Jump to content

Recommended Posts

OOC: I imagine the fate of Marrow's egg would ultimately be up to their player. Realistically, it probably would've been swept away with the rest of the rubble during the interim, so I doubt they'd be able to get away with creepy Marrow baby digging its way up from beneath the floor of the new factory.

 

Likewise, I would assume that any villains would have just been transferred on to other prisons, which is what happens to most of them anyway, as I understand it.

 

In regards to Mechna, I think it might be easier to say that their government and Makuro struck a deal to stay out of each other's way and never speak of the portal incident again. That way villain characters can still potentially use it as a safe haven, and we can still make up vague and hilarious stuff.

Edited by The Old Master

___________________________________________________

My Corpus Rahkshi Profiles

My Wordpress Blog

Skyrise  Ascent

___________________________________________________

 

 

Legends Don't Last Forever

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOC: That works for me, though, just to clarify, Marrow is Rylinth Anderfel's character as is her egg.


"He who loves his brother most hits him hardest." -Vicarath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOC: Or while they were cleaning up the rubble, one of the workers (or Zippy's duck, if Zippy agrees of course) foolishly decided to keep the creepy biomechanical egg, wait for it to hatch, and then keep what comes out for a pet? I must admit, a Baby Marrow / Mama Duck combo would be unstoppable.

Also, about Marrow, would the Heroes or whoever else has custody of it be feeding it Quaza? Because if not, it's likely dead by now.


"It doesn't matter how big your first bite is. It matters how many bites you take." -Mool the Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last I remember Marrow was on the Astral along with the rest of the captured villains.  If Night Stalker saw marrow, he could have informed the heroes that it eats quaza.  It really matters whether or not the Heroes had quaza to spare for feeding a monster.

Edited by Vestak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Practically, I'd probably say that HF would rather use what Quaza they have access to in order to build more Heroes instead of feeding it to Marrow. They might've tried to find an alternative source of nourishment for the creature in order to keep it alive, however, but if it came down to Marrow or the ability to produce more Heroes, I just don't see Marrow being on the winning side of that arguement, especially since other Heroes could've very well been amongst the casualties of Traferous' attack.

Then again, stranger things have happened...


Epics: 

Hero Factory: Contagion

RPG Characters:

BZPRPG Characters

RPG History:

The Asylum, Bionifight Infinite, Year 60,000, Matoran und Panzer, HF RPG 2.0, Wasteland, Corpus Rahkshi, Skyrise

GM Résumé:

Matoran und Panzer (Formerly Appointed Co-GM), Corpus Rahkshi (Former Substitute Co-GM)

 

 

Feel free to shoot a PM my way if you're waiting for me to respond to something and I've been taking a while to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOC: If the Heroes did decide to not feed Marrow, surely they'd dump it off on a remote planet to spare their own consciences, right? As we established earlier, the Heroes don't really issue death (or life) sentences and they don't keep villains around without keeping them repaired and/or functional. If they can't keep Marrow under those parameters, then what?

Edited by Vicarath

"He who loves his brother most hits him hardest." -Vicarath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy...

I'm going to tentatively offer to serve as full GM, primarily to keep things organized.

The problem I have with doing a "GM of the Month" is that it could quickly go downhill when someone's GM Mission doesn't wrap up in a timely manner. Each candidate's incumbency would be pushed back, resulting in a domino effect of GM Missions never getting proper endings, as well as other candidates not getting their turns for months (or even years). Plus, how do we know that profile approval won't vary wildly from GM to GM, regardless of playerbase input?

What I think our most pressing matters are:

- Elect one GM
- Elect up to three(?) co-GMs
- Set up a separate discussion thread
- Set up a reference for HF lore (I have a Word doc for this that I've been chipping away at for over a month)
- Decide on the implementation of a timeskip and how long said timeskip should be

We can worry about missions after we have the above sorted out. Personally, I think a "downtime" session -- wherein we RP our characters chilling out and doing whatever -- would be beneficial to us while we decide on proper missions.

Just my two cents. :v


Hero Factory RPG 2.0 PCs:
| Erik Jet | Daren Wolfe | Henry Flint | Helen Corona | Ethan RezDr. Xaal |

Wasteland RPG PCs:
|
Mina |

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I have some info from a source, regarding this RPG:

 

Mechna Mission

1. The Mechna Mission was based on Mirror World (that alternate dimension HF book), but was going to be a mirror of the HF RPG world. We all would have been controlling the mirror variants of our characters and such.

2. There was a quick reminder to make sure we don't approve any OP profiles. (This is common sense, but is also something where a reminder never hurts)

3. Traferous would have existed, but would have been a generic civilian NPC.

 

Mechna Planet & Government

1. Apparently there was a blog entry draft with a lot of this info on it that can now only be recovered by an admin. If someone wants to give it a go I can give you the blog entry name via PM, but I feel like we can probably work with what was remembered and move on from there.

2. Plan was for players to play the government eventually; new characters to populate it

3. Phalanx are Green NPCs (dunno what Green NPCs are, also don't know what Phalanx are because I didn't pay attention to Mechna beyond my own tiny subplot)

4. Government Head Honcho was in charge of conspiracy and such. Very evil. Assistant called Bureaucrax; this assistant is who Destructor was speaking with, is Lare/Gref's boss (dunno who those are).

5. Arsenal's Contact gets on Bureaucrax's nerves as well as everyone else's, is responsible for hiring mercenaries and such. Mildly insane, good at reading people.

6. Two other characters (Pyros? Dunno, might've been something I wasn't paying attention to), one is sane, one is insane. They were involved in a bar scene? One was mistakenly given a gun there. It's suggested in the notes that I play them, but personally Focus is enough for me and if we're moving straight on from Mechna, they can probably be cut.

 

Other Stuff

1. All GM NPCs are green (I suppose this means player-controlled?). I believe all canon characters should probably be reserved for use by GMs only. It's suggested in the notes that Zippy take Furno.

2. The notes once again suggest that Nato take over as main GM, although Nato has already refused this offer and I think we're pretty close to finalizing a solution to this anyway.

3. Any of the source's PC characters (such as Traferous, I guess) are also green. The notes mention that if the source returns, they will simply take over and continue playing them; no suggestions as to who should take over which characters. With our current GM solutions, however, I feel like it might not be an issue to simply leave them be.

 

Anyway, that's about it. Condensed it as best I could, as suggested by staff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That all sounds kind of complicated to have to sort out, and I really don't like the idea of Traferous returning in any capacity considering how much of a pain it was to get rid of him the first time. I've already made my suggestion:

 

In regards to Mechna, I think it might be easier to say that their government and Makuro struck a deal to stay out of each other's way and never speak of the portal incident again. That way villain characters can still potentially use it as a safe haven, and we can still make up vague and hilarious stuff.

 

So I guess its up to everyone else to decide whether they want to try to sort out this interdimensional mess, or just timeskip past all of the hassle. 

  • Upvote 1

___________________________________________________

My Corpus Rahkshi Profiles

My Wordpress Blog

Skyrise  Ascent

___________________________________________________

 

 

Legends Don't Last Forever

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I understood it, all of the Co-GMs had a say in profile approval alongside the players, regardless of who was actually running the missions. Plus, the plan was to start implementing multiple missions simultaneously in order to maintain interest (thus actually making it GMs of the Month, meaning that someone would have a shot about every month or so, considering that we only have, like, four Co-GMs in total), so switching between them wouldn't be nearly as bad as it's being made out to be. And since nobody actually has a solid plan to move forward with yet, that just gives people more time to figure out what they're doing.

As for the notes from our "mysterious source," if anyone wants to try to move forward with this while the rest of us start working on what comes afterwards, I don't particularly care either way, but I personally don't like assuming control over preexisting characters unless absolutely necessary. Also, some of the canon characters have been able to be player-controlled since the beginning of the game, and we haven't had a problem with that so far since nobody has made any of them do anything OOC as of yet, so that may be a step in the wrong direction.


Epics: 

Hero Factory: Contagion

RPG Characters:

BZPRPG Characters

RPG History:

The Asylum, Bionifight Infinite, Year 60,000, Matoran und Panzer, HF RPG 2.0, Wasteland, Corpus Rahkshi, Skyrise

GM Résumé:

Matoran und Panzer (Formerly Appointed Co-GM), Corpus Rahkshi (Former Substitute Co-GM)

 

 

Feel free to shoot a PM my way if you're waiting for me to respond to something and I've been taking a while to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I understood it, all of the Co-GMs had a say in profile approval alongside the players, regardless of who was actually running the missions.

 

We didn't have any Co-GMs before. The GM simply took the opinions of others into consideration when evaluating a profile, but ultimately had the final word. 

 

Besides, what's to stop our "GM of the Month" from submitting another Traferous? Is he/she going to comply if the rest of us call for said brainchild to be nerf'd? What if another GM decides to approve/ban a previously banned/approved character the following month? Plus, can anyone guarantee that their Monthly Missions are going to be wrapped up within 30-ish days? How do we even decide who goes next?

 

[...] considering that we only have, like, four Co-GMs in total)[.]

 

We've had roughly five(?) Co-GM offers. We haven't decided anything yet.

 

And since nobody actually has a solid plan to move forward with yet, that just gives people more time to figure out what they're doing.

 

Not... really. Sure, people may have their own separate plans, but that doesn't help us as a group.

 

We need to decide ASAP whether or not we need one permanent GM (with a couple of Co-GMs) or to rotate GM "shifts."

 

As for the notes from our "mysterious source," if anyone wants to try to move forward with this while the rest of us start working on what comes afterwards, I don't particularly care either way [...]

 

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this. Are you suggesting that one part of the group sort out the Mechna Mission while the rest start planning the aftereffects...? 

 

[...] but I personally don't like assuming control over preexisting characters unless absolutely necessary.

 

... Are you talking about NPCs?

 

Also, some of the canon characters have been able to be player-controlled since the beginning of the game, and we haven't had a problem with that so far since nobody has made any of them do anything OOC as of yet, so that may be a step in the wrong direction.

 

To be fair, nobody except myself and maybe Zippy have even bothered playing any NPCs for more than a post or two. We haven't seen an "out-of-character" NPC because 95% of the playerbase didn't feel like using them.

 

I'm flattered you think my rendition of Bulk was in-character, though. :P

 

That all sounds kind of complicated to have to sort out, and I really don't like the idea of Traferous returning in any capacity considering how much of a pain it was to get rid of him the first time. I've already made my suggestion:

 

In regards to Mechna, I think it might be easier to say that their government and Makuro struck a deal to stay out of each other's way and never speak of the portal incident again. That way villain characters can still potentially use it as a safe haven, and we can still make up vague and hilarious stuff.

 

So I guess its up to everyone else to decide whether they want to try to sort out this interdimensional mess, or just timeskip past all of the hassle. 

 

This sounds like an excellent idea. Doing a timeskip and leaving the ending of the Mechna Mission vague could be entertaining, what with each Hero remembering it a little differently. ;)

 

Alright, seeing as the proposed timeskip is beginning to sound like the simplest thing to sort out, I think we should put it to a vote. Who here would like to see a full-on (two/three month) timeskip?


Hero Factory RPG 2.0 PCs:
| Erik Jet | Daren Wolfe | Henry Flint | Helen Corona | Ethan RezDr. Xaal |

Wasteland RPG PCs:
|
Mina |

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aye.


 

           

Chuck Norik is no match for Bruce Lhikan!

 

 

If you use correct grammar in your posts (or try hard to), place this in your signature. Join Myst's campaign for correct grammar usage on BZPower!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1. The way I understood it, all of the Co-GMs had a say in profile approval alongside the players, regardless of who was actually running the missions.

We didn't have any Co-GMs before. The GM simply took the opinions of others into consideration when evaluating a profile, but ultimately had the final word. 

 

Besides, what's to stop our "GM of the Month" from submitting another Traferous? Is he/she going to comply if the rest of us call for said brainchild to be nerf'd? What if another GM decides to approve/ban a previously banned/approved character the following month? Plus, can anyone guarantee that their Monthly Missions are going to be wrapped up within 30-ish days? How do we even decide who goes next?

 

2. [...] considering that we only have, like, four Co-GMs in total)[.]

We've had roughly five(?) Co-GM offers. We haven't decided anything yet.

 

3. And since nobody actually has a solid plan to move forward with yet, that just gives people more time to figure out what they're doing.

Not... really. Sure, people may have their own separate plans, but that doesn't help us as a group.

 

We need to decide ASAP whether or not we need one permanent GM (with a couple of Co-GMs) or to rotate GM "shifts."

 

4. As for the notes from our "mysterious source," if anyone wants to try to move forward with this while the rest of us start working on what comes afterwards, I don't particularly care either way [...]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this. Are you suggesting that one part of the group sort out the Mechna Mission while the rest start planning the aftereffects...? 

 

5. [...] but I personally don't like assuming control over preexisting characters unless absolutely necessary.

... Are you talking about NPCs?

 

6. Also, some of the canon characters have been able to be player-controlled since the beginning of the game, and we haven't had a problem with that so far since nobody has made any of them do anything OOC as of yet, so that may be a step in the wrong direction.

To be fair, nobody except myself and maybe Zippy have even bothered playing any NPCs for more than a post or two. We haven't seen an "out-of-character" NPC because 95% of the playerbase didn't feel like using them.

 

I'm flattered you think my rendition of Bulk was in-character, though. :P

 

That all sounds kind of complicated to have to sort out, and I really don't like the idea of Traferous returning in any capacity considering how much of a pain it was to get rid of him the first time. I've already made my suggestion:

 

In regards to Mechna, I think it might be easier to say that their government and Makuro struck a deal to stay out of each other's way and never speak of the portal incident again. That way villain characters can still potentially use it as a safe haven, and we can still make up vague and hilarious stuff.

 

So I guess its up to everyone else to decide whether they want to try to sort out this interdimensional mess, or just timeskip past all of the hassle. 

This sounds like an excellent idea. Doing a timeskip and leaving the ending of the Mechna Mission vague could be entertaining, what with each Hero remembering it a little differently. ;)

 

7. Alright, seeing as the proposed timeskip is beginning to sound like the simplest thing to sort out, I think we should put it to a vote. Who here would like to see a full-on (two/three month) timeskip?

 

 

Itemised list of responses are as follows:

 

1. I was actually refering to the system we are now just recently creating, not the one implemented in the past. And to answer you question, the Co-GMs would likely (or, at the very least, should) be taking the thoughts of other players into consideration before putting it to a vote. That way, no one person has all the approval power, and situations like Traferous would exist far less often.

2. That is, indeed, what I was referring to. And yes, nothing is set in stone as of yet.

3. That was referring to potential plot ideas, yes. The discussion we're having now is currently taking care of the rest, and on that point, I agree.

4. That was what I was suggesting, yes, but since everyone seems to be in favor of a time skip, that point is now moot.

5.Yes, both canon and/or otherwise. I'd rather come up with my own than be constantly wondering if I'm playing somebody "right."

6. True, but why spend time fixing a system that isn't broken?

7. Aye, I suppose. Like I said, whatever gets us moving again, I'm fine with.


Epics: 

Hero Factory: Contagion

RPG Characters:

BZPRPG Characters

RPG History:

The Asylum, Bionifight Infinite, Year 60,000, Matoran und Panzer, HF RPG 2.0, Wasteland, Corpus Rahkshi, Skyrise

GM Résumé:

Matoran und Panzer (Formerly Appointed Co-GM), Corpus Rahkshi (Former Substitute Co-GM)

 

 

Feel free to shoot a PM my way if you're waiting for me to respond to something and I've been taking a while to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I have a suggestion regarding the whole GM issue:

 

Tex has already offered to maintain the first post, and Zippy is our unofficial lore expert. Ideally, if we could get another three volunteers, then those five could easily serve as a group of co-GMs, each managing a different aspect of the RPG, with profiles and other important decisions having to be agreed upon by at least three of them before being put into action. 

 

I still really like the idea of player run missions, and I think it could be implemented quite easily under this system - the player pitches their idea to the board of co-GMs, and if they approve, the player in question is given temporary control of the relevant NPCs for the duration of the mission. 

  • Upvote 4

___________________________________________________

My Corpus Rahkshi Profiles

My Wordpress Blog

Skyrise  Ascent

___________________________________________________

 

 

Legends Don't Last Forever

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a thought regarding the "Mission of the Month" thing. Anybody remember how Project Sunstorm or whatever it was called from mission #1 had that vague timer thing going on and whenever Fishers wanted us to keep moving she'd announce that "Project Sunstorm now has X hours left before launch!"? We could just set something like that up for each Mission of the Month except the timers actually mean something, as in "You literally have only X days left to stop the dastardly scheme before it destroys all of Ninjago Makuhero City!" That would simplify things schedule-wise, but also limit the types of missions we could use somewhat.  :confused:

 

I also vote AYE for the timeskip.


"It doesn't matter how big your first bite is. It matters how many bites you take." -Mool the Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a thought regarding the "Mission of the Month" thing. Anybody remember how Project Sunstorm or whatever it was called from mission #1 had that vague timer thing going on and whenever Fishers wanted us to keep moving she'd announce that "Project Sunstorm now has X hours left before launch!"? We could just set something like that up for each Mission of the Month except the timers actually mean something, as in "You literally have only X days left to stop the dastardly scheme before it destroys all of Ninjago Makuhero City!" That would simplify things schedule-wise, but also limit the types of missions we could use somewhat.  :confused:

 

I also vote AYE for the timeskip.

 

Having a time limit on a mission once in a blue moon could be interesting, but I don't think anyone wants to deal with that on every Monthly Mission. :I

 

As for the timeskip, that's seven votes so far, but I'll let it go for another 24-ish hours to give others a chance to speak up. After that we'll move on to the next item.

  • Upvote 2

Hero Factory RPG 2.0 PCs:
| Erik Jet | Daren Wolfe | Henry Flint | Helen Corona | Ethan RezDr. Xaal |

Wasteland RPG PCs:
|
Mina |

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow I missed a lot hold on
 

Egg proposal: Will have to think on it. On the one hand, I like the idea of the Hero Factory's resident guard having backup. On the other, there's two issues: the first is feeding the thing Quaza, which probably won't happen. The second is that the duck might just eat the egg.

 

Marrow: I don't know what the best moral ground is on feeding a villain what are essentially baby hearts to survive. My suggestion is that Hero Factory synthesised some kind of replacement foodstuff.

 

Timeskip: ye

 

Hall of Justice-esque co-GM Board: ye. GM of the Month is proving to have too many issues. Having a group overseeing and approving characters, missions, etc. will probably help that.

 

Time limits on missions: Seriously limits missions, and as Cor said, it's fine every once in a while but not every month.


Memoirs of the Dead entry: The Unknown Turaga, a tale from the late Chronicler Kodan's journal.


Strakk's Best Friend, the story of a confusing yet somehow canon friendship.


Terrible Comics, a collection of comics that are terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a time limit on a mission once in a blue moon could be interesting, but I don't think anyone wants to deal with that on every Monthly Mission. :I

 

Yeah, that's kind of what I thought. :annoyed: Seeing as we're deciding on a board of GMs instead of a rotation though, shouldn't that kind of clear up the need for a Mission of the Month in the first place? The board can talk over a mission between themselves and then just host it, but unless everyone suddenly has an idea all at once there's no reason to rush things, yes?

Either way, time limits aren't the only way to keep things on track if do go for Mission of the Month. I'm sure there are other ways to make sure the mission ends by the time the month is over.


"It doesn't matter how big your first bite is. It matters how many bites you take." -Mool the Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on the unpredictable nature of player participation and character action, I kind of agree that trying to constrain in-game missions to irl deadlines isn't such a great idea.

Edited by The Old Master

___________________________________________________

My Corpus Rahkshi Profiles

My Wordpress Blog

Skyrise  Ascent

___________________________________________________

 

 

Legends Don't Last Forever

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Having a time limit on a mission once in a blue moon could be interesting, but I don't think anyone wants to deal with that on every Monthly Mission. :I

 

Yeah, that's kind of what I thought. :annoyed: Seeing as we're deciding on a board of GMs instead of a rotation though, shouldn't that kind of clear up the need for a Mission of the Month in the first place? The board can talk over a mission between themselves and then just host it, but unless everyone suddenly has an idea all at once there's no reason to rush things, yes?

Either way, time limits aren't the only way to keep things on track if do go for Mission of the Month. I'm sure there are other ways to make sure the mission ends by the time the month is over.

 

 

Based on the unpredictable nature of player participation and character action, I kind of agree that ctrying to constrain in-game missions to irl deadlines isn't such a great idea.

Aye, there's really no way we can make sure a mission ends on time without ruining that GM's plans. Plus, there's no guarantee they won't get pulled away by RL situations and delay the mission for days or even weeks. Do we cut the mission short when the 30 days are up, or allow the GM extra time and keep the next GM waiting?

 

Having a sort of GM council would function much the same as having one GM, except that the usual GM duties would be spread between the five(?) of them. I like Nato's suggestion that each one take on a different job (i.e. loremaster, NPC-handler, etc.), however, if one GM is off dealing with RL, the other four would still be able to run things in the meantime.

 

Edit: Also, I don't see why the playerbase couldn't PM their mission ideas to said council. I think it'd be fun to have predominately player-run missions. Dungeonmasters in D&D are really only in charge of the environment and NPCs, with only the occasional story prompt. 

Edited by FallenCor
  • Upvote 3

Hero Factory RPG 2.0 PCs:
| Erik Jet | Daren Wolfe | Henry Flint | Helen Corona | Ethan RezDr. Xaal |

Wasteland RPG PCs:
|
Mina |

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GM duties would be spread between the five(?) of them.

 

I figured five was a reasonable number, given how many players have already offered to serve in some kind of co-GM capacity. Not too many for things to get complicated, but not so few that the game will stall if one or two are absent or have a disagreement. 


___________________________________________________

My Corpus Rahkshi Profiles

My Wordpress Blog

Skyrise  Ascent

___________________________________________________

 

 

Legends Don't Last Forever

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Would people in charge of one aspect be able to weigh in on other aspects?

 

2. When do I get a jacket with "LOREMASTER" sewn on the back


Memoirs of the Dead entry: The Unknown Turaga, a tale from the late Chronicler Kodan's journal.


Strakk's Best Friend, the story of a confusing yet somehow canon friendship.


Terrible Comics, a collection of comics that are terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. It was just a suggestion. If everyone agrees to it, then I guess it would probably be up to the elected co-GMs to decide how they wanted to interact and cooperate. 

 

 

2. Buy your own jacket. 


___________________________________________________

My Corpus Rahkshi Profiles

My Wordpress Blog

Skyrise  Ascent

___________________________________________________

 

 

Legends Don't Last Forever

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may not have a physical jacket but I have a laptop, a trackpad, and a whole lot of determination

 

art2.png

 

You don't wanna mess with me, punks. I watched the entirety of Invasion from Below without leaving the room in exasperation.

Edited by ZippyWharrgarbl
  • Upvote 6

Memoirs of the Dead entry: The Unknown Turaga, a tale from the late Chronicler Kodan's journal.


Strakk's Best Friend, the story of a confusing yet somehow canon friendship.


Terrible Comics, a collection of comics that are terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole "Mission of the Month" thing was originally meant to be an exageration anyway; if a plot could be wrapped up within that time span, great, but nobody was ever meant to have it as a hard deadline. Either way, so long as the Co-GMs still get equal say when it comes to designing mission layouts, I have no issues with going a different route, as that's what I really wanted to make sure happened.

As for Rylinth's suggestion about implementing time limits on missions, from an IC perspective, I'm going to have to agree with the majority so far. From an OOC perspective however, with a little tinkering, mind you, he might actually be onto something here. If the missions were being designed in phases offscreen instead of implementing a standard doomsday countdown, the Co-GMs could dynamically introduce new aspects to them, based on how much progress the players involved had achieved so far, which could theoretically break up some of the monotony we would encounter with simply going from Point A to Point B. For example, lets say that the Spyderian Horde has begun nesting in a district of a random city, some Heroes were deployed there on a recon mission in an effort to hinder their advance, and they've just discovered the main chamber and are now fending off its guardians. If the Heroes are in control of the skirmish by the end of the phase, not only do they end up preventing their foes from bringing in more backup, but they also manage to get a blood sample off of one of them, leading to the development of weapons that injure Spyderians more easily in the future. If the Spyderians are victorious, on the other hand, not only do they call for enough reinforcements to force the Heroes into an immediate retreat, but when the next phase rolls around, their territory and numbers have effectively doubled, potentially hindering the next objective of the Heroes. This way, the potential successes and failures of the players have more of a direct impact on the missions themselves, making the consequences of said actions feel more "real" and, by extension, garners more interest than we've seen in the past.

 As for the ability to weigh in on another aspect of the game, sure, it should be possible, and the other Co-GM would ideally take the time to hear out your concerns, but whether or not it actually succeeds in having an effect would depend almost entirely on the nature of the conversation.

Edited by Timageness

Epics: 

Hero Factory: Contagion

RPG Characters:

BZPRPG Characters

RPG History:

The Asylum, Bionifight Infinite, Year 60,000, Matoran und Panzer, HF RPG 2.0, Wasteland, Corpus Rahkshi, Skyrise

GM Résumé:

Matoran und Panzer (Formerly Appointed Co-GM), Corpus Rahkshi (Former Substitute Co-GM)

 

 

Feel free to shoot a PM my way if you're waiting for me to respond to something and I've been taking a while to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole "Mission of the Month" thing was originally meant to be an exageration anyway; if a plot could be wrapped up within that time span, great, but nobody was ever meant to have it as a hard deadline. 

 

So, if we're using "month" loosely here, then how do we decide when that mission needs to end? Is it entirely up to that month's GM whether or not the players have to keep doing that mission, no matter how long it takes? 

 

Frankly, if these theoretical GMs are really just hosting the story bit of each mission, why would we give them full GM powers? Or were we meant to use "GM" loosely as well?  :confused: I'm starting to feel like we're just slapping a fancy title on something we've already been doing in-game.

 

1. As for Rylinth's suggestion about implementing time limits on missions, from an IC perspective, I'm going to have to agree with the majority so far. From an OOC perspective however, with a little tinkering, mind you, he might actually be onto something here. If the missions were being designed in phases offscreen instead of implementing a standard doomsday countdown, the Co-GMs could dynamically introduce new aspects to them, based on how much progress the players involved had achieved so far, which could theoretically break up some of the monotony we would encounter with simply going from Point A to Point B. 2. For example, lets say that the Spyderian Horde has begun nesting in a district of a random city, some Heroes were deployed there on a recon mission in an effort to hinder their advance, and they've just discovered the main chamber and are now fending off its guardians. If the Heroes are in control of the skirmish by the end of the phase, not only do they end up preventing their foes from bringing in more backup, but they also manage to get a blood sample off of one of them, leading to the development of weapons that injure Spyderians more easily in the future. 3. If the Spyderians are victorious, on the other hand, not only do they call for enough reinforcements to force the Heroes into an immediate retreat, but when the next phase rolls around, their territory and numbers have effectively doubled, potentially hindering the next objective of the Heroes. 4. This way, the potential successes and failures of the players have more of a direct impact on the missions themselves, 5. making the consequences of said actions feel more "real" 6. and, by extension, garners more interest than we've seen in the past.

 

Alright, bear with me here... 

 

1. Are you suggesting we break missions up into pieces? "Based on how much progress the players [...] had achieved so far"? I think you're overcomplicating something that GMs already do.

 

2. Again, isn't that how we've been doing things?

 

3. The aftereffects of one mission having an affect on the following mission happens all the time. Breaking the planning process up into "phases" is completely unnecessary.

 

4. How have our actions (or rather our characters') not been having an impact on the missions?

 

5. "Real"? Everyone's been writing their characters as realistically as possible, and doing a fine job of it, too. (Except Shade -- he's weird. I'm kidding. *cough*)

 

6. People have been busy with school, jobs, and family. It's not that there's the lack of interest, there just happen to be periods where more than one player is dealing with other things.

 

...

 

As of this post, there are seven (and-a-half) votes in favor of the proposed timeskip. I'll give it a couple more hours for those players who haven't yet voiced their opinions.


Hero Factory RPG 2.0 PCs:
| Erik Jet | Daren Wolfe | Henry Flint | Helen Corona | Ethan RezDr. Xaal |

Wasteland RPG PCs:
|
Mina |

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the better question would be why it matters at all now that it's basically become an outdated concept, but I'd assume that the person responsible for the particular plot would've come up with a loose overview of the mission beforehand, just so everyone else in charge would have some idea of how long it was supposed to run, story-wise.

As for the other points:

 

1. The missions were already technically broken up into smaller segments long before we even submitted character profiles, considering each one came with its own list of objectives that could potentially be completed, so not much would be changing in that department.

2. Poor example on my part, I'll admit, but what I was actually suggesting was that it might be a cool idea if the objectives themselves had a more active role in how the overall mission played out upon completion, not that we should have one mission's outcome affect the beginning of another (because you're right, that has already been happening). In the past, if an objective wasn't completed, a part of the actual story was actually cut out instead, but otherwise the current mission pretty much remained unchanged.

3. See responses #1 and #2.

4. I'm not saying that they don't have any impact at all, but they should also have more of an impact than, "Oh, but you've only succeeded in delaying my master plan!," or, "Now I'll just be more ticked off at you when I return for Round Two!"

5. Again, not saying people aren't, but the game should also reward people for doing so by giving them a reason to keep posting.

6. For the record, I'm not talking about not being able to post because of stuff IRL, I'm talking about all the people who the game has previously failed by not doing enough to keep their interest. And I know that this has happened in the past for a fact because I was one of them at one point, and to be quite frank, it sucked royally. But don't just take my word for it; feel free to PM some of the other people who have had characters in the Profiles Section and are no longer around anymore. I can think of at least one of them back towards the beginning who actually came out and said that they were quitting for that very same reason.

All I'm trying to convey with this is that I've been noticing a trend during my time here, and it's one I believe that we should also seriously take the time to consider fixing before it becomes an even bigger issue than it already is.

 

Just to clarify yet again, I actually do like spending my time here, and everything I'm trying to point out is in an effort to improve upon what we already have, not to tear it down. I wouldn't have offered to become a Co-GM if that was my intention.


Epics: 

Hero Factory: Contagion

RPG Characters:

BZPRPG Characters

RPG History:

The Asylum, Bionifight Infinite, Year 60,000, Matoran und Panzer, HF RPG 2.0, Wasteland, Corpus Rahkshi, Skyrise

GM Résumé:

Matoran und Panzer (Formerly Appointed Co-GM), Corpus Rahkshi (Former Substitute Co-GM)

 

 

Feel free to shoot a PM my way if you're waiting for me to respond to something and I've been taking a while to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5. "Real"? Everyone's been writing their characters as realistically as possible, and doing a fine job of it, too. (Except Shade -- he's weird. I'm kidding. *cough*)

OOC: Actually, the reason I only have one character is because I seem to only be able to put my own personality in whatever person I create. Shade is a very good representative (more or less) of how I think.

Edited by Vicarath

"He who loves his brother most hits him hardest." -Vicarath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

aye for timeskip.

 

 

also puting myself forward for possible co-GM. 

 

 

mostly as a mediator, but i might contribute in other ways from time to time.

  • Upvote 1

Corpus Rahkshi Profiles!

Kat Grim Diode Burn Percy

Aza and Ezec Pentaghast


CORPUS RAHKSHI APPROVED CHARACTERS


Corpus Rahkshi Discord

                                                                                                                                                       

                                                                                           The Unofficial Guide to TBRPG Combat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOC: Well, I hate to admit it, but most people who noticed I was gone probably assumed it anyway, so here goes: as of right now, I am on indefinite hiatus from this RPG. Much as I enjoyed it, the game is moving more than fast enough to conflict with my frantic real-life schedule. I just have enough on my plate right now that there's no time left to make the number of posts-per-day I'd need to stay on top of this one. Maybe in a few months I'll have slowed down enough to start posting again. I certainly hope so. In the meantime, so long and thanks for all the fish.


bionicle_2017_banner_3c.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOC: Well, I hate to admit it, but most people who noticed I was gone probably assumed it anyway, so here goes: as of right now, I am on indefinite hiatus from this RPG. Much as I enjoyed it, the game is moving more than fast enough to conflict with my frantic real-life schedule. I just have enough on my plate right now that there's no time left to make the number of posts-per-day I'd need to stay on top of this one. Maybe in a few months I'll have slowed down enough to start posting again. I certainly hope so. In the meantime, so long and thanks for all the fish.

 

Sorry to hear that, man! Hope to see you again after we have everything sorted out.  ^_^ 

 

...

 

Alright, we seem to have settled on a full timeskip, which leaves only the length of said timeskip up for debate. Tex suggested six months, since some of y'all seem to like the idea of having a half-rebuilt Tower. Six months would certainly give our Heroes enough time to have sorted out their temporary lodgings, as well as letting the dust settle after the Portal Mission. What do you guys think?

 

...

 

We should probably start taking care of the GM issue next. Personally, I'm game for having a council of sorts, elected by the playerbase, but I know some were keen on picking random GMs throughout the year. From what I gather so far, the former would act almost exactly as if we had one GM (except that the responsibilities would be shared by two or more players), while the latter would... require some additional work to figure out.

 

So the question is: Do we want a council or "GM of the month"?

  • Upvote 1

Hero Factory RPG 2.0 PCs:
| Erik Jet | Daren Wolfe | Henry Flint | Helen Corona | Ethan RezDr. Xaal |

Wasteland RPG PCs:
|
Mina |

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aye for six-month timeskip. Aye for Council of GMs.

Edited by Vicarath

"He who loves his brother most hits him hardest." -Vicarath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Council sounds like a much better way to go than GM of the Month.

Also an AYE for the 6-month timeskip.


"It doesn't matter how big your first bite is. It matters how many bites you take." -Mool the Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...