doesn't mean I can't have an opinion on what I feel is an article meant to stir the pot. After all, shouldn't I express my perspective as a show on RQ (which, like, isn't that what the article was meant to be about?).

Anyway, those are my thoughts. For what it's worth I think you should still read the article! It has some great thoughts…

…but with all things, read it with an informed opinion; remembering that it was written by the Director of Marketing for another Podcast network, who references their own network within their "expose" as an example of a network with "good practices", during a time that they're recruiting for new shows and that every single show on that Network has openly supported the article - retweeting it almost instantly, during the final days of their competitors successful Kickstarter.

The disclaimer on the article about the Authors association with F&F wasn't put until AFTER they were called out. Odd that an expose on uncovering the truth would be less than transparent when posting…

952 notes · View notes

prokopetz · 5 months

Note

Hey! So I ran a one-shot of Eat God and we had a blast. I have some feedback to offer from both myself and my players (This was actually a while ago but I’ve been busy as hell so I’m only writing it up now, so I might have forgotten some things).

First off, character creation was just as fun as advertised. My player’s all loved getting to choose their character’s traits and appearance and designing their deicidal muppets. The game’s mechanics also made it extremely easy to create looney-tunes style shenanigans, which both I and the character’s took full advantage of.

At one point a character with the roving limbs trait was running away with a barrel containing another character (I put the character in the barrel) balanced on their legs while their top half distracted the town guards, a completely different character slipped into the sewers I hadn’t thought about and I had a chance to throw a surprise alligator at them, and a theocratic pastor said that he “carried God with him in his heart” (which ended exactly as anthropophagically as I had expected it too). I also got the great quote from one of my players “I swear to the god I want to eat.”

I have a few critiques, a few suggestions for things to develop for future editions, and a few questions. My first critique is that I think that having tokens for obstinacy is a little distracting, since you keep track of everything else about your character on paper (we ended up using Sprite flavored tic-tacs that one of the player’s had in their bag) and would be better done on the character sheet. I also think the game could use a formal turn structure for high-pressure situations. It’s a game that promotes chaotic play, and with people popcorning in it got a bit loud and overwhelming.

For future developments, I think that having more specific action types like attack, help, investigate, etc. would be helpful. Specifying the mechanical effects tied to some of the abilities, like being able to “stun” someone with Primordial Power and Dizzying Display, having a general movement speed that would be doubled by Fast Feet, being difficult to harm with Defensive Dermis, etc., would be useful for the GM. And more examples of NPC abilities would be useful, if only to have something to base homebrew on.

There are also a few questions I had. First, is there a specific time scale for actions taken in a high-pressure situation like combat?

Second, I assume that you count the unmodified roll for calculating calamity? Because I don’t believe any roll over a character’s facet would have no chance of triggering calamity, and similarly don’t believe that positive modifiers would increase the chance of calamity.

Lastly, a general lesson I learned as a GM that I do not hold against your game: be careful how far you let your characters stretch the limits of their abilities in low pressure situations if you’re too socially anxious to retcon in high pressure ones.

Ultimately I think it’s a great game and everyone had a great time. I meant to run another session but didn’t find the time, so I might have more feedback when I finally get around to that. For credits sake I’m Kendall R., my players wanted to be credited as Noc, Ladybug, and Brynne.

(With reference to this post here.)

I appreciate the feedback. With respect to your questions:

First, is there a specific time scale for actions taken in a high-pressure situation like combat?

There is not. Defining a more formal conflict framework with a specific round length is a potential addition to a future revision, albeit not one I'm committing to adding at this time.

Second, I assume that you count the unmodified roll for calculating calamity?

Dice rolls in Eat God are generally not modified in any way; the value of a particular die is the number you rolled on that die. Effect modifiers (which I assume are what you're referring to here) apply to the roll's Result, which is the number you get from carrying out the procedure described in "Rolling and Reading Your Result"; any comparison which does not explicitly refer to a roll's Result is referring to the values the dice are physically showing.

#gaming #tabletop roleplaying #tabletop rpgs #eat god #game design #violence mention #death mention #cannibalism mention

126 notes · View notes

peanutbutter-and-jellie · 5 months

Text

oh look, the funny thing my gm said

this quote is funny wait wha-

WOAH

(congrats to @nebulaaaaaa since its her quote)

#pm seymour #source: yourplayersaidwhat #yourplayersaidwhat

61 notes · View notes

math-rocks-and-lizard-bats · 1 month

Text

Things @quiddie says frequently that have entered my speech patterns (gm and non gming) (and that I constantly quote):

“Let me be very clear”

“What you don’t see”

“I mean….”

“That’s really good for me actually”

“Wet fire!!!!”

*throwing things that don’t work*

“Tell me that little something extra.”

“Applebees soulcycle”

“Guardian of Faith Kill me first”

“Oh no! My immersion”

“Like a lil bit as a treat”

“I do have alert I can’t be surprised”

Aabria if u see this these so make me so happy I hope you know. You help me so much I love all your work. (As you’ve seen bc you’ve reblogged my stuff) college is hard but getting to watch you to help me destress makes me so happy.

#candela obscura #critical role #aabria iyengar #dimension 20 #antiope jones #deanna critical role #I just love aabria so much #she helps me through hard days and I hope she knows that #college is hard #kicking my ass #but I’m figuring it out

27 notes · View notes

zedecksiew · 2 months

Text

How To Play The Revolution

So: I do not like the idea of TTRPGs making formal mechanics designed to incentivise ethical play.

But, to be honest, I do not like the idea of any single game pushing any particular formal mechanics about ethical play at all.

So here I am, trying to think through the reasons why, and proposing a solution. (Sort of. A procedure, really.)

Assumptions:

Some genres of game resist ethical play. A grand strategy game dehumanises people into census data. The fun of a shooter is violence. This is truest in videogames, but applies to tabletop games also.

Games can question their own ethics, to an extent. Terra Nil is an anti-city-builder. But it is a management game at heart, so may elide critiques of "efficiency = virtue".

Not all games should try to design for ethical play. I believe games that incentivise "bad" behaviour have a lot to teach us about those behaviours, if you approach them with eyes open.

The systems that currently govern our real lives are terrible: oligarchy, profit motive; patriarchy, nation-states, ethno-centrisms. They fuel our problems: class and sectarian strife, destruction of climate and people, spiritual desertification.

They are so total that the aspiration to ethical behaviour is subsumed by their logics. See: social enterprise; corpos and occupying forces flying rainbow flags; etc.

Nowadays, when I hear "ethical", I don't hear "we remember to be decent". I hear "we must work to be better". Good ethics is radical transformation.

If a videogame shooter crosses a line for you, your only real response is to stop playing. This is true for other mechanically-bounded games, like CCGs or boardgames.

In TTRPGs, players have the innate capability to act as their own referees. (even in GM-ed games adjudications are / should be by consensus.) If you don't like certain aspects of a game, you could avoid it---but also you could change it.

Only in TTRPGs can you ditch basic rules of the game and keep playing.

So:

D&D's rules are an engine for accumulation: more levels, more power, more stuff, more numbers going up.

If you build a subsystem in D&D for egalitarian action, but have to quantify it in ways legible to the game's other mechanical parts---what does that mean? Is your radical aspiration feeding into / providing cover for the game's underlying logics of accumulation?

At the very least it feels unsatisfactory---"non-representative of what critique / revolution entails as a rupture," to quote Marcia, in conversations we've been having around this subject, over on Discord.

How do we imagine and represent rupture, to the extent that the word "revolution" evokes?

My proposal: we rupture the game.

+++

How To Play The Revolution

Over the course of play, your player-characters have decided to begin a revolution:

An armed struggle against an invader; overturning a feudal hierarchy; a community-wide decision to abandon the silver standard.

So:

Toss out your rule book and sheets.

And then:

Keep playing.

You already know who your characters are: how they prefer to act; what they are capable of; how well they might do at certain tasks; what their context is. You and your group are quite capable of improv-ing what happens next.

Of course, this might be unsatisfactory; you are here to play a TTRPG, after all. Structures are fun. Therefore:

Decide what the rules of your game will be, going forward.

Which rules you want to keep. Which you want to discard. Jury-rig different bits from different games. Shoe-horn a tarot deck into a map-making game---play that. Be as comprehensive or as freeform as you like. Patchwork and house-rule the mechanics of your new reality.

The god designer will not lead you to the revolution. You broke the tyranny of their design. You will lead yourself. You, as a group, together. The revolution is DIY.

+++

Notes:

This is mostly a thought experiment into a personal obsession. I am genuinely tempted to write a ruleset just so I can stick the above bit into it as a codified procedure.

I am tickled to imagine how the way this works may mirror the ways revolutions have played out in history.

A group might already have alternative ruleset in mind, that they want to replace the old ruleset with wholesale. A vanguard for their preferred system.

Things could happen piecemeal, progressively. Abandon fiat currency and a game's equipment price list. Adopt pacifism and replace the combat system with an alternative resolution mechanic. As contradictions pile up, do you continue, or revert?

Discover that the shift is too uncomfortable, too unpredictable, and default back to more familiar rules. The old order reacting, reasserting itself.

I keep returning to this damn idea, of players crossing thresholds between rulesets through the course of play. The Revolution is a rupture of ethical reality like Faerie or the Zone is a rupture in geography.

But writing all this down is primarily spurred by this post from Sofinho talking about his game PARIAH and the idea that "switching games/systems mid-session" is an opportunity to explore different lives and ethics:

Granted this is not an original conceit (I'm not claiming to have done anything not already explored by Plato or Zhuangzi) but I think it's a fun possibility to present to your players: dropping into a parallel nightmare realm where their characters can lead different lives and chase different goals.

Jay Dragon tells me she is already exploring this idea in a new game, Seven Part Pact:

"the game mechanics are downright oppressive but also present the capacity to sunder them utterly, so the only way to behave ethically is to reject the rules of the game and build something new."

VINDICATION! If other designers are also thinking along these lines this means the idea isn't dumb and I'm not alone!

+++

( Images:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-23-fronts-and-generals.1497106/

https://www.thestranger.com/race/2017/04/05/25059127/if-you-give-a-cop-a-pepsi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WarGames

https://nobonzo.com/

https://pangroksulap.com/about/ )

#theory #ttrpgs #politics #revolutions #proposals #pariah

216 notes · View notes