At the very least!

Bye
Thanee

I'd personally prefer is he lived so we can explore leadership issues.

And I am not enamored with the resolving this through Narrative.

it is a wiki.... so you can edit it out... but he wasn't dead YET at the end of the story... just hurt BAD.... if you want, you can edit it out or go in and rescue him, or maybe TG won't have the Trolls kill him.....

TG's idea was the narrative with a second from halo and aziz and a few others.... and sparky voted for a mix

I think implementing this system really isn't that major of a change
1) this is probably the biggest thing, but I would allow post-edits if game conflicts arise. (Neither of these situations of Neo, and Aziz, do I personally have any OOC conflicts with)

2) I think this has been kept fairly well... the only hour+ long posts were when we were asked by TG to sum up our night and move ahead.... the only "controversial" posts have been a matter of 2 seconds. (both Neo's and Aziz's) And Both of these could have been erased with a editting of posts if other people had attempted to stop it.

3) I think the wiki is fine for a DROOC page.... - like Sparky said "Don't hate"

4) I think combat is going fine over the wiki as well as our current declared actions. Even TG has allowed time to readjust our declared actions if a LOT of combat has passed. I have no qualms with the current combat. (and it's actually VERY similar to Rat's proposal) Noone has been waiting until their turn to declare actions (I don't think)

The only changes I guess we could try to implement are
a) A dice rolls page - done
b) editting posts allowed if any other PC had wanted to interrupt any already posted actions or had stuff to say/do before you're post.
c) Maybe some help in the gm department to keep the pace up.

Last Words - I don't think you can relate this game to LiTS that well since LiTS has a different style. That is a broad based game focused on the interaction of each character to the world, focussing on each single runner's personal development. This game is based on PURE PC to PC interaction focused on the development of a combined large group of players, and thus these problems are occurring at a much faster rate than in normal games. "all for one, and one for all" as the fench say.

I agree with you completely! This is a game, not a story. And therefore it must be clearly defined what happened, or else how can anyone respond accurately?

The question is not progression versus small details. The question is it beneficial to make progress at the expense of accuracy, continuity and consistency? I would say the answer is a resounding no.

Post sequencing does NOT mean that everyone posts with the same frequency. In fact, post sequencing is specifically designed to allow for the fact that people will NOT post with the same frequency.

I specifically stated three times of areas where post sequencing is necessary:

1. Where the order does not matter – If order does not matter, then people should be willing to edit for smoothness and aesthetics. Do we want conversations that actually make sense, or ones that are jerky and nonsensical because they were limited by the post frequency and timing of the players in real life? Post sequencing and discipline simply means being willing to check and make sure that everything makes sense, and editing where it does not so that it makes sense. You stated above we’ve already been doing this as necessary, so what’s the problem with being willing to continue that practice in this scenario?

2. Where the order of actions matters, other characters are in position to affect the outcome, and have a desire to attempt to impact the outcome – This situation is the very definition of a game! X attempts to do something, Y does not want him to. So what happens? It is not logically possible to allow whoever posted first to automatically do what they posted, because then we would not have a game, we would have a story!

You stated that (edited for brevity, original full context above):

I beg to differ. Consider the following:

1. X posts first in the IC thread that he successfully shoots Z
2. In the OOC thread, per the rules, Y successfully stops X from shooting Z

What makes more sense, to say that X’s original post of shooting Z is incorrect because according to the rules and procedures in the OOC thread Y has stopped him, and thus require X to edit his original post while Y posts the correct results of the rules in a second post, or to say that because X posted first his post stands as what actually happened, even though the rules say otherwise?

The former decision is a game while the latter decision is a story. You stated that this is a game, not a story. If that is so, then every post must accurately reflect the rules and regulations of that game. Even if that means going back and editing previous posts to accurately reflect the outcome of those procedures, it is imperative to do so, because as a result of the rules, those previous posts are now indeed wrong. If we allow people’s posts to stand regardless of their accuracy according to the rules just because they posted first, then we no longer have a game, we have a story.

As a game, the details ARE important, and yes, they are more important than progression. What is more important, to ‘move forward’ with the story and keep posting, even though X didn’t really succeed at shooting Z according to the rules, or to get the details right? What if X refuses to change his post, and then Y posts a second post stating that he stopped X from shooting Z? What actually happened? Continuity is gone, and our game with it.

Post sequencing’s entire purpose is to ensure that the game does not turn into a story by requiring all posts to have continuity and accuracy. Otherwise, what is to stop someone from saying they successfully did X, Y, and Z, and that’s that because they posted first, even though everyone else’s posts say differently? Everyone must be willing to conform their posts to reflect the rules, even if it means backtracking in order to do so, or else there is no longer a game, instead we have a random assortment of stories that may or may not have anything to do with each other.

Therefore, it appears that you and I are in agreement here, that the posts should accurately reflect the rules, in accordance with the fact that this is a game. If posts must be changed to correctly reflect the outcome of the rules of the game, then they need to be changed to preserve the integrity of the game. So what is the disagreement?

The third example of needing post sequencing is required is when order matters, but no one is in a position to affect the outcome. As we can see below:

I fail to see how it is demonstrated that my example was inaccurate. Aziz took an action that would directly lead to combat. It is his prerogative as a PC to take an action prior to combat being initiated or started by the GM. Someone has to start the combat or else there would never be combat. Where is it at all uncommon for a player to be the one to initiate combat?

Order most certainly mattered, because if someone else had talked first, then maybe Aziz would not have fired. If someone else, say Auran, had wanted to post talking to the trolls, and declared her intent OOC, then maybe they could have worked it out so that Auran posted trying to talk to the trolls (after Aziz’s original post) and Aziz could have edited his post to only yell at the troll.

In this instance, post sequencing PROTECTS the ability of the others to act without being locked into a situation (in this case combat) that occurred only because someone else posted before them in real life. Again, what is the problem, as the whole point is to ensure everyone’s character has a fair chance to act without letting one player (Voorhees) dictate the entire scenario simply because he saw and responded to TG’s post in real life before anyone else?

This solution actually IMPEDES players from posting, as it prevents them from taking any actions that might potentially lead to something other than what was specifically planned. As argued earlier, Voorhees had every right to fire at the troll if he chose as an action designed to instigate combat.

He specifically stated that he only fired at the troll. He never said what happened. At no point did he do anything that should not have been allowed.

If players are ‘not allowed’ to do something (in this case, fire at someone outside of a combat round) then we don’t have a game, we have a story. They were not allowed to do something because it doesn’t fit what is ‘supposed’ to happen. If that’s the case, how does any of us ever start a fight? Do we have to always wait for TG to tell us we’re fighting? That completely undermines our player prerogative to participate in the evolution of events.

It is ALWAYS a combat action in a non-combat setting that begins combat. Otherwise, how does combat start? Two sides that don’t do anything to initiate a fight will not fight. That is self-explanatory.

So how can we say that ‘just because a player does something IC doesn’t mean it happens’? That is the definition of a story, telling people what they can and cannot do! It is a story to tell people what they can and cannot do, and it is a story for anyone to dictate results independent of rules. Aziz did neither of the two, and thus stayed strictly within the boundaries of the game. A player’s responsibility is to act IC. It is only crossing the line when the player dictates results in addition to actions. Aziz fired IC, it happened. The result of the action is not up to the player alone, but the action certainly is. We must preserve both that dynamic and distinction or else once again, we have drifted into the realm of story.

In the process, Voorhees demonstrated perfectly the need for post sequencing. If someone had a real problem with his action, the opportunity would be there for them to talk with him and ask him to reconsider in light of what that character was going to do, with the only difference being a real life timing difference and subsequent posting adjustment.

Of course, Voorhees would still be well within his right to reject that request and post what he wanted anyway, in which case post sequencing would protect him. Even if someone had gone out to talk first, Aziz could still have fired even though that might not be what the other player wanted and even though the other player (hypothetically) posted before him. Again, where is the problem?

Wiki versus DROOC

I’m going to switch gears here and completely agree with Silo. Keeping track of updates/changes on wiki is difficult to say the least. It is hard to format it appropriately and in a chronological fashion compared to DS, and that undermines the whole point of keeping things organized for easy reference.

Most important to me is the current lack of organization on our wiki. I absolutely don’t mean to denigrate all the fine work done by everyone on the wiki, but it is seriously all over the place. Because everyone is free to do what they want on it, there are links and pages going every which way. There’s a section for storyline that makes no sense to me (chronologically it doesn’t really go anywhere), nor can I track any individual character, and doing it by location is incredibly hard if there is a big time jump between events at the same location.

Since timing in combat is very important, doesn’t it make sense to post in a way where everything is easier to find and automatically in (relative) order?

To me, the real value of the wiki is as an archive and storage facility. That’s one of the things I suggest for the assistant GMs, designate a few of them to redesign the wiki, streamline it for maximum efficiency and effectiveness. The benefit of it has been the ability to edit and change it as we went along, but now that’s turned into a liability as the lack of focus and direction from the beginning means it’s now scattered and nowhere near user-friendly with respects to gathering information quickly and easily.

I think there’s a lot of potential here, but I think we need to organize better to tap it to the fullest.

That is also the point of starting a DROOC thread, to keep a specific type of information (dice rolls) in a centralized place with an already predefined, consistent, and clear format. Since it will be primarily for combat, let me move to that section next.

Combat

The clearest evidence to me that the wiki does not work for combat is in TG’s last IC post. As Silo pointed out, and I agree, the single legitimate reason for anyone to post OOC information in the IC thread is so that it is not lost and easily accessible.

The fact that TG felt it necessary to post the OOC information in the IC thread tells me volumes.

First, that the OOC thread is NOT serving its intended purpose. He obviously felt the need to put it in an easily accessible place where everyone who needed that info could find it, and did not trust the OOC thread to serve that purpose. Second, that he did not trust the wiki for it, or else why didn’t he put it there? If both current mechanisms for organizing OOC information (the wiki and the OOC thread) are not trusted by the GM himself, that speaks very strongly to me about the need to find an alternative method.

A few people mentioned not wanting too many threads, but three threads are too many? LITS alone has over six main threads right now. Total, LITS has 14 active threads (although some are obviously used more than others) to clearly delineate the various aspects of the game. We have that many threads so the game runs smoothly and efficiently, and until an admin tells us it’s a problem, I don’t see the harm, especially if it makes the game better for everyone.

Having a thread solely for dice rolls and mainly for combat cannot make things worse than they are. Hopefully it will make it better. The bottom line is, regardless of how people view combat, or how they would like to run combat, combat will happen. We need to be prepared for it, and attempt to run it in the most efficient and effective way possible.

Having all the necessary data in one clearly defined location with a set procedure strikes me as an improvement over a current system that finds the GM reduced to having to post OOC information in the IC thread simply so people can find what they need. If people don’t want to go with my solution I have no problems with that, but once again, I have not heard a better, or even an alternative one.

The argument that ‘the current system isn’t totally broken’ is not a reason not to seek to improve our process, and I would even say that argument is seriously lacking in light of TG’s recent need to post OOC information as he did.

Someone mentioned that the current system ‘isn’t all that different’ from what I proposed. That may be, but again, there isn’t a clear understanding of what that system is. There isn’t a clear set of guidelines. There is not a clear, universally understood or implemented procedure. There is not a pattern or consistent approach to anything other than each player’s individual preferences. The system has been held together by a few players being willing to hunt for all relevant information and put it up on either the OOC thread or the Wiki, and one of those people, Mister Juan, has flat out stated it is a pain in the butt. The obvious implication is that the current system is less than ideal, so why not strive to do better?

Conclusion

I do not expect any of my proposals to be adopted. In the end, what we do and do not do is up to Tinkergnome, and I will abide by his decisions. However, I believe it is our responsibility as players to attempt to make the game the best it can be. I have not seen anyone argue that the current state of affairs is the most efficient, effective, and enjoyable system we could possibly have, and that suggests to me that we can do better, and I believe we should attempt to do so.

The title of the game itself states ‘Collaborative Fiction on the Streets’. That means that it is a game, one we are working on together, with the intent of producing a story. Any writer knows you cannot just go and write and expect to turn out a top quality product. Continual revision, updates, polishing, and rethinking are necessary to turn out a top quality product.

While I do not hold that my thoughts are the sole pathway to a top quality game, I do hold that it is incumbent upon us all to work together towards a top tier game, and while it is a lot of work and perhaps even annoyance now, in the end it will pay off, and it’s worth our time to think it through and make that happen.

Uh, just one thing, I have forgotten to address over the whole discussion.

@ GM & TG

I think if we had not waited for 1 week, to resolve the coke-run and than have our all night and morning actions condensed into a single rl night, we would have done much more prepwork!

Hahahahahhahaha. In the interests of not being long winded and no longer writing books, I'll just respond point by point here for the sake of speed. And so I don't have to spend hours writing 10 page replies.

Actually, this is the biggest reason my last post was so long. As I'm sure we've all seen in the forums, sometimes a simple minor difference of opinion can become two people going to war with each other. I absolutely did not want that to happen, especially because a lot of your thoughts were lost to the digital void, and because I don't know you well enough to know how you'd respond, so I erred on the side of caution, courtesy, thoroughness, and detail. I'm glad I read you reasonably well and there's no hard feelings.

Sounds good to me.

OK, I understand what you mean now, and I agree with what you say here. That's an excellent point and makes lots of sense.

The main point I was trying to make was the need for systematically developing a system and structure for the game. Post sequencing was something I felt necessary for everyone to be aware of and in agreement with, so that if/when it is necessary, we're prepared for it.

I agree that for the most part, we've done absolutely fine. I had noticed however, a general lack of consensus/understanding on how far to advance the story, and what to do if overrunning did occur. I wanted to get everyone on the same page before any major problems occurred, because I like being prepared like that.

I am not saying we sacrifice progression for accuracy, just as I am saying we should not sacrifice accuracy for progression. I agree completely there should be a balance between the two.

From your previous posts, I was interpreting you as saying that it was ok to sacrifice accuracy for progression, which I disagree with. But I see we're saying the same thing, that balance is important, and I think we just ended up presenting our cases as leaning more strongly in one direction or the other than we really intended to do. Balance is good. All in agreement here.

Agreed. And if we come up with a better method after (perhaps as a result of) having the DROOC, we can simply drop it in favor of the better method. I just want to try to improve on the current system. What that looks like is still largely undetermined.

Ah geez...I can't even get my character sheet up correctly. Now I have to figure out how to add comments?

Not necessarily a rewrite, just reorganization so it's easier to read, find stuff, and generally just more coherent in its layout so it's more user friendly. But that's a topic we can tackle in more depth at a later date.

Whew. Nice and short, see?

It is my understanding that it is TG who has to inform us if we're doing combat the 'normal' way or the 'narrative' way. That makes it pretty hard to plan what we're doing.

In general though, I believe our plan was to get the heck out of here, hopefully with as many of us still breathing as possible. Beyond that, the situation has, how do I say this, rapidly deteriorated and simple survival has suddenly rocketed to the top of the list.

I'd suggest everyone just try to get out, help everyone out around you, fighters covering those who can't, and try to regroup later, using the comms if necessary.

I'm rereading the entire thread now to catch up, so once I have a better handle on the situation, I'll have more concrete thoughts.

And oh yes, now that tax season is over and I actually have time, I am a much different player, in case you couldn't tell.

See, and I thought you'd gotten out of this game what you stated early on that you really loved... chargen and world creation.

Nah, I'm just obsessive compulsive sometimes about some things. OK many times about many things. That's probably how I got stuck being the Universe Coordinator of LITS. No one else enough is dumb enough to want the job.

Hear, Hear, Vegas!

That said, I've edited your post down to the part I'm giving a direct response to

Why am I here?
A few reasons, first among them: Dra.
I get to game with him, but almost exclusively with him as the GM. It is great to be able to play with him where he is a player!
Secondly: escapism.
I used to MUSH a LOT, but RL doesn't allow for me to be sitting and focus on just one game for any lengthy amount of time (many who frequent our IRC channel know this is because I am so busy with the autism homework, for 4yo, I'm not even getting my housework done each day, and soon not only will I have more autism homework, I'm going to have increasing ADHD homework, for 9yo, and a whole lot more to get done while somehow figuring out how to get 'the basics' done, even though right now they aren't, and still have time to even Think about any kind of playtime! "If Momma ain't happy...")

Anyway, seeing it suggested that I should be happy that within IC days of creation my char is now going to die (amid proclamations, that I was not sure how serious they were since some sounded at least semi-serious while others seemed to be joking around, that we are all going to die)... was unpleasant (the suggestions that I should think dying so soon is the best thing that could ever possibly happen is what I am referring to as being unpleasant).

Knowing TG is probably as busy as I am doesn't make hearing about what I perceived to be akin to a small warband come down on us then reading something along the lines of 'I did not expect you to fight' any more enjoyable either, nor the later comment about no prep work when several people WERE trying to figure things out IC and were even making rolls in OOC for it. (In other words, TG needs us to get our info that he needs to be reading into a more easily accessible format for him so he knows he's touched on things instead of things getting 'lost' along the way, though I am not one who would know how best to go about that, I simply recognize that it needs doing).

I am in this game to RP with a good crowd, which I ultimately believe you all are even if at any given moment I may not agree with a particular comment. I am not here to be told, or be made to feel, that my opinion is 'unworthy' or any implications of such (and I will stress that my char dying this quickly IC is, in my opinion, in no way, shape or form fun).
OOC we've been playing some weeks, and I do believe that IC we're on the second day. I want to have a chance to get to know my character, and the people she interacts with, before I have to retire her - she's only just begun! (yeah, I'm the kind of person who fleshes out her char through gameplay)

I didn't come here for dramatic deaths every day, I came here for a 'looser run game' that would be about a bunch of kids growing up and trying to stay out of trouble while getting into some kind of trouble on the streets - char development, not immediate nor mass character death - within a medium that my basically not having time to have a life would not be totally detrimental to.

My thanks to any of you who have actually read this far I'm too tired to add any conclusions or the like and I know I've said more than some of you could care about
This post reflects my opinions only, others will have to express their own opinions for themselves *VMG*

*hugs*
Kart

Sorry, Sparky, but I really can´t see your point here

Why can´t we discuss this suff WHILE we are proceding? The game has run before and it was fun, at least to some of us. Now the things you (as in plural) want to discuss are all nice and good, and I´m in to do so, but I see absolutly no reason, why we can´t go on with the game, while we are sorting these things out. Honestly, this whole discussion, while the IC is compleatly stopped is killing the game for me! If this goes on, I´ll drop out, soon, I fear.

Why can´t we just decide on how to solve this battle (narative, semi-narative, semi-combat, combat, whatever) and go on. Then we can discuss all these good improvement proposals, while we are going on.

Did the game so fare suck so much for you, that you would better not proceed at all, then proceed as before, while we are discussing improvements?

My motivation was allready drained, when mass battle started (but that´s another issue), right now, it´s dying