RolePlay onLine RPoL Logo

, welcome to Game Design

13:12, 17th May 2024 (GMT+0)

General - Discussion.

Posted by Game DesignFor group 0
steelsmiter
player, 105 posts
Sun 18 Jan 2015
at 09:06
  • msg #93

Re: OOC - Discussion

Arkrim:
No, I'm just throwing random things out there.

It's cool, a good bit of them will be used for NPCs :D
icosahedron152
player, 34 posts
Sun 18 Jan 2015
at 14:19
  • msg #94

Re: OOC - Discussion

I'm not familiar with ZA per se, but for general zombie game PCs:

The Single Parent with kids in tow
The Girl With Attitude
The Pensioner with essential knowledge
The Office Worker
The Manual Worker
The Ex-Criminal

Could add a bit of interest. :)
shady joker
player, 36 posts
Sun 18 Jan 2015
at 18:43
  • msg #95

Re: OOC - Discussion

Maybe this might fall under ex-soldier but...

The Gun/Survival nut that has a stock pile of weapons and equipment. Make sure he says,"I told you all so" at least once.

The Doctor/Medical character that heals the other characters.

The Scientist tying to figure out WHY zombies are around.
steelsmiter
player, 106 posts
Mon 19 Jan 2015
at 02:24
  • msg #96

Re: OOC - Discussion

shady joker:
Maybe this might fall under ex-soldier but...

The Gun/Survival nut that has a stock pile of weapons and equipment. Make sure he says,"I told you all so" at least once.

Redneck actually. the main difference is whether we use the contraction of "you all".

quote:
The Doctor/Medical character that heals the other characters.

Hadn't got that one down yet. Was thinking of non-doctor skills for it.

quote:
The Scientist tying to figure out WHY zombies are around.

Hadn't considered a professional in that role either.
LoreGuard
GM, 36 posts
Mon 19 Jan 2015
at 17:32
  • msg #97

Re: OOC - Discussion

How about about the Entrepreneur who tries to figure out a way to control the Zombies to build a new workforce so they can start a new industrial revolution using zombie/slave labor.

Maybe he is a genius and may [almost] be successful.

Or maybe he only thinks he is, and is destined to be devoured by his exiting new workforce, when a regular feeding goes way wrong.
steelsmiter
player, 107 posts
Mon 19 Jan 2015
at 17:36
  • msg #98

Re: OOC - Discussion

LoreGuard:
How about about the Entrepreneur who tries to figure out a way to control the Zombies to build a new workforce so they can start a new industrial revolution using zombie/slave labor.

Maybe he is a genius and may [almost] be successful.

That's full of awesome!

quote:
Or maybe he only thinks he is, and is destined to be devoured by his exiting new workforce, when a regular feeding goes way wrong.

Oh he can still be a genius and not account for certain failures :D
LoreGuard
GM, 37 posts
Mon 19 Jan 2015
at 20:04
  • msg #99

Re: OOC - Discussion

Glad I was able to come up with an entertaining idea for you.  :)

Do you want a thread for this?
steelsmiter
player, 108 posts
Mon 19 Jan 2015
at 20:26
  • msg #100

Re: OOC - Discussion

I don't know. I will be using a modified form of Castle Falkenstein, but I've found that straight rules tweaks are viewed as somewhat counterproductive.
icosahedron152
player, 38 posts
Wed 25 Mar 2015
at 04:02
  • msg #102

Re: OOC - Discussion

The following is an extract from the RPoL Development forum, thread called 'New Category: Gaming Aids'.

Basically, if we tag this 'game' as 'Discussion', we get a free ad in RPoL's 'Heaven' resource list, where maybe more people can find us.


Skald
 moderator, 616 posts
 Whatever it is,
 I'm against it
Mon 23 Mar 2015
at 12:05
rMail | Profile

moderator post | [quote] | [reply] | msg #58
Re: New Category: Gaming Aids.

...But we do have a thread in Heaven that points to specific gaming-related discussion games, if that's what you're after: link to a message in another game

I went through everything that had "discussion" as category or game system or in the title, plus found a few more here and there.  Ignored anything inactive or which hadn't had a post in five months.

Anyone else already has or starts gaming-related discussion threads (or if you're the owner of an inactive one that you're bringing back to life), I'd be happy, keen even, to add to the list.  :>

icosahedron152
 member, 450 posts
Tue 24 Mar 2015
at 06:00
 [edit] | [delete] | msg #60
Re: New Category: Gaming Aids.

In reply to Skald (msg # 58):

Ok, this is starting to look like a working compromise. I see at least one resource in there that others have been seeking. However, there are other resources that are missing because the GM has probably been confused about categorizing his/her game and picked a category other than Discussion (which was my original point).

So, if you are a GM, or know a GM, who has a useful resource with an element of discussion in it, get that resource tagged with 'Discussion' and let Skald know. And make yourself a shortcut to that list so you can find other resources as they are added.

Thanks, Skald - a positive result. :)
This message was last edited by the player at 04:09, Wed 25 Mar 2015.
C-h Freese
player, 13 posts
Wed 25 Mar 2015
at 04:10
  • msg #103

Re: OOC - Discussion

I take it that means that 'System' needs to be switched from "Homebrew" to "Discussion" which is also a listed system.
Arkrim
GM, 314 posts
Wed 25 Mar 2015
at 04:45
  • msg #104

Re: OOC - Discussion

Done and done. Thanks, Ico! I was wondering why discussion had never popped up as an option. I guess you just had to fill it in manually.

Last time Game Design lost it's discussion status because a troll had started harassing people there and when it was reported, it was discovered that the sole moderator had quit RPOL not responding to any inquiries whatsoever for months. Maybe this time around we have multiple moderators so that doesn't happen?
This message was last edited by the GM at 04:54, Wed 25 Mar 2015.
icosahedron152
player, 39 posts
Wed 25 Mar 2015
at 19:37
  • msg #105

Re: OOC - Discussion

Just to be clear, I believe adding (or changing) to tag to Discussion will still leave us as a 'game', not a public discussion forum like the other one was.

To achieve that status would be a later upgrade requiring specific moderator alteration.

All this current change will do is give us a free ad in the 'Heaven' public forum. But at least we'll appear on a list that people can find.

If I'm still not clear, let me know.
C-h Freese
player, 14 posts
Wed 25 Mar 2015
at 22:04
  • msg #106

Re: OOC - Discussion

I believe you are right if, if I remember correctly forum was a two step processes. First you opened a game for discussion.  Then you had to prove the idea would fly with a certain amount of activity and length of existence.  Then you can  petition to be made a public rather than private forum.
Below is a copy of the notice of closure from the other Forum.


quote:
RPoL allows users to create discussion boards, such as this one, which operate as user run forums with public access.  The creator/owner of the forum, however, bears the full responsibility for maintaining and moderating it.  It is expected that all forums created by users on RPoL be moderated, and that all abide by our content guidelines and Terms of Use.  The forum owner is ultimately responsible for this, and must be diligent in their moderation duties within their forum.

It has been brought to our attention that the creator of this particular forum is not fulfilling that responsibility, and has not been doing so for some time.  Nor have they appointed anybody to take responsibility in their absence.

As a result of this, the board does not meet RPoL's requirements for a user-run forum, and will be closed down.  Note that because no extra moderators were appointed by the forum owner, it is not possible to transfer ownership of the current forum to anybody else.

Should anybody wish the forum to continue, they will need to create a new one, setting it up as a game, then approach the site moderators at a later date when it has proven itself to be sustainable, to arrange conversion to a forum.

...at 01:36, Tue 08 Apr 2014.

LoreGuard
GM, 43 posts
Wed 25 Mar 2015
at 22:45
  • msg #107

Re: OOC - Discussion

Yes I believe we would also need to request it be listed in the list in heaven.  I think it would be best to have Arkrim request it.  So we don't flood them with requests.

We could examine if we want to continue to require RTJ to participate, or if we should ask to have it made an open discussion group.  Would the opening up bring more people to our discussions, or bring extra disruption?
Alexei Yaruk-Mundhenk
GM, 29 posts
A new and greater game:
we can make it possible!
Wed 25 Mar 2015
at 23:03
  • msg #108

Re: OOC - Discussion

Speaking for myself, I do believe that making it an open discussion forum was always the goal, and I have eagerly awaited the day that it came to pass.

However, weather or not it becomes open discussion I think it should be listed in the Heaven thread, because we need some fresh blood around here.
Arkrim
GM, 315 posts
Thu 26 Mar 2015
at 02:21
  • msg #109

Re: OOC - Discussion

Okay, so step one: free heaven plug.

I'll happily submit the request. Is there a specific method I'm supposed to send the request or should I just Rmail the admins?

And do we need to eliminate the RTJ in order do so? I mean, all we do is ask someone to agree to the rules here anyway. There are no requirements beyond that. We only have 7 rules and they're mostly "be respectful, be sensible" repeated in 7 different ways.
LoreGuard
GM, 44 posts
Thu 26 Mar 2015
at 03:26
  • msg #110

Re: OOC - Discussion

I believe that getting listed in heaven would be accomplished by an RTJ stating we are a discussion group that has been around for getting close to a year now, and offers help and advice in building games and usable mechanics to into existing games.

If we want to dispense with the RTJ requirement I think that is an rmail to the moderators.  I think as you mentioned the rules we go by are simple and designed to be in line with public forums framework, and we have several internal moderators whom have stepped up.  Thread naming might get a little messy unless we moderate them, but we can discuss how important that is.
icosahedron152
player, 40 posts
Thu 26 Mar 2015
at 05:36
  • msg #111

Re: OOC - Discussion

As I understand it, becoming a public forum would sidestep a plug in Heaven, because as a forum we would be just as prominent as Heaven itself.

I'm not sure that the moderators would consider us currently to have a sufficiently high profile or large enough membership/following to take that step, but a plug in Heaven would be a step in the right direction.

I think, as Lore Guard says, a request to Skald, care of the moderators, will get us the ad. Or we could simply ask in the thread where this offer was made, to see what format he prefers.
C-h Freese
player, 15 posts
Thu 26 Mar 2015
at 15:04
  • msg #112

Re: OOC - Discussion

It is there in heaven now.

---Spelling edit
This message was last edited by the player at 03:01, Fri 27 Mar 2015.
Arkrim
GM, 316 posts
Fri 27 Mar 2015
at 02:30
  • msg #113

Re: OOC - Discussion

Awesome! Thanks guys.
Tzuppy
player, 1 post
Fri 27 Mar 2015
at 04:06
  • msg #114

Re: OOC - Discussion

One thing we've noticed in WoD Forum, which is a public forum, is that when a game becomes a a forum, it no longer has "seeking players" flag and as such it doesn't turn up in default "Only active games requesting players" searches. In turn, this considerably reduced our ability to attract new folks. Personally, if this was my game, I wouldn't go that route.
LoreGuard
GM, 45 posts
Fri 27 Mar 2015
at 04:17
  • msg #115

Re: OOC - Discussion

I wonder if Jase has thought about that... I would presume that a Public forum should be treated as if it always had the players wanted flag turned on.  So it would show up in default searches, for instance.
Tzuppy
player, 3 posts
Fri 27 Mar 2015
at 04:31
  • msg #116

Re: OOC - Discussion

Well, if you get him to fix that I certainly would appreciate it.
Arkrim
GM, 317 posts
Fri 27 Mar 2015
at 04:40
  • msg #117

Re: OOC - Discussion

That's a good idea. Perhaps we should just wait it out. Stay a game until that gets adjusted, then apply for discussion status IF and WHEN that's fixed.
LoreGuard
GM, 46 posts
Fri 27 Mar 2015
at 05:05
  • msg #118

Re: OOC - Discussion

I put in a suggestion in the RPOL Development... I really think that is non-intuitive to be stuck off... by becoming open, that is effectively stuck open, the extreme of requesting participation.  You never know, Jase might notice it and simply take care of it.  I really think it was a non-intentional ramification of their decision that forums and discussion groups shouldn't advertise as games do.  I think to advertise in PW they have to have that flag on... If they can't turn it on, they can't advertise.
Sign In