[MtG] Looking for Lore Buffs to help me backstory

Page 1 of 1 [ 9 posts ] 

NyxBean
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2015
Posts: 81
Location: Edinburgh

11 Jul 2015, 7:04 pm

Although it looks like the majority of the posts are video games, I figured this might be the right place.

Long story hopefully made short before I move onto the point: I'm a new player of Magic: The Gathering. Started at the beginning of last year and at first I thought I was doing great, making themed decks and playing them with my flatmate. Then I realised that other people were building by mechanics with creatures I felt didn't mix. Stupid of me really considering what a Planeswalker is and does, but I'd got this structure, even down to how many of the types of cards that would be in there. I then got given a big box of commons and discovered that whenever I bought more I'd have to find all the appropriate cards and re-arrange the decks (I think I'm up to about 35+ now).

I had to force myself to stop because I was burning out and crying. It was distressing not to be playing either though and so I made a plan: push all the cards I have except the Planeswalkers to the side and start over, only getting the newest or relevant cards instead of everything. That way I can learn to build on mechanics (I don't know why this works in my head) and can hopefully figure out a non-obsessive way to deal with new cards.

When I found out that the next two expansions are returning to Zendikar, I knew the moment had come. I even have the Soul of Zendikar. It's a sign from the cards, yada yada.

Anyway, I need help doing a background. reddit was a jerk about it. Hopefully I'll have more useful answers/tips/canon reminders here; attention to detail and all that, after all.

Also let me know about any backstories of your own Planeswalkers, please.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please note that if I misinterpreted a character's actions it's because I've yet to have a full understanding of them.


The Basics of the Character [Ver 1.2]

Nae is a Dryad who likely found her ability recently. I was thinking she might have been sent to Theros from Ravnica when her spark triggered (probably due to Guild warring), becoming involved with the more spiritual side. Probably won't have Nae being too experienced yet and likely doesn't go further than Theros before she meets Kiora who sees potential and convinces her to head to Zendikar and wait for her. Depending on the upcoming potential relationship between Kiora and Nissa, Nae might meet the latter.

Nae is Green/Blue. The Green will be down to her dryadic nature. The Blue would either come from Naiad/Siren friends.

I can pinch another Green/Blue Planeswalker card and make a template to sit over its picture and name in order to symbolise that it is Nae. As it stands, it seems that only Kiora is the only suitable choice.


- What are the main variations of Blue and Green magic? Ex: blue can be more illusion or more control, as I understand it
- What do I need to know about Zendikar, Theros, and Ravnica for decent backstory purposes?
- Are the Ravnican dryads all human-like? What would be a good way of explaining her more 'wild look'?
- Does "Nae" sound like a Dryad name?
- If I copy the general numbers and such on existing Planeswalkers and keep to their basic form first, a card wouldn't be overpowered, right?
- Anything else?

---
Any help you can give will be appreciated.


_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let's simply agree to disagree.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

11 Jul 2015, 7:59 pm

Why do you need a backstory to play a card game?

Just build your best deck and play it.

It isn't as if MtG was anything like AD&D, anyway ... :roll:



NyxBean
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2015
Posts: 81
Location: Edinburgh

11 Jul 2015, 9:36 pm

Fnord wrote:
Why do you need a backstory to play a card game?

Just build your best deck and play it.

It isn't as if MtG was anything like AD&D, anyway ... :roll:


Because that's how I want to play/experience it?


_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let's simply agree to disagree.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Misery
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,163

12 Jul 2015, 12:28 am

Fnord wrote:
Why do you need a backstory to play a card game?

Just build your best deck and play it.

It isn't as if MtG was anything like AD&D, anyway ... :roll:



Because Magic: The Gathering is VERY heavy on the lore and story. I mean really, REALLY heavy on it. There's a seriously absurd amount of detail to it and the cards themselves do not deviate from this. Just because something is a card game does not mean it cannot have a story. Knowing what I do about AD&D (recently, I've learned ALOT about that since certain people I know turned out to be fans).... yes. It's got THAT level of detail to it. But it's harder to come by; obviously, you can only fit so much text on a card (there's 2 types of text: the normal text that explains what the card does, and text that's in italics that is the story stuff, or sometimes just a comment about a particular monster (that isnt central to the story) or even maybe a joke about it (again, if it's a normal thing that isnt story-focused). I could ramble on and on and on and on about all of the different characters and their interweaving storylines, or about various major events such as the Brothers' War between Urza and Mishra that shaped damn near everything in that world that came after it, or the story of Gerrard, the Legacy, and the search for Sissay (may have spelled that wrong) and the subsequent creaton of the plane of Mirrodin and the intricate stories that happen in THAT messed up place, or Yawgmoth and the hellish plane of Phyrexia, or.... you get the idea. I could go into seriously extreme detail here as I'm familiar with alot of it. Whenever I read a story, regardless of what type it is, I only get into it if there's alot of depth and detail (which is why I might find AD&D's whole overall universe to be fascinating as well), and I got into this one pretty heavily.

You dont NEED to know any of that to play the game, which is a good thing; the player can approach everything the way they want to. But it's all there, if the player takes the time to look into it.

Back to the OP's stuff though...

All of that above being said, I'm not as familiar with the most recent story stuff for Magic. I'd been out of the loop on it for quite awhile, which started back when I had no real money to keep up with what is actually a bloody expensive hobby (seriously, Magic can cost you ALOT of money to keep going, as is the nature of trading-card games). But I know alot about the old stuff. I intend on getting back into the game soon here since the money is no longer a concern, though it'll be the online version for me (just as expensive) as stuff like that barely even EXISTS around here. The cards arent sold anywhere around here, because this area blows. Hell, even for something like AD&D; I bought one of the players' handbooks recently to learn about that, but I had to ORDER it. There's nowhere to buy anything like that even remotely near here. I'd have to travel AT LEAST a few hours to MAYBE find a place that might have something like that. This, of course, sucks. If it werent the case, I'd have gotten into tabletop RPGs already, I really would.

Though, playing the online version has it's own advantages. No more rules arguements, since it handles that perfectly on it's own. I always got tired of explaining some of the super-complicated situations that might occur in the game to people. And no, by "online version" I dont mean the Duels of the Planeswalkers games, which are... damn stupid, to me. I mean Magic Online, the official full online client.

...also, Reddit is USUALLY a pile of jerks. Just ignore those idiots. You can probably very easily find a giant wiki for the game, going into both game mechanics, individual cards, and then all the story and lore stuff. If interested in the lore, look for some of the books; many of them are very good, and there's alot of them.

Above all though... just dont get discouraged if you get utterly destroyed by more experienced players. It *will* happen. It's inevitable. But you can learn alot from having that one happen. And learn just what each color is good at and what they're bad at, this helps more than it might sound like. And one other thing to keep in mind with a game like this: There are going to be cards that SERIOUSLY just look awful when you see them for the first time, the sort of things that do stuff like eat half your health when played, or blow up a pile of your creatures, or worse things... but those cards can turn out to actually be really, really good ones... it's just a matter of understanding how they can be used. Pretty much all games of this type have cards like that.



Misery
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,163

12 Jul 2015, 12:52 am

Oh, and to answer one of your questions about the nature of blue VS green magic:

Yes, Blue magic is often associated with both the concept of control, and the concept of illusion and deception. Often, illusion and deception are in fact used to gain control; projecting the illusion of a hostile opponent onto that of an ally is, for example, a good way to get someone to attack that ally of theirs. But it can also be direct stuff, such as mind control, mana control, stuff like that. I like to just say "it's the color that messes with stuff instead of destroying it". It isnt aggressive, and is opposed to the aggressive and destructive Red magic, and tends to favor a slower approach that is based on reaction and reflection rather than direct assault and force. Things like counterspells or redirection are common with it, or even things that might change the color of other things. It can be defensive, but is not nearly as good at defense as White magic is. In game terms, the typical way that it works is that you often have a rather slow start, not doing much damage at first but defending yourself by controlling and redirecting your opponent's cards. Blue decks tend to win by simply assuming control of the board as a whole, and dealing slow damage over time in an environment where the opponent is simply prevented from doing much of everything. It synergizes well with White and Black and is opposed by Red and Green. It is also often associated with water and the ocean, as well as groups such as the Merfolk, or creatures of the sea.

Green represents life and nature, though it's representation of "life" is a bit different from that of White magic (at least by my view). It focuses heavily on nature, animals, and the like, and typically uses those things in a very focused way. It is good at both usage of single large beasts, or swarms of smaller creatures, and part of it's core is powering up and boosting things, making any given creatures stronger, and stuff like that. It tends to have little need of things like artifacts or controlling enchantments. It tends to emphasize strength, and brute force (though in a different way than Red's direct blasts of power), and savage instinct. It conflicts with Blue's unnatural enchantments and effects, as Blue often works to control creatures, which are what Green focuses on. Green though is good at breaking things by simply punching them to death, and so has good methods of destroying Blue's magical gizmos and such, as well as battling Blue's creatures, which tend to have low strength and vitality. Gameplay-wise, Green is good at fast aggressive damage and overwhelming numbers, as well as single ultra-strong yet not complicated monsters. Green decks are very aggro based, but as it's creatures tend to be limited in terms of actual abilities it can sometimes fall off in the late-game. But as with everything in the game, that's not ALWAYS the case. Depends of course on the cards and the synergies you are using. It goes well with White since White can heal and defend, and also with Red as Red is even better at the destroying and smashing than Green. Blue can screw it up by making it's creatures do bizarre things (or just outright stealing them), and Black can REALLY screw it up by simply murdering everything directly. And then possibly reanimating them.


Hopefully I didnt make that too confusing (I certainly may have made it too wordy, sorry about that, but I like detail...), so if something doesnt make sense, feel free to ask.



NyxBean
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2015
Posts: 81
Location: Edinburgh

12 Jul 2015, 9:29 pm

Misery wrote:
Because Magic: The Gathering is VERY heavy on the lore and story
You dont NEED to know any of that to play the game, which is a good thing; the player can approach everything the way they want to. But it's all there, if the player takes the time to look into it.


I've been surprised by how few people I've been able to find who are actually interested in the background and lore which to me is a shame. Luckily it seems that my offline friends are more open to it, with one even having read a novel or two, though he said the writing was awful. To be honest, most novels for games are atrocious: I have Liberty's Crusade by Jeff Grubb on my bedside table - it's based on the first StarCraft game but it's so hackney. Having said that, I'm told some of the 40K books are decent enough and my carer even knows a guy who wrote one of them.

Anyway, yes, it's definitely fantastic to be able to take or leave lore. Personally I get quite enthusiastic by the italic quotes at the bottom and, in my lower level and slower playing themed decks, it can actually decide on what gets included. I get that many players seem to want to reach the crazy pro level where it is seemingly entirely based on how you've built your deck and games are over in two rounds. Okay, I see why they may like that but personally I'd like ten or so rounds so tactics have a chance to evolve and have enough of a chance to try to change when the opponent mixes it up. That's why I'll probably always be called a "casual" player. I don't mind though; I know what I find fun.


Misery wrote:
which started back when I had no real money to keep up with what is actually a bloody expensive hobby (seriously, Magic can cost you ALOT of money to keep going, as is the nature of trading-card games).


Yup, called "cardboard crack" for a reason. :lol: Seriously though, I'm too ill to work and if they sort out my benefits I may get more money so I'll buy cards. The ill-informed would scream this would be a waste but I'd just turn back to them and say, "Instead of saving my money, I'm putting it straight back into the economy and besides, I bet you don't visit charity shops as much as I do,". Then they'd feel bad and go buy some books from Oxfam, hopefully


Misery wrote:
If it werent the case, I'd have gotten into tabletop RPGs already, I really would.


That really sounds infuriating. I'm 25 and only relatively recently got involved in RPGs. I've played several me-to-GM games and one at a convention but yet to get a proper one going. If I hadn't been dumped by my ex maybe I'd be in a game sooner, though we're looking at becoming friends so I might actually still be able to get involved. On the other hand, I'm luring people to my flat where I hope they'll decide they want to play Vampire: The Masquerade.

I'm in a city so you would have thought that I'd have been playing since I first wanted to (12 -13) but no; because of this ridiculous female body and the lack of friends, I didn't feel comfortable wandering into the shops, making friends, turning up at events. I, like many of the biological females in the area, wound up getting involved through boyfriends/close male friends/brothers, etc. (for me it was a bf). It's annoying to be an average-looking single girl at the local convention because they're all wondering how you're single. I even got asked. Most don't mean any harm, they simply don't realise that it makes us feel like less of a part of the group and more as accessories. Luckily after they see you a few times they cut it out.


Misery wrote:
Though, playing the online version has it's own advantages. No more rules arguements, since it handles that perfectly on it's own. I always got tired of explaining some of the super-complicated situations that might occur in the game to people.


As a newb and one who is confused when people speak it out to me, I'd probably be frustrating. What I'd do would be to pick those situations, write them down in a jotter or copy out web pages, hand it over, then go make a coffee. If by the time I was finished they were still having trouble, despite helpful notes I'd put in, I'd say, "Well then, I win,". Because I'm not nice.


Misery wrote:
...also, Reddit is USUALLY a pile of jerks. Just ignore those idiots. You can probably very easily find a giant wiki for the game, going into both game mechanics, individual cards, and then all the story and lore stuff. If interested in the lore, look for some of the books; many of them are very good, and there's alot of them.


Answering this as I go so now I see you've mentioned the books. Yeah, I've put down the links for all the important areas and once I get my concentration back (still shaky from break up but ex will be speaking to me soon) I'll be able to get right into it. I think the first few plays with the new expansions will obviously be the starter decks so Nae won't have to be fully formed yet. Should search for my spare Return to Ravnica and Theros cards though, especially Journey into Nyx. I haven't had a reason to get really into Theros so this character idea is useful.

As for reddit... ick. I'm in /r/Aspergers and the gilded Lounge areas which are about the only safe places. Even then you get the odd troll. Those subs are pretty quick off the mark for moderation though so it isn't too bad. Any gaming sub I've been in except for /r/WhiteWolfRPG has been a cesspit.


Misery wrote:
Above all though... just dont get discouraged if you get utterly destroyed by more experienced players. It *will* happen. It's inevitable. But you can learn alot from having that one happen.


I'm more likely to take it well if I'm doing it by going through people I know and they point out handy hints or, even better, ask me what I think happened in a situation. I don't know if you get that sort of master/teacher relationship with strangers.

As for horrifying cards: I usually think "I need that!". The only ones that irritated me where those with Shadow since it isn't really around any more as far as I remember and in that sense you can't deal with it, and the Eldrazi, though that was because my flatmate was purposely buying the most grizzly ones and my mainly common cards at the time had no chance.


Misery wrote:
Oh, and to answer one of your questions about the nature of blue VS green magic:


Blue is going to take getting used to though I expected that. Truth be told, my main playing style so far lends me more to Red and Green.


Misery wrote:
Green represents life and nature, though it's representation of "life" is a bit different from that of White magic (at least by my view).


Mechanically White will heal but in a philosophical sense, it's just Black in denial. The both want control. White thinks it is righteous and as such will be so brutal and rigid that it may as well give up the joke and paint on the goth make up. At least Black appears to accept it is despicable.

Mechanics-wise, I love both of those colours and when you have a deck with both which works well, it's so awesomely grisly.


Misery wrote:
It is good at both usage of single large beasts, or swarms of smaller creatures, and part of it's core is powering up and boosting things, making any given creatures stronger


See, that's the thing: I don't know if I want Nae to focus more on big stompers or on swarms. She'll definitely be one to use the Growth cards because I love them. Although then I'd have to start working out if having both colours in spells AND creatures is a level of deck-building I'm even at yet.


Misery wrote:
Hopefully I didnt make that too confusing (I certainly may have made it too wordy, sorry about that, but I like detail...), so if something doesnt make sense, feel free to ask.


No, it's fine. I like wordy and by the colour part I already knew what was going on. I know what the feel of each colour is, it's the finer points of what sort of extra variations of usage and also the combination of Green/Blue which is what I need to look at now. I know that The Simic Combine have that colour scheme (their Guild Leader right now is a Merwoman called... Zerena? Something Z anyway). Also, Kiora the Planeswalker uses it, though I think I mention it in my post. I should look for other examples and see how they compare.

The idea of opposing magics is wonderful to me, like White/Black. On a sort of "mystical" level of the Multiverse I feel it is interesting to see that dynamic and think on what it means.

I thought hard about what magics I would be naturally with if I were in that setting and, after asking others, Green/Blue was decided on. I think it was mildly by process of elimination.

White is too hard line although it can be noble, it still has the potential to fall to zealots.
Black is immoral and I'm (if we switch to DnD for a second) am Chaotic Good at my best and Chaotic Neutral at my most stern/naughty. Simply, it wouldn't work.
Red is the firebrand and while I could be said to be impulsive and fiery, in my heart I would rather not have to be. In all honesty though, if I were a triple mana wielder, this might come into play.
Blue is an interesting one and it was a bit awkward to work out how it fit. I was almost pure Green. Then it was pointed out that while it is all magic, Blue would probably be more into the arcane deep lore for the sake of it, while White & Black were more likely to seek that as a means to an end.
Green was easy. I'd be a Dryad. That was decided through pretend play when I was 14. There was only one missing character and I turned up and was decided to be "brought into the fold". I would have picked that anyway. Besides, I love animals, would have a great time outside in nature if it weren't for anxiety, and my wildness is more true as Green when all is said and done. Red comes in when I'm angry.


What about you, Misery? Where would you fit in terms of magic outside of its mechanics and which classic alignment would you say you belong to?


_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let's simply agree to disagree.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Misery
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,163

13 Jul 2015, 5:50 am

Wow, you actually went and read all of that. Many people wouldnt, I think. You know, "TL;DR" despite that it takes like 5 minutes, if that. Sometimes I dont know how the heck most people manage to have conversations with each other.

NyxBean wrote:
I've been surprised by how few people I've been able to find who are actually interested in the background and lore which to me is a shame. Luckily it seems that my offline friends are more open to it, with one even having read a novel or two, though he said the writing was awful. To be honest, most novels for games are atrocious: I have Liberty's Crusade by Jeff Grubb on my bedside table - it's based on the first StarCraft game but it's so hackney. Having said that, I'm told some of the 40K books are decent enough and my carer even knows a guy who wrote one of them.

Anyway, yes, it's definitely fantastic to be able to take or leave lore. Personally I get quite enthusiastic by the italic quotes at the bottom and, in my lower level and slower playing themed decks, it can actually decide on what gets included. I get that many players seem to want to reach the crazy pro level where it is seemingly entirely based on how you've built your deck and games are over in two rounds. Okay, I see why they may like that but personally I'd like ten or so rounds so tactics have a chance to evolve and have enough of a chance to try to change when the opponent mixes it up. That's why I'll probably always be called a "casual" player. I don't mind though; I know what I find fun.


The books for it can be good depending on which ones, and which writers. One problem that I think happens for stuff like this is that the writers are forced to work within a pre-existing framework, they cant just start making things up in their own way. They have to go along with all of the lore that's already there, and that can be very restricting, so it becomes much harder to put out a good story.

Now, as far as pro play in the game, hmm, competitive play actually is usually best when it is indeed many turns; from everything I've seen, this is usually the case unless there's currently some sort of massive imbalance. But the guys that make the game try their best to keep such imbalances from happening. I mean, nobody really likes matches that end in 2 turns. Even the winner of such matches will soon grow bored of it, because it's almost like they dont even have to play it at all; they never reach the point of having to make much in the way of strategic decisions. You cant sell a product based on gameplay that ends up being uninteresting... so yeah, they try not to allow that. Blizzard does the same thing with Hearthstone, they dont want super fast matches, they want to have matches keep going for some time, with a constant back-and-forth between players that forces everyone to use actual tactics, otherwise the whole thing falls apart, and "just isnt very fun", as they put it.

But yes, most decks are made for functionality, not just at pro level, but at.... well, every level, really. A deck not made in that way will lose even to weak players in many cases.

Quote:
Yup, called "cardboard crack" for a reason. :lol: Seriously though, I'm too ill to work and if they sort out my benefits I may get more money so I'll buy cards. The ill-informed would scream this would be a waste but I'd just turn back to them and say, "Instead of saving my money, I'm putting it straight back into the economy and besides, I bet you don't visit charity shops as much as I do,". Then they'd feel bad and go buy some books from Oxfam, hopefully


Ah, yeah, I dont work either, havent for.... years, I dont know, and yet tend to spend money like there's no tomorrow. Obviously some people have issues with this, but... I really just dont care. Besides, I spend only in the realm of my own hobbies, it's not like I'm off buying helicopters or some damn stupid thing like that. That would not be a wise investment, really.

Of course, those that say that it's a waste never seem to notice the things THEY do that are so wasteful, which I always find to be rather silly.


Quote:
That really sounds infuriating. I'm 25 and only relatively recently got involved in RPGs. I've played several me-to-GM games and one at a convention but yet to get a proper one going. If I hadn't been dumped by my ex maybe I'd be in a game sooner, though we're looking at becoming friends so I might actually still be able to get involved. On the other hand, I'm luring people to my flat where I hope they'll decide they want to play Vampire: The Masquerade.

I'm in a city so you would have thought that I'd have been playing since I first wanted to (12 -13) but no; because of this ridiculous female body and the lack of friends, I didn't feel comfortable wandering into the shops, making friends, turning up at events. I, like many of the biological females in the area, wound up getting involved through boyfriends/close male friends/brothers, etc. (for me it was a bf). It's annoying to be an average-looking single girl at the local convention because they're all wondering how you're single. I even got asked. Most don't mean any harm, they simply don't realise that it makes us feel like less of a part of the group and more as accessories. Luckily after they see you a few times they cut it out.


Yeah, it's pretty annoying. I cant get those or board games going or... anything, really. All of my friends are extremely stereotypical Xbox-style gamers, the sort that play FPS games and anything with "RPG" as part of it's description. And even when it comes to that sort of gaming my interests never agree with them as I tend to be into games that ARENT the major AAA sorts. Alot of indie games on the PC and stuff like that... so I cant even get multiplayer going for those either. It's definitely very... aggravating.

And yeah, I've seen what can happen to females that try to get into... well, any of this. Most of the males act like damn fools and have this bewildering idea that they can "get some" almost immediately, because.... because. I doubt there's a logical reason for this. But I've certainly witnessed it, yes. Cant facepalm hard enough, nope. It's rather pathetic to see those idiots do that. It's like, just leave the poor girl alone already and let her go do stuff. But no, they never do. Though, I've noticed that it's not JUST restricted towards that particular attraction; particularly at conventions (which is the usual places I see this at, is anime cons) males that are gay or bi can get just as obnoxious towards other males, since the convention environment tends to allow for openness in that sort of thing. Though, obviously, it's not as common as the other sort, but it happens. I've had it happen at me a few times. I'm male but I'm kinda androgynous in appearance (hell, I got mistaken for a girl right away when I posted a face photo on this very forum for... some reason, I'm sure it made sense a the time), and of course I get into the cosplay aspect too... so every now and then someone will get a bit strange about it. This does not help the ol' social anxiety, nope. Particularly if someone attempts, well... physical contact. Yes, I can see how that might be REALLY goddamn annoying to anyone receiving it. I always rather wish I could do something when I see it happening to someone (of either gender) but unfortunately, I cant...

Bloody stupid, all of it.


Quote:
As a newb and one who is confused when people speak it out to me, I'd probably be frustrating. What I'd do would be to pick those situations, write them down in a jotter or copy out web pages, hand it over, then go make a coffee. If by the time I was finished they were still having trouble, despite helpful notes I'd put in, I'd say, "Well then, I win,". Because I'm not nice.


Hah, the fun part would be getting anyone to read any of that. Getting them to listen to it explained verbally is hard enough. Partly the game's fault though, the way it's rules are designed.

Quote:
Answering this as I go so now I see you've mentioned the books. Yeah, I've put down the links for all the important areas and once I get my concentration back (still shaky from break up but ex will be speaking to me soon) I'll be able to get right into it. I think the first few plays with the new expansions will obviously be the starter decks so Nae won't have to be fully formed yet. Should search for my spare Return to Ravnica and Theros cards though, especially Journey into Nyx. I haven't had a reason to get really into Theros so this character idea is useful.

As for reddit... ick. I'm in /r/Aspergers and the gilded Lounge areas which are about the only safe places. Even then you get the odd troll. Those subs are pretty quick off the mark for moderation though so it isn't too bad. Any gaming sub I've been in except for /r/WhiteWolfRPG has been a cesspit.


I'm curious, these characters you have mentioned a few times now, are they characters you have come up with? Or are they pre-existing characters? I've not heard those names before, I think.

And yes, Reddit and the like.... cesspits indeed. I dont know why people become shrieking asshats once they get onto a gaming forum. I really dont. But it happens in sooooooooooo many of them, and the bigger they are, the worse they get. I'm always reminded of the main Minecraft forums, which is... well, an absolute mess. Always with the flaming and the screaming. And that's just the start of it. And of course, nobody ever seems to see a problem with this... But Reddit and similar places are even worse! The REALLY annoying bit is sometimes being forced to go to such a place to get certain bits of info or certain downloads, and having to sift through the derpy screaming bits to get to it. Just.... so annoying....


Quote:
I'm more likely to take it well if I'm doing it by going through people I know and they point out handy hints or, even better, ask me what I think happened in a situation. I don't know if you get that sort of master/teacher relationship with strangers.

As for horrifying cards: I usually think "I need that!". The only ones that irritated me where those with Shadow since it isn't really around any more as far as I remember and in that sense you can't deal with it, and the Eldrazi, though that was because my flatmate was purposely buying the most grizzly ones and my mainly common cards at the time had no chance.


Hah, yeah, good luck with that one. Most people wont do that. It can be hard to find someone that will. Depending on the type of game, people might just be total jerks about it instead. Like fighting games... now THERE is a community filled with detestable jerks. Help out new players? Nope. CANT HAVE THAT. No, they gotta stomp them and then barrage them with as many insults as physically possible. They go about this with such amazing enthusiasm that you might think they believe that the universe will collapse if they dont achieve a certain level of insulting jackassery in a short time. I expect there's plenty within TCG communities that do the same thing. "GIT GUD, SCRUB!!1" and so on. Ugh. *I* at least try to help, when I can. Provided people are willing to actually listen. Be nice if more people did that.


Quote:
Blue is going to take getting used to though I expected that. Truth be told, my main playing style so far lends me more to Red and Green.


Misery wrote:
Green represents life and nature, though it's representation of "life" is a bit different from that of White magic (at least by my view).


Mechanically White will heal but in a philosophical sense, it's just Black in denial. The both want control. White thinks it is righteous and as such will be so brutal and rigid that it may as well give up the joke and paint on the goth make up. At least Black appears to accept it is despicable.

Mechanics-wise, I love both of those colours and when you have a deck with both which works well, it's so awesomely grisly.


Misery wrote:
It is good at both usage of single large beasts, or swarms of smaller creatures, and part of it's core is powering up and boosting things, making any given creatures stronger


See, that's the thing: I don't know if I want Nae to focus more on big stompers or on swarms. She'll definitely be one to use the Growth cards because I love them. Although then I'd have to start working out if having both colours in spells AND creatures is a level of deck-building I'm even at yet.


Misery wrote:
Hopefully I didnt make that too confusing (I certainly may have made it too wordy, sorry about that, but I like detail...), so if something doesnt make sense, feel free to ask.


No, it's fine. I like wordy and by the colour part I already knew what was going on. I know what the feel of each colour is, it's the finer points of what sort of extra variations of usage and also the combination of Green/Blue which is what I need to look at now. I know that The Simic Combine have that colour scheme (their Guild Leader right now is a Merwoman called... Zerena? Something Z anyway). Also, Kiora the Planeswalker uses it, though I think I mention it in my post. I should look for other examples and see how they compare.

The idea of opposing magics is wonderful to me, like White/Black. On a sort of "mystical" level of the Multiverse I feel it is interesting to see that dynamic and think on what it means.

I thought hard about what magics I would be naturally with if I were in that setting and, after asking others, Green/Blue was decided on. I think it was mildly by process of elimination.

White is too hard line although it can be noble, it still has the potential to fall to zealots.
Black is immoral and I'm (if we switch to DnD for a second) am Chaotic Good at my best and Chaotic Neutral at my most stern/naughty. Simply, it wouldn't work.
Red is the firebrand and while I could be said to be impulsive and fiery, in my heart I would rather not have to be. In all honesty though, if I were a triple mana wielder, this might come into play.
Blue is an interesting one and it was a bit awkward to work out how it fit. I was almost pure Green. Then it was pointed out that while it is all magic, Blue would probably be more into the arcane deep lore for the sake of it, while White & Black were more likely to seek that as a means to an end.
Green was easy. I'd be a Dryad. That was decided through pretend play when I was 14. There was only one missing character and I turned up and was decided to be "brought into the fold". I would have picked that anyway. Besides, I love animals, would have a great time outside in nature if it weren't for anxiety, and my wildness is more true as Green when all is said and done. Red comes in when I'm angry.


What about you, Misery? Where would you fit in terms of magic outside of its mechanics and which classic alignment would you say you belong to?


Hmmm, if I had to pick a color of magic from the game's concepts, ah, I think I'd be blue with some red mixed in. Blue because I can indeed be very manipulative and controlling, and am very good at doing both without anyone noticing that it's happening. Maybe not the best trait to have, but it's there. I also tend to be quiet and contemplative much of the time. And then there's the whole "element of water" bit, as I tend to be very attracted to that. Like the ocean, ahh, that's just wonderful, really. I swim alot and enjoy the presence of water in a general sense.

But then also some red because I have a very short fuse and no patience whatsoever, and absolutely will just randomly smash things if I get angry enough. And I tend to charge into situations without exactly planning things out. Not to mention I tend to have a need for heat; I hate cold places and climates, really. My ideal environments would be either a tropical region, with the ocean nearby, or a desert region, all sand and rock. As opposed to my current location which is all grass and.... grass. I'm so tired of grass.

As for classical alignment, ahh, I'd say either chaotic good or chaotic neutral or somewhere a bit in between the two. Sorta depends a bit on my mood. I know alot of people on the autistic spectrum tend to need order and repetition, but much of either will just drive me up the wall. And I tend to enjoy chaotic places like the conventions and whatnot (though I tend to avoid directly interacting with anyone when possible). This would also explain why my room is just random junk strewn everywhere. Hell, I usually have hotel rooms completely destroyed within about 6 hours of getting to one. Not on purpose, mind you. It just somehow happens. And while I try to be polite and helpful towards others much of the time, hmm, I can also be standoffish and want to just see what happens if they do things on their own. I'll always help if things go really bad, but other than that... yeah, again it depends on my mood. Or I can just be unpleasant and negative. I'm good at negative. Which might be expected of someone with the name "Misery". I cant stand seeing anyone be hurt by anything though and get rather incensed at witnessing any form of injustice.



NyxBean
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2015
Posts: 81
Location: Edinburgh

13 Jul 2015, 10:36 am

Misery wrote:
Wow, you actually went and read all of that. Many people wouldnt, I think. You know, "TL;DR" despite that it takes like 5 minutes, if that. Sometimes I dont know how the heck most people manage to have conversations with each other.


Boggles my mind as well. I'd figured that message boards were as much for in-depth discussion as they were for idle chit-chat, with the idle chat being in the non-specific threads. Apparently not. I think in part it has something to do with the attention span issues we are probably seeing with the advent of more instantly gratifying entertainment like TV and the internet. Other times I put it down to people being lazier than I imagined. If I asked a question or started a discussion, I try to read everything. If the person is speaking nonsense or covering ground already mentioned, they may get passed over.

I love online conversations because I tend to hate offline ones unless I'm in a relationship with the person or we're all doing something hobby based at the same time. I just sound like a moron or talk to much and the atmosphere feels wrong. Online if you talk to much, all you have to deal with is being ignored, or somebody making a weak joke (which is expected).


Misery wrote:
The books for it can be good depending on which ones, and which writers. One problem that I think happens for stuff like this is that the writers are forced to work within a pre-existing framework, they cant just start making things up in their own way. They have to go along with all of the lore that's already there, and that can be very restricting, so it becomes much harder to put out a good story.


If I did or maybe if I ever get involved with that I'd probably ask for a day or two to come up with some of the ways which might deviate, have a few variations of those in how to keep with the lore, and come back to whoever was in charge of the final decision to ask how they felt. I mean, I'm assuming the writer's have contact with the franchise in some form from the start. If they are expected simply to submit a full story, I'd probably email.

Likely that's not the way they'd want to work, yet it seems like a good plan. As well as that, part of me feels like the sign of a versatile writer is being able to have limitations. Not everybody needs to be versatile, of course; you find your niché then stick to it. I suppose it would be nice to see gaming books being taken more serious by other authors, however the quality which are accepted by the franchises perhaps put them off.

As for Liberty's Crusade, I wouldn't say it is too much that he's restricted. I mean, yes, he has to follow the main story line and have his Marty Sue character fall into every major event so you go through the whole game. However, when he does get to flex his muscles... well, it's cheesy. I get that "death sticks" as a term for cigarettes is an old joke but when you go on to call them about two extra exaggerated terms in the space of a few pages, any reader who has read at even a slightly higher level is going to want to murder you.

Then there's the fact that about as much emotion the main character shows to trauma is throwing up a bit and then saying, "Alright, let's go,". Okay, cool, he's a tough reporter who's sometimes been out when riots are happening, etc. That doesn't change the fact that he himself tells the reader that he has never seen anything like this before. Unless he's some sort of sociopath, the amount of new and terrifying experiences he's witnessing, added to the enormity of them and the pressure of dealing with military and rebel humans, and he should already be showing signs of cracking. His physical description even makes him sound like a young, hip Steve Jobs. Ack.


Misery wrote:
But the guys that make the game try their best to keep such imbalances from happening. I mean, nobody really likes matches that end in 2 turns. Even the winner of such matches will soon grow bored of it, because it's almost like they dont even have to play it at all; they never reach the point of having to make much in the way of strategic decisions.


It's really weird and maybe I'm seeing the extremes but so far I'm seeing the casual players who are more interested in seeing what comes out and the interplay between the cards than winning (me, though I'm slightly more competitive than the more laid back guys) or they are that kind of min/maxing ridiculous "I'm going to knock you out in a second" and are proud of that. I mean, the latter certainly seem to at least appreciate when it isn't working out like that but against other pros they take this swift victory thing as if it's the greatest thrill in the world and some never seem to get bored. I also hear this from friends who play. They tend to explain why those players would like it so I have to clarify that when I don't understand, it doesn't mean I don't get it cognitively, it means I don't understand what is so exciting about it on a personal level. It seems so boring and getting such extreme delight out of beating another so suddenly in a game during which you can have dramatic twists and turns seems to defeat the purpose. Hilariously, you even see it in adult players of Pokémon TCG.


Misery wrote:
But yes, most decks are made for functionality, not just at pro level, but at.... well, every level, really. A deck not made in that way will lose even to weak players in many cases.


My brain probably has zoned out here as I'm only 50/50 on being sure what you mean so I'll go ahead and say what I'd eventually like. Before I go ahead I'll have to say I'd need a couple of the same kinds of decks in order for others to join in. Anyway, I'd want functional decks of each level of playing (as well as style but that's getting ahead of the point). So if people wanted a relaxed weenie deck session, cool. If they wanted brutal madness, grand, I have the decks for it. Then anything in between.

Obviously them bringing their own which go along with the same style of play would be more ideal. I'd be looking at trying to balance the decks against each other so it was more down to how you used the cards rather than whether you had a mythic rare, although that would be for those decks I was making as back ups for people to use. I'd obviously have to use one of those too if that was the case, simply to be fair.

That was what it was like when I had my Ravnican Guild Wars event. I had a few events but became discouraged when I invited an individual who didn't seem to comprehend that when you are playing against inexperienced or rusty players who are trying to learn you do not bring a deck based on an out-dated mechanic which nobody can deal with. I think he crushed everybody he played against and, even though my flatmate says he's a fairly decent player, he took the allowance of "older cards are acceptable" a bit too far. He doesn't seem like the type not to know the current status of a favoured mechanic so I'm not sure what he was up to. With me, he told me I was still making the right moves, but not much else. It was only one deck he brought too. *shrugs*

I need to make more of those events when I'm more confident. I was getting other people interested and old players re-inspired.

As for reddit... ick. I'm in /r/Aspergers and the gilded Lounge areas which are about the only safe places. Even then you get the odd troll. Those subs are pretty quick off the mark for moderation though so it isn't too bad. Any gaming sub I've been in except for /r/WhiteWolfRPG has been a cesspit.[/quote]


Answering this as I go so now I see you've mentioned the books. Yeah, I've put down the links for all the important areas and once I get my concentration back (still shaky from break up but ex will be speaking to me soon) I'll be able to get right into it. I think the first few plays with the new expansions will obviously be the starter decks so Nae won't have to be fully formed yet. Should search for my spare Return to Ravnica and Theros cards though, especially Journey into Nyx. I haven't had a reason to get really into Theros so this character idea is useful.


Misery wrote:
Ah, yeah, I dont work either, havent for.... years, I dont know, and yet tend to spend money like there's no tomorrow. Obviously some people have issues with this, but... I really just dont care. Besides, I spend only in the realm of my own hobbies, it's not like I'm off buying helicopters or some damn stupid thing like that. That would not be a wise investment, really.

Of course, those that say that it's a waste never seem to notice the things THEY do that are so wasteful, which I always find to be rather silly.


If there is one thing in life I strive not to be, it is a hypocrite. Of course, I fail at times. It's natural. But if I catch myself or somebody points it out, I try to rectify it. I think there must be a lot of others like me and I at least know a few but yes, it does seem that many don't engage in any true introspection.

As for working, high school dropout who only managed to volunteer at a charity shop for a few months. I'm properly messed up due to childhood issues and later factors which compounded that. Added to the obvious differences from the norm. I'd like to volunteer again, eventually, but I refuse to believe that I have to work if it will cause me undue stress. In fact, I'm such a weird pro-robotics anarchist that I'd ideally want the people who didn't agree to colonise other areas in the solar system and be in space stations built for long term living, and then have the people who did agree work on what they felt was important and valuable, with robots (without any sort of advanced AI) work on menial tasks.

Sorry, got a bit future-hippie there. I know what the experts are saying right now about what is and isn't possible, and yet that's happened over the course of human history and even quite recently. I'm one of those nerds who think the Singularity is possible so the robots involved with the standard tasks would have to lack the ability to... think past their job. Hopefully any AI which could would be open to the objective idea behind that, although who knows what our programming would spawn into. Tricky subject which causes arguments about ethics as well as even the possibility. /tangent


Misery wrote:
Yeah, it's pretty annoying. I cant get those or board games going or... anything, really. All of my friends are extremely stereotypical Xbox-style gamers, the sort that play FPS games and anything with "RPG" as part of it's description. And even when it comes to that sort of gaming my interests never agree with them as I tend to be into games that ARENT the major AAA sorts. Alot of indie games on the PC and stuff like that... so I cant even get multiplayer going for those either. It's definitely very... aggravating.


Ugh, that seems irritating. No offense to anybody on the forum but most of the fans of AAA FPS games and similar regular genres seem to be... well, they don't seem that imaginative and even when they are playing they want to "camp" or "break" aspects in order to win. I really do understand wanting to succeed, as much as it sometimes may not sound like it and yes, I want to succeed to. There comes a point though when it's some sort of ego boost and not the enjoyment of the game. I stop cheating on StarCraft when I was old enough or had played enough how to work out the intricacies and I've never looked back.

With Skyrim, before I had to stop, I would mod for realism, increased difficulty, and various RPG reasons. My ex had some increased difficulty modes, maybe a few RPG elements, but mostly he changed it so that his character had ridiculous levels of health, stamina, and mana. Now, I'm pretty sure he was deciding to bring his concept of the Neravine but, since I stick to what vaguely amounts to canon in my head, I wind up thinking, "but... but... they've gone to Akavir and the Champion of Cyrodiil "disappeared"; the Dovahkiin should be somebody new...". I just couldn't work out how he was having fun. Sure, with the dragon mod he had five appearing at the one time but since he could take a single reptile out with a specific blast, it felt stupid. There were other things he did which made no sense to me; obviously his enjoyment of the game lay in areas I don't understand. I get extremely immersed and want it to be as difficult as I imagine it would be. For him, maybe he wanted to experience more or do cool tricks. Another thing which irritated me secretly was that he wasn't playing in the correct order. I knew I was being crazy but he wasn't even remotely sticking to any structure or... logical steps for Dovahkiin. At least to me.

At least he and my other friends tend to be pretty into indie games, some exclusively, but I hate multiplayer. Not many play in a way that makes sense and rather than turning into a mini fascist, I'd prefer to play alone. I got a shock when I experienced my first MMORPGS. I imagined people would be going about, acting like it was table top but no, loads of people hopping up and down with others spamming and asking for gold. So I went to the RP servers and almost shot myself because a) most people were terrible, b) many people were going too far out of the world for their own means, and c) there were still people who wanted to run you through missions instead of letting you actually experience them.

In-person with people I know hold similar values, I can play with others. Online, even some of the people I know wind up sucking. If friendship does happen with my ex and my main PC gets fixed, I might ask my ex to make a new character on Secret World and RP it with me. He's a GM so I pretty much trust him to be able to RP and lead me in it if I get stuck, as I have little experience of it in an MMO. I might have to buy us both headphones with mics though, and if he picks a female character like he usually tends to, his voice is going to be quite amusing.

Question: To me it seems that many female players pick female avatars, which makes sense in my head. Then, years ago, I noticed most of the gamer guys I knew picked chicks as well, and discovered it is a little bit of a "thing". Thinking back to my MMO experiences, I don't think I saw too much of an imbalance. What do you think is going on there, considering that at least back then, more males were playing? Why might it be that males would be more interested in playing a female than a female being interested in playing a guy? Is it because in many games in which you don't have the choice it usually defaults to male?
/yet another tangent


Misery wrote:
And yeah, I've seen what can happen to females that try to get into... well, any of this. Most of the males act like damn fools and have this bewildering idea that they can "get some" almost immediately, because.... because. I doubt there's a logical reason for this.

...

Though, I've noticed that it's not JUST restricted towards that particular attraction; particularly at conventions (which is the usual places I see this at, is anime cons) males that are gay or bi can get just as obnoxious towards other males, since the convention environment tends to allow for openness in that sort of thing.


My theory comes from an extremely inclusive and intersectional feminist view point and one which is actually not liking The Third Wave and would like feminism to evolve. Males can be feminists and eventually we should be able to have both feminism and masculism stand together but apart in order to uphold the good values of both gendered roles, destroy the harmful ones, and show people they don't have to conform to either or just one (yeah, genderfluid).

So, having stated that I don't hate men and I'm not all out to turn sons against fathers: I've looked into it, thought about it hard, read what lots of people say, observed, thought even harder and I think that what it is comes down to an inherent male compulsion to be the go-getter and the unfortunate issue that society, while being at the stage at which we could actually encourage a change and "evolve" socially, has simply allowed it to continue or actively promote it. I mean, look at pick-up artist advice. I've seen it aimed at getting women but I'm sure it winds up being the same for gays and bis. The unfortunate thing is that most don't realise it isn't polite and, if anybody speaks up, their minds go to the vocal minority of radfems or the over-the-top PC crowd and they take the defensive. As a feminist and somebody who believes that yes, sometimes dignity is called for, the people who take it to extremes are ruining the discourse we could be having with these men. Of course, some are simply jerks.

As for their thinking they can just get it if they try, I suppose it's part of what I've mentioned and also perhaps (at least in the West) a leftover from the '60s self-realisation therapy movement or whatever you would call it. "You are special,", "You can be who you want to be,", "You deserve the very best in life,". That's all fine and well but when it leaks into historical memory and isn't balanced with compassionate empathy for other human beings, the majority wind up self-consciously viewing others as objects, at least at first.
...okay, so maybe sociology might be one of my fixations.

Finally, others simply think they are entitled. It isn't simply men and women who get like that - all the genders even outside of the binary wind up thinking they are owed something perhaps more than they really are.


Misery wrote:
I've had it happen at me a few times. I'm male but I'm kinda androgynous in appearance (hell, I got mistaken for a girl right away when I posted a face photo on this very forum for... some reason, I'm sure it made sense a the time), and of course I get into the cosplay aspect too... so every now and then someone will get a bit strange about it. This does not help the ol' social anxiety, nope. Particularly if someone attempts, well... physical contact. Yes, I can see how that might be REALLY goddamn annoying to anyone receiving it. I always rather wish I could do something when I see it happening to someone (of either gender) but unfortunately, I cant...


I have to work on bodily autonomy for a couple reasons:

- guys tend not to mind if a short girl touches them suddenly, unless they have a girlfriend, and even then it's shaky so I was unaware that it isn't cool
- for some reason I actually ask women if I can hug them, usually when drunk, but I recently realised that I shouldn't as some might feel impelled to accept for social politeness
- if somebody has a tattoo and I am drunk, I'm 75% likely to take hold of the area and gently twist to see the rest; percentage drops quite a lot if it is a woman, which isn't fair; sometimes I do ask if I can touch but what I really should say is "Your tattoo is fascinating but I'm not sure what it is, would you feel comfortable explaining the story behind it?". I've realised, with the help of an article partly, that people will likely respond very well to that and will actually move their body to show you the details of the piece

As you can guess, most of this occurs when I'm drunk and I forget about boundaries. However, if I catch that the person is uncomfortable, I leave them alone and apologise, and if they state their discomfort, I do the same. It's also something I'm actively going to prevent. I guess I didn't notice how much of an issue it could be because I've managed not to get groped too much and when I had my hair, all genders were asking to touch it, so I let them. Since they weren't stroking my skin, it wasn't an issue.


Having said that, at a convention I'm supposing there are not many people who are flat out drunk and it seems to me that when a person has taken the time to get into costume, that should definitely be respected as an action they took for themselves and not others. Most seem to see it as the other way around. Women who go skimpy due to the characters they are portraying are either fat-shamed, hounded, or asked a million obscure questions about the character that even the big male fan next to the questioner wouldn't know and are then called a fake. It's weird to me that in comics and the like women have been aimed at the male gaze but when women actually try to come in they are treated like something to be chased away, as if they are going to taint the fandoms with their hormones. Just as bad are the comments about "but [character] is white, you can't be because you are [race]; you should have went with [lamer character] instead because it would have worked better". Screw you! Nobody should say that to anybody! Meh. I've yet to go to a large convention due to knowing from friends and many others that these issues exist, but eventually I will.


As for it happening to you, I'm sorry to hear that. :( One of the extra problems you risk encountering because of this, though I can't see it happening at a con with everybody moving around, is the idea that some men may panic when they realise who they are coming on to or inappropriately touching is not, in fact, a woman. This can lead to unfortunate and at times dangerous outbursts. At the moment the theory hasn't been looked into incredibly much but has been used in court cases. While to some it may sound like a cop out and it will be in many cases, I truly believe this happens. Another reason to learn not to grope inappropriately.

In regards to standing up to any gender being harassed, I understand how you feel. Can I be certain that I would? Not 100% and considering my conditions it is unlikely, but I've had so long to stew hearing different genders, races, etc. experiences I think my anger would override the fear and they'd have a bald, pierced, furious midget in boots yelling at them. I think confusion more than anything else would drive them away. Still, it is reasonable that some would not be able to. On the other hand, both the bystander effect and finding it funny/acceptable will motivate others to stand and watch it go down. Out of my shaky understanding of probabilities, it would seem unlikely that not one of the surrounding witnesses could at least tap the person on the shoulder and ask them to be more polite. I mean, doesn't the geek/cosplay/gamer community at large want to be inclusive? They go on about already being it but that's a pack of lies.
/noooo more tangents


Misery wrote:
Hah, the fun part would be getting anyone to read any of that. Getting them to listen to it explained verbally is hard enough. Partly the game's fault though, the way it's rules are designed.


It seems also to be partly how gamers and even adults seem to be. You hand me that information and I will, if well enough, focus extra hard on it so I can play the game right. Others have no patience or seem to simply revert to wanting to miss the rule completely. Not that I mind creative ways to change it around which will be easier for them, fun for me, and still get the same intended result more or less. I value that but only if the effort is put in to understand why what is going on needs to happen. You don't see that much.

When game rules blow, like really blow, I will go looking for a laid out alternative which have been typed up with dedication by a frustrated but intelligent gamer. I suppose that comes from seeing how RPGs can be mixed together and altered, and how RPG video games can be modded to suit the player but still fulfill their original intent. If the rules make sense and aren't meant to make the actual chances easier, then I'm all for it.

Later I might need to make my own jotter of the trickier rules to bring about with me. The irritating point at the moment is the people I'm into playing with are either inexperienced or rusty and the ones who are experienced enough appear too... serious for me to want to play with them. Like, they'd treat it less than a game and more like a proof of their geekhood or masculinity (yup, all the serious ones are dudes).


Misery wrote:
I'm curious, these characters you have mentioned a few times now, are they characters you have come up with? Or are they pre-existing characters? I've not heard those names before, I think.


I'll go through what I think I've mentioned and give links when appropriate. I don't know how far back you go so I'll simply mention it all.

Nae is of course my Planeswalker I'm working on.

Nissa Revane is a Green mana Elf from Zendikar, a plane which draws adventures and is pretty overgrown with huge monsters storming around. Currently it's under siege by the Eldrazi, colourless monsters from out of Lovecraft's nightmares. Nissa and a few others had a hand in trying to beat them or send them away but it messed up and they were released at least down onto Zendikar (will have to read further). As far as I understand it, Nissa was unlikely trying to stop them entirely, she simply wanted them to be aimed somewhere other than her beloved home world. If we go into DnD alignment, which I keep being told is "impossible to do with MtG because it misunderstands the colours", she is likely somewhere on the neutral spectrum. Because of her actions with the monsters, I'm leaning towards chaotic.

Kiora is a Blue/Green mana merwoman who is also from Zendikar. She has no idea about Nissa's actions likely and may not know of her (again, more reading needed but may be in link). In the next little bit I'll have more to say about her but people have judged her to be chaotic neutral too.

Theros is a plane based pretty much around Greek mythology. I haven't had a chance to explore it much yet but I'm drawn to the [url=Nyx]http://mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Nyx[/url] aspect since it is the spiritual and magical side, involving the Gods and spirits.

Thassa is the God(dess) of the Sea inTheros. Kiora, being a right wench, masqueraded as the Goddess in order to collect giant sea creatures to help her return to Zendikar and fight the Eldrazi. At some point she winds up tussling with Thassa because you don't just wander into a deity's home and start acting like that. The Planeswalker managed to push the Goddess back and simply Planewalked away with Thassa's bident. Basically Kiora wanted Thassa's Kraken (who I think is this guy and I have the card). I don't know if she managed to get it or not but since the card is there... well.

Ravnica is a plane with its main city being almost entirely a city. MtG has been there twice and there's too much to go into for me right now. Basically there are a bunch of factions and their fighting was set to destroy everything so a Guild Pact was made. There was the Ravnica block which I know less about and the Return to Ravnica block which I know a little better.

The Simic Combine is one of the Guilds which changed a fair bit between blocks. Originally, before the first block, the Combine were meant to... serve or heal with Nature, something along those lines. The Guildmaster Momir Vig decided that this wasn't enough and began to improve on nature. So they wound up being strange botanical scientists and pretty involved with fungus. Then something happens between the blocks - links should explain as I need to catch up - and Momir Vig is no more. The Combine is in disarray until *poof* merfolk begin to rise from Ravnica's oceans to see what all the turbulence is. The Guild gains a new master in Zegana a merwoman who aims to bring the Guild back to its holistic routes. They are Blue/Green. The Guild does not actually align with dryads in cards, but hopefully I can wiggle that.

The Selesyna Conclave is the Guild people probably connect most to dryads as three of them head it. They are seen by some as harmless hippies and by others as eco-terrorists. I don't know enough about them but in terms of dryads I think that's the only Guild they are linked to.

I don't think I mentioned anybody else but if I did, let me know.[/quote]


Misery wrote:
And yes, Reddit and the like.... cesspits indeed. I dont know why people become shrieking asshats once they get onto a gaming forum


I'm not so sure either. At first I assumed that the demographic was simply quite young in most areas but when you look further, you realise that's not the case.

There are a few theories - some connecting - as to why people are nasty idiots online (excluding any conditions):

- Anonymity seems to turn a lot of us into vicious monsters. Went through that for a period when I was 14 but I think I was mostly copying others. I apologised to the people eventually and became e-friends.

- The reason anonymity does this may be that politeness in society evolved as a way to keep the group together, strength in numbers, and ensure that we functioned as our species required. However, once online, you wind up feeling like you have no reason to do so. There was a study which suggested that, in neurotypicals at least, if there is no eye contact then the chances to be insensitive or cruel are increased.

- People tend to call offline life "real life" and that muddies the waters, esp. when people say "it's just the internet". These types are detaching themselves from the reality that there are real people on the other side of the screen. It's like babies and object permanence. It's almost as if the internet is infantilising us.

- People get bullied. We all know that. "Adjusted adults" believe they are past doing it back now that they are out of high school but the second you give them a keyboard they turn into petulant teens. It's understandable that the injured could want to injure, but that doesn't make it right.

- The internet is still young, in the grand scheme of things. In this way, not much research has been done and people are not taught empathy involving it. We're simply handed it and more or less allowed to go mad.

- Moderators on sites get these very strange power trips. "It's only the internet" but as soon as you give certain users privileges, their whole attitude changes. They engage in bullying, favouritism, unfair banning, taking sides, authoritarian actions, and other power madness. In turn, the favourite regulars prosper from this and, knowing they are favoured, treat others horribly. Then people realise that if you can't beat them, join them. It's vicious and sad.


Misery wrote:
Hah, yeah, good luck with that one. Most people wont do that.


I'm lucky to have a few friends and various routes into games where people will either be nice anyway or feel like they have to because I'm so-and-so's whatever and I have [list diagnoses]. Yeah, there will still be jerks but ultimately I have avenues for finding decent people to teach. Jimmy is rusty with MtG but he's still skilled enough to help, whereas my ex and/or flatmate are only two of the decent ones for table-top, board, and other card games. LARPs are trickier because unless you create the character to act as a leech to your "master", you're screwed. Either you make friends with everybody beforehand or you read up extensively on all the lore and create the most ridiculously interesting but unassuming character and either wait for them to come to you while you work on the anxiety or you find somebody you are comfortable with, drop a hint, and wander off to another area to watch everything go down. Then you can come in again and mix things up.

My flatmate goes to a Vampire: The Masquerade LARP which has been running for over a decade and they still haven't actually completed the first story line. It all descended into random and confusing in-game politics, squabbling out-of-game politics, arguments among the rules refs and narrators, and the "too many cooks in the kitchen" issue. I know exactly how to fix it but one of the major ways has already been voted on and pretty much refused.

What needs to happen: Since none of them ever agree, somebody who either has no investment in the game but knows the rules or is at least detached enough to be objective has the final say, whether the refs and narrators like it or not. Everybody agrees on who this is and that person agrees to abide by certain rules pertaining to their roles.

The refs and narrators are told to work together, actually get back to players on down-times, and either stick to the rules or pick the logical answer in regards to an unknown. Any major event or killing off of a long-term character must not be taken lightly and ref-nerfing must be kept at a minimum.

Having said that: if you are going to have story lines you make sure they conclude in a proper time period. If your players are not getting it, you somehow lead them there as much as you can and, if that isn't working, you go directly to the most trusted player and ask them if they are willing to do so. Players are more likely to follow the actions of another character than the prompting of a narrator.

Monthly time-ins should not consist of the characters mostly talking about nonsense. While a lot of action takes place in the down-times, players need to be motivated.

It says this in all the damn books, except for the "head executive" part, maybe, though to be honest they mention Chronicler or Storyteller which is the same if you think of it in table-top so they probably do need that.

Sorry, rant. Over a decade and they can't finish the first story line and have allowed ridiculous ones to pop up, with massive amounts of squabbling. They have no structure, common consensus, and the refs/narrators change all the time. There's no point in me telling them any of this because it's probably been stated and they likely want to "stay away from the restrictions of books". :roll:


Misery wrote:
Like fighting games... now THERE is a community filled with detestable jerks. Help out new players? Nope. CANT HAVE THAT.


This is not gendered as biological females do it to, but this seems to be a more masculine/testosterone issue (there are women born with slightly more "masculine" brains and those who have more testosterone, though estrogen is supposed to be worse for rage than testosterone; both are seen in both sexes). It seems to be a... must-be-the-boss thing. The situation must be controlled, they have to be the best of the best, if newbs don't toughen up then they'll get nowhere, perhaps they learned without help so others should have to, PROVE YOURSELVES!! ! It's tiring. I might be more into them (and sports) if people could be healthily competitive instead of vicious savages.



Misery wrote:
And then there's the whole "element of water" bit


This actually came into my connecting with blue too. As silly as it is, being a Pisces meant a lot to me as a kid. I prefer shallower lakes, rivers, and ponds to the full ocean because depths scare me. I also love the rain.

As for manipulative... God only knows if I am. I get accused of it but I try my best not to be. I am liable to be seen as bossy but I need the control to be able to cope with the environment, plans, situation, whatever. People know when I want something. However, people underestimate other aspects of my character so you could say illusion is there.


Ha, patience. I have to work on it. I'm getting... a little more controlled but I used to just flip out. This mini laptop has been punched, slammed, and hurled across the room. I have no idea how it is still working. I also bit the screen of a phone in half through rage I had nowhere to direct. The only person I ever attacked was my brother when I was younger as a) misdirected from abuse received from adults, and b) he would not give me space. I remember the last fight. I was 12, he was 9. He was going to tattle to my mother about something and, since I was terrified of her, I had to get the wireless phone from him at any cost. So we're wrestling on the floor and he slams the phone into my forehead. Pure red or black rage, I can't remember which, went in front of my eyes. Visually. I know I grabbed his hair and smashed his face into the floor though.

That terrified me and I tried to find out if his nose was broken as he hid in his room. He threw out the phone but I was like "No, I need to see your freaking nose,". I don't even think most of it was fear of my mother at that point, it was fear of myself.

/too much information


Misery wrote:
And I tend to charge into situations without exactly planning things out. Not to mention I tend to have a need for heat; I hate cold places and climates, really. My ideal environments would be either a tropical region, with the ocean nearby, or a desert region, all sand and rock. As opposed to my current location which is all grass and.... grass. I'm so tired of grass.


I love grass. I live in the (lower class) suburbs so it's not hard to get it, but I still love it. I can handle being too cold than too hot better, however I still want to move to the tropics because of seasonal affective issues. But all them nasty critters and natural disasters... UK is safer in that sense.

I charge in to some areas of life and excessively plan others. It really depends on the type of situation.


Misery wrote:
I know alot of people on the autistic spectrum tend to need order and repetition, but much of either will just drive me up the wall.


I think that there are many who have areas where they need that and areas where they definitely need to escape it. I'm guessing but it seems to hold true for at least one offline aspie I know and, if I am on the spectrum, it's the same for me. Although I'm rigid in my need for change because it has to be specific change in this manner at this time, etc.


Misery wrote:
And I tend to enjoy chaotic places like the conventions and whatnot (though I tend to avoid directly interacting with anyone when possible).


If I can disconnect I can enjoy that but that ability has been lost to me for years. :/ Used to be able to generally get over being bumped into; now it might make me freak out and notice absolutely everybody nearby. Agoraphobia compounding issues, I think.


Misery wrote:
This would also explain why my room is just random junk strewn everywhere.


I've heard that certain folk on the spectrum, esp. those with comorbids, don't have the... willpower to keep anything organised because they are either spending so much energy on trying to cope or else they take up all their energy on their interests and then don't have any left for tidying. If any are like me, they may also be scared. If I try to structure this area, I have to do that area, and then it would make sense to change this so that looks better. Or I have OCD as well. *shrugs* I don't tidy or clean because of it. If I do I'm all over the place for hours and then I meltdown crying.


Misery wrote:
And while I try to be polite and helpful towards others much of the time, hmm, I can also be standoffish and want to just see what happens if they do things on their own. I'll always help if things go really bad, but other than that... yeah, again it depends on my mood. Or I can just be unpleasant and negative. I'm good at negative. Which might be expected of someone with the name "Misery". I cant stand seeing anyone be hurt by anything though and get rather incensed at witnessing any form of injustice.


I used to be quite negative and standoffish. Then I saw how much it upset me when others were like that. To me, it made me a hypocrite so I began this massive crusade of changing myself. It's not something I think everybody has to do, but it's been helping me. Now I advise a lot to those who I feel will take it. For some others... it's horrible to say but I feel they are too dense to come to the realisation themselves. I think I'm becoming quite adept at putting advice to friends in a balanced and friendly way because they often come to me. Online it is about 8/10 times where it will go down well. Not so great with romantic partners but I think that's because my type tend to be paranoid and easily offended.

And I've been accused of being a "social justice warrior"... maybe White mana fits after all...


_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let's simply agree to disagree.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Misery
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,163

13 Jul 2015, 1:02 pm

Ye gods, that may be the single longest post I've yet encountered in.... years. Many years now. I must say, I'm impressed... you're one of the very few I"ve encountered in this place that is willing to have a conversation with some detail to it. Though, THIS forum, it's more understandable when someone doesnt do that. I mean, you know, the autism and all... very often not just a mark of laziness, not here. I certainly understand the fact that many in this place probably just dont like to talk all that much and can certainly get overwhelmed.

Offline, I am kinda like that... to a point. As long as I dont get enraged by something, anyway. But normally, I'm pretty quiet and tend to keep to myself. I can do these longer things with people I'm close to, or with pretty much anyone online, as for whatever baffling reason the presense of large amounts of technology tends to be something I find comforting. Heck if I know why. I doubt most people would find the unholy mess around this desk area to be "comforting". Certainly not the giant spiderweb of cables and... things... that hangs off the front (not the back!) of it. There's a whole console, some headphones, a few controllers, speakers, and what I think is the 360's power brick (hard to tell without tearing into the horrid mess) stuck in that huge mass. I could see LOTS of people being REALLY bothered by encountering something like that, but for whatever reason it doesnt bug me but just adds to the positive effects of this room. Well, mostly positive anyway. But yeah, it at least allows me to be comfortable enough to do all the talking online that I tend to do. Well... when I can find people willing to actually converse, that is. With full sentences, preferrably.

Quote:
If I did or maybe if I ever get involved with that I'd probably ask for a day or two to come up with some of the ways which might deviate, have a few variations of those in how to keep with the lore, and come back to whoever was in charge of the final decision to ask how they felt. I mean, I'm assuming the writer's have contact with the franchise in some form from the start. If they are expected simply to submit a full story, I'd probably email.

Likely that's not the way they'd want to work, yet it seems like a good plan. As well as that, part of me feels like the sign of a versatile writer is being able to have limitations. Not everybody needs to be versatile, of course; you find your niché then stick to it. I suppose it would be nice to see gaming books being taken more serious by other authors, however the quality which are accepted by the franchises perhaps put them off.


I mostly just imagine that there's probably alot of extra work involved, and having to research something that's mostly fictional probably doesnt help that. It's like, sure, you can ask people at the company that makes the game questions about it, but... something tells me that it's not that simple. You might get one of the game's creators, but find out that, hey, he MADE the damn thing but is missing TONS of the details. Makes me think of the people that make stupid ol' Windows. They make it, but I swear they have NO freaking clue how it even works.

Writing as a whole just always seems VERY difficult to me. So much to keep track of, and you've got to be careful of so many things! I dont know how anyone manages to do it. I read alot of books myself, and generally have great respect for the authors that I follow, for being able to do the sort of thing they do, with the level of quality that they manage.

Of course, then you get others that'll take those ideas and go and screw them up... sigh. You know, someone grabs onto some book someone made and tries to make some damn movie out of it (because you know, cramming an 800 page story into a 2 hour timeframe is a GREAT idea, cant possibly go wrong...) and it just somehow feels like it damages the entire thing by existing. I hate when that happens. I get that people want to make money, but sometimes, it's like... just leave things the hell alone. They never do of course. I suppose that's what happens with some books based on games or whatnot. You get a half-assed effort from the writer/publisher because they're just going off of the brand name to get them the money. Just makes a GOOD book of that sort that much more valuable, though.


Misery wrote:
But the guys that make the game try their best to keep such imbalances from happening. I mean, nobody really likes matches that end in 2 turns. Even the winner of such matches will soon grow bored of it, because it's almost like they dont even have to play it at all; they never reach the point of having to make much in the way of strategic decisions.


Quote:
It's really weird and maybe I'm seeing the extremes but so far I'm seeing the casual players who are more interested in seeing what comes out and the interplay between the cards than winning (me, though I'm slightly more competitive than the more laid back guys) or they are that kind of min/maxing ridiculous "I'm going to knock you out in a second" and are proud of that. I mean, the latter certainly seem to at least appreciate when it isn't working out like that but against other pros they take this swift victory thing as if it's the greatest thrill in the world and some never seem to get bored. I also hear this from friends who play. They tend to explain why those players would like it so I have to clarify that when I don't understand, it doesn't mean I don't get it cognitively, it means I don't understand what is so exciting about it on a personal level. It seems so boring and getting such extreme delight out of beating another so suddenly in a game during which you can have dramatic twists and turns seems to defeat the purpose. Hilariously, you even see it in adult players of Pokémon TCG.


Yeah, honestly you see that in pretty much every competitive genre or game type there is. Bloody stupid to me, really, but people do it. Again I see it the most in fighting games... apparently it's just wonderful fun to take new players and just stomp the cheese out of them. And the players doing the stomping then wonder why "noobs" are so bad at the game. It's a vicious circle of anti-logic that basically eats itself. Sad, really. I get nothing out of doing that myself, as I need a challenge and some excitement to hold my limited attention. I'll only do it, though, if someone is REALLY ticking me off.

Quote:
My brain probably has zoned out here as I'm only 50/50 on being sure what you mean so I'll go ahead and say what I'd eventually like. Before I go ahead I'll have to say I'd need a couple of the same kinds of decks in order for others to join in. Anyway, I'd want functional decks of each level of playing (as well as style but that's getting ahead of the point). So if people wanted a relaxed weenie deck session, cool. If they wanted brutal madness, grand, I have the decks for it. Then anything in between.


Basically I was referring to the traditional way of having matches with TCGs; each player just brings their own decks that they made completely outside of the event or whatever, and competes with those. As a rule, in this type of play, decks just made "for fun" or to follow very specific match up rules will end up being destroyed by decks that are made for competitive efficiency. Even a lower level "built to win" deck tends to manage this. It can be hard for many to find people that'll stick to more "fun" rules or game types. Me, I just usually stick to the traditional method; it takes me bloody forever to come up with a new deck in any TCG (I'm the min-maxer type when it comes to any game at all), so I make a deck on my own, and I'm bloody well going to use it, I will. So traditional matches it usually is for me. Dont get much out of preconstructed decks... I find a lack of satisfaction if I dont do it on my own, really. Though I tend to think that way about alot of things.


Misery wrote:
Ah, yeah, I dont work either, havent for.... years, I dont know, and yet tend to spend money like there's no tomorrow. Obviously some people have issues with this, but... I really just dont care. Besides, I spend only in the realm of my own hobbies, it's not like I'm off buying helicopters or some damn stupid thing like that. That would not be a wise investment, really.

Of course, those that say that it's a waste never seem to notice the things THEY do that are so wasteful, which I always find to be rather silly.


Quote:
As for working, high school dropout who only managed to volunteer at a charity shop for a few months. I'm properly messed up due to childhood issues and later factors which compounded that. Added to the obvious differences from the norm. I'd like to volunteer again, eventually, but I refuse to believe that I have to work if it will cause me undue stress. In fact, I'm such a weird pro-robotics anarchist that I'd ideally want the people who didn't agree to colonise other areas in the solar system and be in space stations built for long term living, and then have the people who did agree work on what they felt was important and valuable, with robots (without any sort of advanced AI) work on menial tasks.

Sorry, got a bit future-hippie there. I know what the experts are saying right now about what is and isn't possible, and yet that's happened over the course of human history and even quite recently. I'm one of those nerds who think the Singularity is possible so the robots involved with the standard tasks would have to lack the ability to... think past their job. Hopefully any AI which could would be open to the objective idea behind that, although who knows what our programming would spawn into. Tricky subject which causes arguments about ethics as well as even the possibility. /tangent


Okay, I'll admit, I understood little of this. I was doing just fine until I got to "pro-robotics anarchist", at which point I'm pretty sure I blew a mental fuse. Which happens to me often, really. And I have no idea what this mysterious Singularity is, in particular.

Though I will say that I tend to facepalm when I hear about experts rambling on about "oh well this idea DEFINITELY isnt possible! We cant actually really TEST it right now, but we definitely know!". They say these things as if our current level of science means that we know all about everything and have somehow conquered all mysteries. I always find this viewpoint baffling. And it's used SO MUCH in so many different ways and places. Just... baffling.

Quote:
Ugh, that seems irritating. No offense to anybody on the forum but most of the fans of AAA FPS games and similar regular genres seem to be... well, they don't seem that imaginative and even when they are playing they want to "camp" or "break" aspects in order to win. I really do understand wanting to succeed, as much as it sometimes may not sound like it and yes, I want to succeed to. There comes a point though when it's some sort of ego boost and not the enjoyment of the game. I stop cheating on StarCraft when I was old enough or had played enough how to work out the intricacies and I've never looked back.

With Skyrim, before I had to stop, I would mod for realism, increased difficulty, and various RPG reasons.


Ahh, yeah... some of the behaviors that alot of gamers tend to do can be just a BIT baffling. You are correct, many of the stereotypical AAA FPS sorts of players will tend to do those very things. They'll camp in multiplayer games. They'll break things in singleplayer games. And the worst part to me, is that when they do these things, they really, actually, honestly believe they've "beaten" the game or challenge or whatever. And I just... I DONT EVEN.

And Heaven forbid that the game in question manages to actually CHALLENGE them with difficulty despite their attempts to break it! You mentioned modding to increase difficulty, and it occurs to me just how many gamers would NEVER EVER DO THIS. It's just absurd to me.

As I think I've mentioned, I personally NEED a challenge to hold my attention. And my own idea of "difficulty" is a little warped at this point. A brief example of the sort of game I tend to get into: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uON3zty3-Q Now granted that one is a bit of an extreme example (and yes, that's me playing it there), but it works out well enough. I'm used to THAT sort of thing. I get great satisfaction in conquering seemingly impossible adversaries (and there's no genre that does "seemingly impossible" better than that one). It gives me the feeling of having ACCOMPLISHED something. And this is a good thing, and is part of what drives me to get better. And then, I watch your "typical" gamer do things, and... argh. In a game like that one, they would have simply died a million times, used a continue every time they ran out of lives, and this would mean that they "beat" the game. And it's like... really? Just... really? That's how they view it? The game absolutely flattened them! But nope. If they have continues, or spawn camping or "wall hax" as some put it or some way to exploit the AI or break the game in question or phase outside of the level and enter somewhere else throiugh a glitch... yeah. They'll happily do these things and consider it to be skill. It just amazes me, really. I dont understand how they can get something out of that. I mean, to each their own, but still.

And really, I could rant on THAT topic for a loooooong time....

Quote:
Question: To me it seems that many female players pick female avatars, which makes sense in my head. Then, years ago, I noticed most of the gamer guys I knew picked chicks as well, and discovered it is a little bit of a "thing". Thinking back to my MMO experiences, I don't think I saw too much of an imbalance. What do you think is going on there, considering that at least back then, more males were playing? Why might it be that males would be more interested in playing a female than a female being interested in playing a guy? Is it because in many games in which you don't have the choice it usually defaults to male?
/yet another tangent


Ahhh... THIS issue. Yes, I'm familiar with this one. I think, with males doing this sort of thing, there are two major possible reasons.

Number 1 is the most common: sex appeal. You might notice how in so very, very many games, the "armor" for female characters isnt exactly.... practical. I mean, really. Wearing LESS should not protect you MORE, but what do I know? Developers exploit the hell out of this, and so the player in question ends up with a female character, because then they have something to constantly look at with great enjoyment throughout the course of the game. A damn crude reason, yes, but it's one I'm very sure of for many players.

Number 2 though, not so common. For some... I think it's more of an outlet. A way to, ah, act out desires or fantasies. Typically what I mean, is relating to those players that may have, well, gender issues. Embarrassing though it is, I rather have such issues as well (which is at least part of the reason for my appearance being the way it is), and I myself end up using female characters alot for something of that reason. It's a bit like cosplay to me: it's almost a way to act more like your true self than you might be able to normally. So they seize the opportunity, and do so. Now of course, females can do this too, but... I have no idea why, but for whatever reason I dont actually ever see that many girls with that specific type of issue, and thus that sort of reason. You know, in LGBT communities. There just always seems to be a bazillion guys there with that sort of "problem", but so very few girls, and... yeah. I have no idea why. But within the context of gaming though, I definitely think that reason number 1 is dramatically more common than this one.


Quote:
Having said that, at a convention I'm supposing there are not many people who are flat out drunk and it seems to me that when a person has taken the time to get into costume, that should definitely be respected as an action they took for themselves and not others. Most seem to see it as the other way around. Women who go skimpy due to the characters they are portraying are either fat-shamed, hounded, or asked a million obscure questions about the character that even the big male fan next to the questioner wouldn't know and are then called a fake. It's weird to me that in comics and the like women have been aimed at the male gaze but when women actually try to come in they are treated like something to be chased away, as if they are going to taint the fandoms with their hormones. Just as bad are the comments about "but [character] is white, you can't be because you are [race]; you should have went with [lamer character] instead because it would have worked better". Screw you! Nobody should say that to anybody! Meh. I've yet to go to a large convention due to knowing from friends and many others that these issues exist, but eventually I will.


Oh, there are way more than enough people at those events that are absolutely drunk out of their minds. Iv'e been to so many of these, and seen it so often; and as I never drink myself (ever) and am usually a bit blasted on caffiene, I tend to be extremely alert and will usually notice things like that. Not that I have to try very hard... so many times, it's just so obvious when someone's gotten drunk at one of these. Which makes sense... the alcohol must combine from the inevitable exhaustion and lack of sleep that is so common at these events, so they end up acting sorta super drunk, as opposed to normal drunk. Chaos can then ensue as a result. Not to mention the breaking of all sorts of rules.

It definitely is more common at large conventions though. Particularly since it's so very, very hard for anyone to really enforce anything at those. People thusly sorta get it into their head that they can get away with anything, which seems to just encourage more drunkenness, which makes things get even MORE out of hand, and... yeah. It gets a little loopy. I end up liking smaller cons alot more, really.

Also, yeah... that bit about body types and whatnot, and cosplay... yeah. THAT is common. You see people being harassed and berated all the time for not looking "right", or having the wrong skin tone, or the wrong hair, or maybe they did some damn stupid marking wrong when putting it on (because clearly, that's super important), or... whatever. And as my cousin puts it, people at cons tend to be "brutally honest", so they absolutely WILL tell you, in no uncertain terms, if they think you look stupid. Which, of course, is mean, but they'll bloody well do it anyway.

For me, this meant making sure to stick to only certain types of characters. I could never pull off a character with a "manly" or masculine appearance, that'd be a bloody disaster. So... I end up doing androgynous characters, or female characters despite being a male myself. As you might expect, this generates additional issues... my main cosplay is Bridget from the Guilty Gear series. So far, this has gone quite well indeed. Iv'e had others, but that's been my main one. Though, I intend on getting another "main" one, which will be Misery from the game Cave Story, the character whose name and image I'm using on these forums here (and basically everywhere). I'm pretty sure I can pull off her look, but moreso than just that, it turned out that her personality in-game is very much matches mine IRL. I say "IRL" because i"m not sure how much of it comes through online here via typing. But yes, my personality is extremely similar to that of the character, which... that's the first time that's happened. I cosplay as Bridget and others but as a rule, I could never actually roleplay as them if I had to as I really just cant manage to act like that sort of character, much as I may want to. For Misery though, there's no acting needed whatsoever. If I just act like I always do people will think I AM roleplaying, in that case.

And there, I've gone off on a tangent of my own!


Quote:
As for it happening to you, I'm sorry to hear that. :( One of the extra problems you risk encountering because of this, though I can't see it happening at a con with everybody moving around, is the idea that some men may panic when they realise who they are coming on to or inappropriately touching is not, in fact, a woman. This can lead to unfortunate and at times dangerous outbursts. At the moment the theory hasn't been looked into incredibly much but has been used in court cases. While to some it may sound like a cop out and it will be in many cases, I truly believe this happens. Another reason to learn not to grope inappropriately.


Oh yes. I've encountered this one. The "I didnt realize you were male!" reactions. Ugh.

Hmm, this might be a bit too much information, but one thing I do is, uh... er... well, I do nude photos online. Dont remember why I started doing that, but it's fun, and I'm not exactly the sort to be a prude in any way, so I bloody well do it. I get a real kick out of it, and generally will happily show them to anyone that wants to see (this has happened a couple of times even here in this forum; obviously such things are shown via PM, not in the forums itself...). And one thing that'll happen is that people will sometimes have very strange reactions to my appearance even with the lack of any clothes. There'll be some that might just see a vague thumbnail and click it, or just see my face & shoulders and click it, and then suddenly it's VERY obvious that they're not looking at a female, and... well, that's when the angry messages or the insults start. Because, clearly, it's my fault that they click any specific thing, yeah? They can get real nasty about it, too. It really does just seem to offend their masculinity to in any way associate with anyone that might cause even a remote, tiny bit of confusion of that sort.

Of course, there's other reactions too. Some people get really INTO it and find that sort of thing to be very appealing. That sort can be really pushy and kinda obnoxious. And it's often that same assumption that they can "get some", too (hint, they dont get any). And they can be a little annoying overall.

Or there's the strange sort of reaction. Sometimes it'll be a guy who claims to be straight... but has decided that he loves what he sees ANYWAY. I find this baffling, I really do... It's like, okay, are you SURE your straight here, considering what you're saying? I know such things are just labels, but really, I just... I dont even.

And of course, those very reactions can happen at a con too when in costume. Except of course with the additional risk of being groped, which fortunately doesnt happen online. A fact I'm rather glad for. Be damn scary if it DID happen online somehow, that's for sure.

But yeah, ah, too much information, perhaps, huh.... I do prefer to be open about things though. Usually.


Quote:
The irritating point at the moment is the people I'm into playing with are either inexperienced or rusty and the ones who are experienced enough appear too... serious for me to want to play with them. Like, they'd treat it less than a game and more like a proof of their geekhood or masculinity (yup, all the serious ones are dudes).


Oh geez, I hate it when people do this. And that one happens OFTEN, yeah? They seem to forget that "fun" is supposed to be part of the whole point. They'll scream themselves silly in great anger if they dont get to show how "strong" they are in various games, and it's like... if it's angering you that much, WHY THE HELL ARE YOU PLAYING IT?!? It's one of the most baffling things I ever see in gaming as a whole. And of course it happens in things like sports, too, but it's mostly the gaming side that gets me, really.

....it gets old, too.


Quote:
I'll go through what I think I've mentioned and give links when appropriate. I don't know how far back you go so I'll simply mention it all.

Nae is of course my Planeswalker I'm working on.

Nissa Revane is a Green mana Elf from Zendikar, a plane which draws adventures and is pretty overgrown with huge monsters storming around. Currently it's under siege by the Eldrazi, colourless monsters from out of Lovecraft's nightmares. Nissa and a few others had a hand in trying to beat them or send them away but it messed up and they were released at least down onto Zendikar (will have to read further). As far as I understand it, Nissa was unlikely trying to stop them entirely, she simply wanted them to be aimed somewhere other than her beloved home world. If we go into DnD alignment, which I keep being told is "impossible to do with MtG because it misunderstands the colours", she is likely somewhere on the neutral spectrum. Because of her actions with the monsters, I'm leaning towards chaotic.

Kiora is a Blue/Green mana merwoman who is also from Zendikar. She has no idea about Nissa's actions likely and may not know of her (again, more reading needed but may be in link). In the next little bit I'll have more to say about her but people have judged her to be chaotic neutral too.

Theros is a plane based pretty much around Greek mythology. I haven't had a chance to explore it much yet but I'm drawn to the [url=Nyx]http://mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Nyx[/url] aspect since it is the spiritual and magical side, involving the Gods and spirits.

Thassa is the God(dess) of the Sea inTheros. Kiora, being a right wench, masqueraded as the Goddess in order to collect giant sea creatures to help her return to Zendikar and fight the Eldrazi. At some point she winds up tussling with Thassa because you don't just wander into a deity's home and start acting like that. The Planeswalker managed to push the Goddess back and simply Planewalked away with Thassa's bident. Basically Kiora wanted Thassa's Kraken (who I think is this guy and I have the card). I don't know if she managed to get it or not but since the card is there... well.

Ravnica is a plane with its main city being almost entirely a city. MtG has been there twice and there's too much to go into for me right now. Basically there are a bunch of factions and their fighting was set to destroy everything so a Guild Pact was made. There was the Ravnica block which I know less about and the Return to Ravnica block which I know a little better.

The Simic Combine is one of the Guilds which changed a fair bit between blocks. Originally, before the first block, the Combine were meant to... serve or heal with Nature, something along those lines. The Guildmaster Momir Vig decided that this wasn't enough and began to improve on nature. So they wound up being strange botanical scientists and pretty involved with fungus. Then something happens between the blocks - links should explain as I need to catch up - and Momir Vig is no more. The Combine is in disarray until *poof* merfolk begin to rise from Ravnica's oceans to see what all the turbulence is. The Guild gains a new master in Zegana a merwoman who aims to bring the Guild back to its holistic routes. They are Blue/Green. The Guild does not actually align with dryads in cards, but hopefully I can wiggle that.

The Selesyna Conclave is the Guild people probably connect most to dryads as three of them head it. They are seen by some as harmless hippies and by others as eco-terrorists. I don't know enough about them but in terms of dryads I think that's the only Guild they are linked to.

I don't think I mentioned anybody else but if I did, let me know.


That's alot of stuff... yeah, most of that is a little past the time I was last fully into the game... I suppose I'll learn alot of this as I go, once getting back into it.

Quote:
LARPs are trickier because unless you create the character to act as a leech to your "master", you're screwed. Either you make friends with everybody beforehand or you read up extensively on all the lore and create the most ridiculously interesting but unassuming character and either wait for them to come to you while you work on the anxiety or you find somebody you are comfortable with, drop a hint, and wander off to another area to watch everything go down. Then you can come in again and mix things up.

My flatmate goes to a Vampire: The Masquerade LARP which has been running for over a decade and they still haven't actually completed the first story line. It all descended into random and confusing in-game politics, squabbling out-of-game politics, arguments among the rules refs and narrators, and the "too many cooks in the kitchen" issue. I know exactly how to fix it but one of the major ways has already been voted on and pretty much refused.

What needs to happen: Since none of them ever agree, somebody who either has no investment in the game but knows the rules or is at least detached enough to be objective has the final say, whether the refs and narrators like it or not. Everybody agrees on who this is and that person agrees to abide by certain rules pertaining to their roles.

The refs and narrators are told to work together, actually get back to players on down-times, and either stick to the rules or pick the logical answer in regards to an unknown. Any major event or killing off of a long-term character must not be taken lightly and ref-nerfing must be kept at a minimum.

Having said that: if you are going to have story lines you make sure they conclude in a proper time period. If your players are not getting it, you somehow lead them there as much as you can and, if that isn't working, you go directly to the most trusted player and ask them if they are willing to do so. Players are more likely to follow the actions of another character than the prompting of a narrator.

Monthly time-ins should not consist of the characters mostly talking about nonsense. While a lot of action takes place in the down-times, players need to be motivated.

It says this in all the damn books, except for the "head executive" part, maybe, though to be honest they mention Chronicler or Storyteller which is the same if you think of it in table-top so they probably do need that.

Sorry, rant. Over a decade and they can't finish the first story line and have allowed ridiculous ones to pop up, with massive amounts of squabbling. They have no structure, common consensus, and the refs/narrators change all the time. There's no point in me telling them any of this because it's probably been stated and they likely want to "stay away from the restrictions of books". :roll:


I have to say I've always thought that LARPs look a bit confusing. Or at least, I"d be bloody confused if I tried it. Like cosplaying but with roleplaying and all sorts of additional bits that look difficult to keep track of... I see it, and I have no idea how any of it really works.

Not that any such thing would happen near where Im at anyway, though.


Quote:
This is not gendered as biological females do it to, but this seems to be a more masculine/testosterone issue (there are women born with slightly more "masculine" brains and those who have more testosterone, though estrogen is supposed to be worse for rage than testosterone; both are seen in both sexes). It seems to be a... must-be-the-boss thing. The situation must be controlled, they have to be the best of the best, if newbs don't toughen up then they'll get nowhere, perhaps they learned without help so others should have to, PROVE YOURSELVES!! ! It's tiring. I might be more into them (and sports) if people could be healthily competitive instead of vicious savages.


That bit about learning it without help... the sad part is, in that community... NOBODY DOES THAT. The vast majority of players learn those games by watching very specific pro players, the ones that are at the absolute top, and merely COPYING the techniques they see. Do they alter or add a personal touch to these techniques? Hell no! That wouldnt be efficient! The math wouldnt agree! So they just copy, very directly, something they see someone else doing. And this is how you become a "pro", apparently. And then they refuse to help new players, which when you think about it in that context, it just... yeah. Best not to think about it too hard.

The dumb part is, they usually think that this way of doing things is the ONLY way, but no, it isnt. I learn the things in these games myself. I dont follow the damn stupid meta-game or watch videos of others playing these, I just jump in and bloody well do things my way. And the majority of the time, against those that copy others, I'll end up winning (particularly with my speed advantage). And hoboy, THAT can trigger the anger, yes it can. Having your invincible, unstoppable, perfect technique that is the ONLY way to do things get beaten... yeah. A source of rage, it seems. I've had a couple do pretty spectacular ragequits, after I defeated them with my screwball technique. Bloody amazing. And at NO POINT during the fights do they at all think that maybe, JUST MAYBE, they should perhaps try something else other than repeating the same thing they copied, over and over again? Nope, they'll just keep doing it, because it's THE way to do it. MY way is the WRONG way. Even when it wins. I try not to think too hard about the "logic" behind this.



Now there was a bit more that I was going to say, but I started this post WAY too freaking late and am now out of time; for me, it is now bedtime. Well, past bedtime, actually, though that's my own fault... gonna be one of THOSE days, I can already tell.