12 years of UV! But we obviously need a change.

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

That doesn't remove the decision on which way to go with character limits, you'll just have to use your imagination on what would work better. And if it doesn't, well, that's why things change!

And just because creating abilities on the fly already happened doesn't mean it should be encouraged or even become the norm. Personally I think it falls under the common sense label. Don't be an ego-tripping abuser and the smaller things will probably be accepted. And if it's not accepted, adjust!

[nightwolf714]

Hi guys! Yeah, I'm hoping to return, and I mean actually return return this time. ^_^

Melody, I'm totally up for helping with a wolf pack. I just don't know when. I was originally thinking of just bringing back Lep at first, but I do kinda miss role playing Cortina and even Devil (the little pain in the butt).

Character limits is difficult. No idea what to advice there. I do think that it may be okay to be a bit looser with it since the reboot will probably have us starting out with a lesser number of users. But then, staying out with a loose character limit and then trying to make it stricter can be difficult. Things tend to go smoother starting out strict and then loosening it up. Problem with character limits is that it's a difficult balance. You want a limit so that people will actually put a decent amount of effort into each character, but then you run the risk of people rotating through characters because they have so many character ideas and that's not very fun either.

I don't know if it's still this way, but I liked how it was when the board was first started. You could have up to 3 characters instantly, but then had to show enough activity for each additional one. That method seemed to work well.

As for how some characters got stuck in another dimension, say a rip in the time/space continuum opened up in the, what's the area called now, the prison? Where some of Barbie's plot stuff occurred. It doesn't sound too far fetched for it to occur there considering all the other crazy stuff that happened. And then just say that some people's characters stumbled through it before it closed. Boom, done and done. XD

[The_Vizir]

And just because creating abilities on the fly already happened doesn't mean it should be encouraged or even become the norm. Personally I think it falls under the common sense label. Don't be an ego-tripping abuser and the smaller things will probably be accepted. And if it's not accepted, adjust!

Apparently my attempt at self-deprecation failed, along with my Jack Black-tastic avatar.

*pokes*

WHY YOU NO WORK?

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

Actually, I got it, I just didn't want to go along with it Also, it was late.

I don't know if it's still this way, but I liked how it was when the board was first started. You could have up to 3 characters instantly, but then had to show enough activity for each additional one. That method seemed to work well.

It's still like that, 3 instant characters, then provided there's activity 2 more every two months afterwards. Then a character archive to put your character in "stasis" while you make a new one so you can swap them out yet still have 5 at all times.

Yet as Viz pointed out we haven't had a chance to actually test this system out yet, so this is the time to decide to continue with it and see if it works, or try something else!

As for how some characters got stuck in another dimension, say a rip in the time/space continuum opened up in the, what's the area called now, the prison? Where some of Barbie's plot stuff occurred. It doesn't sound too far fetched for it to occur there considering all the other crazy stuff that happened. And then just say that some people's characters stumbled through it before it closed. Boom, done and done. XD

Yeah, that'll probably happen like that. The Prison is just a wrecked plot area though, this nexus thing is just an invisible something present all over the forest and mountains that people have fun with.

[Luxon Cobrat]

I do agree that there needs to be a clear and strict set of consequences for misbehavior, with everyone treated the same no matter who they are. But we also shouldn't make this an oppressively draconian system, so I think, at least, that the escalation of consequences should also have a time factor, so that past infractions are forgiven after a certain length of time with good behavior. The system needs to be set up so that people get banned if and (to the greatest extent possible) only if they are intentionally callous in their disregard for others.

That said, it shouldn't fall within a mod's power to decide whether an infraction is intentional or not. Rules should be designed so that a person who has read them can't break them accidentally. The rule should clearly define what isn't allowed, and any behavior that fits that description should result in the prescribed consequence.

If a situation ever is unclear, the mod should bring it to the admin, and the admin should decide if a violation has occured. If the admin affirms that the action was a violation but agrees that it wasn't clear, the offender should be given only a warning and the broken rule should be updated with a clarification regarding the situation in question. If the admin finds that the action was a violation and that it was also clear, the guilty party should receive the prescribed punishment for breaking the rule. If the admin decides the action was not a violation, no further action is needed.

For most rules, I think the most balanced approach to consequences would be warnings for the first two offenses and a temporary ban for the third, followed by a probationary period during which a fourth offence would result in a permanent ban. After the probationary period ends, further offenses would result in another temporary ban followed by another probationary period. If, however, a person goes a certain length of time without violating the rules, their record should be cleared.

The only exception to this process should be in cases of personal harassment. Anyone found to be harassing or stalking another member should be immediately and permanently banned.

However, with this all said, I also think the purpose of the rules should be to protect the players, not to control them. Therefore, no action should be taken regarding any violation of rules unless a player affected by the violation files a complaint. The mods should not be "the fun police," nor should they be lawyers. They should be courtroom judges. If a mod is the affected party, then another mod should judge the case.

And finally, on a more specific note: Power levels. I think one problem UV has had in its later years has been something I'd like to call "power creep" among its characters. As powerful characters appeared, more new characters would be designed to match their power levels, so it eventually reached a point where any character had to be ridiculously powerful just to keep up with a lot of the other characters. I continue to find that the old method of weighing advantages against disadvantages has been completely ineffective at controlling this. I posit instead that an Edge mod reviewing a character should take a full view of the characters abilities and weaknesses and determine with their own judgment how powerful that character appears to be. If a character is so powerful that a well-trained medieval human swordsman would have no conceivable chance of defeating it in combat, then that character's power level is inappropriate for a primarily fantasy RP forum. Using this standard would require a fair number of UV's existing characters to be reduced in power before being admitted, but it would also make character creation much less tedious while also ensuring a much fairer scale of power levels among characters, both of which factors would open up quite a bit more room for creativity among players.

In conclusion, I like cashews, but muffins are better than cupcakes.

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

the escalation of consequences should also have a time factor, so that past infractions are forgiven after a certain length of time with good behavior.

That's the part that was missing, something was missing to make it fair, this is it. So obviously simple too, thank you, Lux.

That said, it shouldn't fall within a mod's power to decide whether an infraction is intentional or not. Rules should be designed so that a person who has read them can't break them accidentally. The rule should clearly define what isn't allowed, and any behavior that fits that description should result in the prescribed consequence.

Fair enough. My original suggestion would only work in an ideal world, which doesn't exist anyway. I guess this is what we really need, spelled out consequences to grievances, though it won't be easy to set up. As you say so, adjustments every time there is a problem does help. Of course, that's how we would up with a huge list of rules in the first place...But oh well, fresh new start, fresh new list of rules to create over time!

no action should be taken regarding any violation of rules unless a player affected by the violation files a complaint

I've always wanted this, but it just never works. People never come forwards, never complain out loud, not until it is way way too late anyway, by which time it is a clusterfuck of knots to untangle. For some reason "it's your own fault" doesn't work at this point either In theory I agree with this though. People just don't like confrontation and hope it'll go away by itself. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.

As for the power levels, here I am going to completely disagree with you. Yeah I've noticed a build up, but honestly that's people's own problem. Just because there's a powerful few characters doesn't mean you have to adjust your own to them, quite the opposite, the powerful characters have to adjust to the weaker ones. I also don't agree a character's strength or power should be limited, but more so their player. Why punish everybody else by restricting their creativity just because somebody else wants to play superman? It's not like they actually can, the rules clearly say so, no god modding and no power playing. And if their powerful character starts messing around with a weaker one (you know, without permission from the player) then again that is their problem. It just doesn't get reported so it seems like it is the player of the weaker character's problem, but it shouldn't be. So this ties in to the previous point above, rule violation needs to be reported or mentioned or brought up or something, because that's the root of this particular problem, not a character's abilities. Well, that and the fact that RPing isn't moderated anymore, none of us is objectively reading all RPs to make sure things are fair.

Excellent feedback and stuff to ponder, thank you.


Unsalted cashews are delicious.

[Norvilion]

I posit instead that an Edge mod reviewing a character should take a full view of the characters abilities and weaknesses and determine with their own judgment how powerful that character appears to be. If a character is so powerful that a well-trained medieval human swordsman would have no conceivable chance of defeating it in combat, then that character's power level is inappropriate for a primarily fantasy RP forum.

That actually sounds like a pretty good standard, though I'd personally relax it to "classic mid-level 5 man D&D party" instead of just one swordsman. That way you could still have pretty impressive abilities but wouldn't neccessarily run into the DBZ effect. Otherwise abilities like invisibility, flying, or just superhuman reflexes would start to fall in the 'overpowered' range. Add in a wizard, ranger, rogue, and possibly bard and you now have an equal encounter.

...which suddenly makes me think it would be an interesting plot to have a rumor of treasure in the Deep Forest spread throughout nearby human settlements. With this in place human adventurers start appearing, hostile to any beast that resides within such an obviously enchanted place.

EDIT: Actually Gaeva brings up a good point. Perhaps have somthing suggested as an "average power level" and let people go above and below as desired. A housecat with the ability to make plants grow may be no match for a swordsman, much less an adventuring party, but it could still be a fun character to play. At the same time so could a magma elemental who has to keep a zen state lest they turn a certain area around them to wasteland.

Also that was a great end line

[nightwolf714]

And finally, on a more specific note: Power levels. I think one problem UV has had in its later years has been something I'd like to call "power creep" among its characters. As powerful characters appeared, more new characters would be designed to match their power levels, so it eventually reached a point where any character had to be ridiculously powerful just to keep up with a lot of the other characters. I continue to find that the old method of weighing advantages against disadvantages has been completely ineffective at controlling this. I posit instead that an Edge mod reviewing a character should take a full view of the characters abilities and weaknesses and determine with their own judgment how powerful that character appears to be. If a character is so powerful that a well-trained medieval human swordsman would have no conceivable chance of defeating it in combat, then that character's power level is inappropriate for a primarily fantasy RP forum. Using this standard would require a fair number of UV's existing characters to be reduced in power before being admitted, but it would also make character creation much less tedious while also ensuring a much fairer scale of power levels among characters, both of which factors would open up quite a bit more room for creativity among players.

I will have to agree with this sentiment. My characters tended to be low on the power scale magically because I preferred it that way. But after a while, Lep could get her butt kicked by children practically. I wouldn't mind the power levels of characters being more strongly monitored. Not controlled per say, since people should be allowed to create whatever for the most part. But just watched and encouraged to limit more.

EDIT: Oh yay, that seems to have been post 5000 for me. ^_^

[Luxon Cobrat]

I've always wanted this, but it just never works. People never come forwards, never complain out loud, not until it is way way too late anyway, by which time it is a clusterfuck of knots to untangle.

Hm. Well... I guess that's actually true here. On other boards I was on before UV, I've seen several take up for themselves when other players stepped on their toes, but now that I think about it, people on UV do seem more likely to let things go on without objection until it's too late. I don't know why that is, but... okay, I guess the rules would have to be enforced no matter what. And I suppose we've all done some logical acrobatics to avoid believing we've done things we shouldn't have, so sometimes a firm hand just needs to reach in and stop us. Unfortunate, but I guess there's no way around it.

Just because
there's a powerful few characters doesn't mean you
have to adjust your own to them, quite the opposite,
the powerful characters have to adjust to the weaker
ones."

This is where I have to disagree. I thought this same thing in the past, but I've changed my mind. True, a person can't actually use their overpowered abilities without permission, but they still have them, and everyone knows they do. Because of that, the more powerful characters will still overshadow the weaker ones in group dynamics. And the simple fact is that Green Arrow doesn't look nearly as impressive guarding a city alongside Superman.

That's the problem. Among characters that are meant to be powerful and heroic, a few characters who are too powerful can steal the thunder from all the rest without ever lifting a finger against them. And we should respect people's reasons for RPing. Some do it for the social aspect, some do it to be part of a story, and some do it to play an epic badass. We should make sure people can do any of those things without having to inflate the power of their characters to borderline Mary Sue levels to keep the mere existence of other characters from destroying their impressiveness.

And if their powerful character starts messing around with a weaker one (you know, without permission from the player) then again that is their problem.

Unfortunately, just as people don't report powergaming against them, there have also been problems that came from this permission being
given when it shouldn't have, which led to a lot of drama and resentment, and nothing could be done about it because no rules were actually broken. I'm being vague about this, but you know what I'm talking about. That really doesn't need to happen again, whether it involves the same people or others.

If we're rebooting UV completely, we don't have to stick to the same moniker of "play anything you want." Keeping the same problems from happening again is a good reason to put reasonable limits on people's creativity. Individual enjoyment is important, but RP is a collective thing. A character is only as good as the value it brings to the whole group, not just the one player.

I don't know how well I'm stating my case here, but hopefully you'll see where I'm coming from.

That actually sounds like a pretty good standard, though I'd personally relax it to "classic mid-level 5 man D&D party" instead of just one swordsman. That way you could still have pretty impressive abilities but wouldn't neccessarily run into the DBZ effect. Otherwise abilities like invisibility, flying, or just superhuman reflexes would start to fall in the 'overpowered' range. Add in a wizard, ranger, rogue, and possibly bard and you now have an equal encounter.

That's probably a better way of putting it. I didn't really mean that a swordsman should have to be a match or even anywhere close to the level of a PC, just that he be enough of a threat that he could possibly win by some fluke. But right, if a five-man D&D party would be overmatched, the character probably needs to be less powerful.

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

I don't know how well I'm stating my case here, but hopefully you'll see where I'm coming from.

You're doing it annoyingly well because you're starting to sway my opinion, which contrary to what I'm making it sound like, is a good thing. You have a good point, Nightwolf too. Good additions by Norv to think about.

I'm still extremely iffy about how to judge whatever standard is chosen though. That is too strong, but that is juuuust ok seems like a great way for the "but you let him through!!". I'm getting exhausted just thinking of these scenarios, so any more suggestions on this subject are very much welcome. as easy as a general standard of no stronger than *insert archetype character(s)* also relies on everybody knowing these general strengths. This why we initially brought in the weaknesses section in profiles, partially to balance the character out, partially to "expose" the characters to weaker ones' players and give them a fighting chance.

I'd love a tournament style entrance/acceptance, except only the losers would gain entrance while the victors are turned away. This would not make sense IC.

EDIT: Oh yay, that seems to have been post 5000 for me. ^_^

There's just something about the sight of a bunch of zeroes in a row that is sooo satisfying to look at! And congrats!

[Norvilion]

I had some extra time today between compiling for work, so I made up a proposal for a power-level guide. It'll probably need to be tweaked as it was mostly off-the-cuff writing, but hopefully might help at least organize thoughts on the matter.

_______________________________________________________________________

Tier 5, “Commoner”:
Description: Not necessarily a character with no special abilities, but one whose powers are fairly minor. Abilities in this tier generally fall in the role of mundane utility, however characters in this tier may have more powerful abilities that are offset by harsh disadvantages. If a tournament were to be held they might compete in the city level.

Possible examples: Color changing, human-strength levitation, flight, solid physical fitness. Perhaps a youth who can produce jets of fire but has to keep their eyes closed during the blast and for a few seconds beforehand.


Tier 4, “Gifted”:
Description: This type of character has a pretty solid ability that would give them a distinct advantage over a well-equipped medieval fantasy human, however the human would still be at least somewhat dangerous. They are usually able to hold their own or get away when trouble arises, but few real encounters would be considered “completely trivial”. If a tournament were to be held they might compete in the regional level.

Possible examples: Invisibility with good physical skill, weapon mastery, speed, elemental attacks. Perhaps a grandmaster fighter who was once at the Skilled, or Paragon level but due to old age is now just a shadow of his former prowess.


Tier 3, “Skilled”
Description: Skilled characters have some kind of great ability that makes them stand out. The lone swordsman would likely be no match for such a character in a head to head encounter. A well-formed group, perhaps including a “gifted” level magic user, would still pose a real threat to them however. If a tournament were to be held they might compete in the national level.

Possible examples: Temporary invulnerability with a recharge, rapid healing (self or others), great strength or agility, powerful magic. Perhaps a youngish european-style dragon who has set out to find a lair.


Tier 2, “Paragon”
Description: This type of character is about as strong as you could expect a mortal to be. Obviously characters like this should be extraordinarily rare, and there should be a darn good reason for considering making one like this. If done well this type of character can be a real boon to their companions and terror to their enemies. If done poorly this character can very easily accidentally dampen other people’s fun or even jump to tier 0 (this is a bad thing). If a tournament were to be held they might compete in the international level.

Possible examples:Ability to create safe-haven demiplanes for a period of time, resurrection/rebirth (self or others), tremendous feats of strength or magic. Perhaps an ancient guardian of a sacred location.


Tier 1, “Juggernaut”
Description: In almost all circumstances this type of character is simply not allowed. They are capable of wide area destruction and unless well controlled can trivialize what would otherwise be an enjoyable group plot. That being said if they are well controlled they can be a good stand in for the general force of nature itself. If a tournament were to be held they might arrive unexpectedly and leave only a crater.

Possible examples: Almost flawless invulnerability, mass area attacks. Perhaps a mythical beast of rage and fire that sleeps within the heart of a mountain.


Tier 0, “God-Mode Sue”
Description: Suffice to say this is a bad place to be. Characters in this tier could be considered simply broken, sucking all the fun out of just about any encounter they’re involved in. For a full explanation just take a look at http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GodModeSue. If a tournament were to be held they might decide they didn’t like it and go back in time to make sure its creators never existed.

Possible examples: Worst case scenario may be Pun Pun, the kobold wizard who figured out how to manipulate the rules of the game to attain almost literally infinite strength, endurance, agility, speed, and intelligence; then ascended to be at least 10x more powerful than any known deity. http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Pun-Pun

-----

Generally we encourage people to create characters somewhere around tier 4, with the occasional tier 3 for serious firepower or tier 5 for edge-of-your-seat excitement. Tier 2s and tier 1s should really only be made with permission (feel free to ask us in Away from the Woods, we probably won’t bite). Obviously tier 0s are completely against the rules.

Remember that the lower the tier of your character the easier it is to work well as a team and the more impressive/memorable it is when you overcome a challenge. Tier 2s and 3s have their place but remember it was a tier 5 (tier 6?) who destroyed The One Ring. Also don’t forget that functional disadvantages can add huge amounts of balance to a character and interesting disadvantages can really make them stand out.

Tier is not strictly dependant on what type of power they possess but also greatly depends on how they can use it. Say a character has the ability to convert matter and energy. As a tier 5 they might be a walking grill/refrigerator as they increase or decrease the energy in objects around them. As a tier 3 they might create massive fireballs or chill the water in the air into ice blocks (creating more water with the excess heat energy taken away). As a tier 1 character… well we all know what kind of weapon the original equation was used in.

_______________________________________________________________________

If we end up using it me might also consider adding a "Notable characters" under each of the tiers, though I'm not sure how we might do that if we were rebooting, perhaps link to old UV profiles or something. May also want to expand the section on disadvantages, was just a bit braindead when I got to that point.

Also sorry for the total wall of text.

[nightwolf714]

I actually like the tier system idea. I wouldn't necessarily make people state what tier they are in, but I think it's pretty nice to have it laid out so clearly.

The only thing I would add in is reminding people that lower tier characters have more ability to move up in tiers while higher tiered characters are kinda stuck where they are. While all characters have the ability to grow, lower ones would be more able to grow magically.

That said, Gaeva does make a point. Some of this is subjective. One person may see an ability as very weak while another is clever enough to turn it into a super weapon of sorts. (For example, Devil had fire and speed abilities. He wasn't particularly strong, but once faced a wolf who almost killed him and tried to do the same again, also threatening his newly reunited siblings. In utter fear and rage, he combined the two relatively weaker abilities and made quite a bit fire tornado.)

It may be good to have a system in place to appeal the decision. Actually, some sort of appeal system in general would be nice for any time a user disagrees with a mod's decision. Though we already talked about that briefly. And our goal is to not have to use any sort of major discipline anyways!

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

Love it, Norv, writing it out like that may be just the thing we need, thank you for the time put in. The inclusion of examples is excellent. I'll have to reread them all a couple of times as it's kinda late here right now, but I think this can be used. I can't give any other feedback right now.

Generally we encourage people to create characters somewhere around tier 4, with the occasional tier 3 for serious firepower or tier 5 for edge-of-your-seat excitement. Tier 2s and tier 1s should really only be made with permission (feel free to ask us in Away from the Woods, we probably won’t bite). Obviously tier 0s are completely against the rules.

I like the wording here, quoting it to remind myself to look at that again tomorrow.

If we end up using it me might also consider adding a "Notable characters" under each of the tiers, though I'm not sure how we might do that if we were rebooting, perhaps link to old UV profiles or something.

Or just add every new character under their respective tiers, giving everybody a clear idea of where they stand, and new commoners a reference to base their own characters on.

The only thing I would add in is reminding people that lower tier characters have more ability to move up in tiers while higher tiered characters are kinda stuck where they are.

Niiiice.

[Lanadyr]

One interesting thing about the proposed tier system is that threads could clearly indicate in their titles which tiers can participate in them.

Obviously, I wouldn’t recommend that players themselves be allowed to do this at will. It would, however, be a useful feature to have for board-wide plots, as it would give everyone a set of power level-appropriate tasks to perform.

It could even make sense from a story perspective. Assuming the Deep Forest itself wants a say in its own defenses, it would probably not want to waste the Tier 1 characters on minor tasks and send the poor Tier 5 characters after the Terror From Beyond Space And Time.

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

Very interesting take on it, Lanadyr...very interesting indeed.

[Norvilion]

That's a pretty good idea, Lanadyr. I imagine a setup like that could also increase plot participation. I imagine it'd be a bit intimidating to participate in a plot thread if you have no idea how your character would be able to survive when fighting along with Gunsy McRadiationhazard. By the same token I know as a previous DM that it can bit a pain trying to balance an encounter when you have characters with wildly differing power levels (Damage reduction? No the fast and weak hitter will feel completely useless. Plethora of mobs? No it'll be wiped out within a round by the AoE specialist). Actually the tier system idea came from a similar concept for D&D3.5. If I had an everyman character I'd be much more likely to join the plot if it involved bolstering the frontliners and if I had a battle freak I would rush off to any plot that involved defending the weak from a real threat.

Before heading off for work Nightwolf mentioned another factor we might want to take into consideration. Some characters are played out radically different from how their power levels would suggest. Ebb was the example she gave- being the exact character I was thinking of when writing out tier 1, though he was mostly played as a tier 5ish. I imagine we don't need to worry about this one too much, but may be considerable to take note of. This could be seen to fall into two categories- those who are high tier and those who have hidden potential to be high tier. In the case of something like the Norad, where the only thing stopping Armageddon is his good nature, they should probably be classified as their actual tier with perhaps a sidenote of how they usually play (functional tier). In the case of a character with extreme potential it should probably work like any character growth, with permission needed to develop character to tier 2 or 1 ("Hey guys, I'm thinking about fully awakening ChaName's angelic blood, which would involve <xyz>. That would probably push them into at least tier 2, that okay?").

[The_Vizir]

Okay, just trying to get caught up here on some of the hypothesizing going about here...

On character limits, the archive was a compromise idea to kinda skirt around the cap but not really. If we want to boost activity, lifting the cap would likely be an asset, like removing the character-in-only-one-thread limit that was also removed but never implemented due to the plot lock. I'd say 10 characters tops as a limit, though 3-5 to start off and then gaining some more over time/posts is a solid way to go about it. Most of us debating are not going to be in any kind of lockdown in this regards, as we will qualify for howevermany we set the limit at, but giving newer players a quicker entrance into the Forest proper and more opportunities to try things out could help with player retention and activity levels. Not a guarantee, however, but something worth more debate/research into how other sites do it.

As for the entire tier system, however, I'm really iffy... I understand where you're coming from in this regards here, Norv, but I think the matter's being oversimplified and failing to take into consideration weaknesses and drawbacks. A character that is, for example, a technical genius who can create MacGuyver-esque inventions might seem like, for example, a Tier 5 or so your scale, but then creates a device that counters your character perfectly after observation. Another character can create portals, which might put them at tier 2 due to the summoning/avoidance potential, and just the diversity they could exploit with these powers, but has their portals fritzed by metal, 'cause resonance or something.

Heck, Norv, you mentioned Norad, and his biggest weakness was "can't fight things smaller than a tank," so despite having firepower out the wazoo, he was defeated more often than not 'cause everyone else is so small/agile enough to dodge the cannon fire/whatnot. Tier 1 in power, yes, but taken out by Tier 5s and 6s 'cause of his major disadvantages. Another one of my characters, Grey, would technically be Tier 2 'cause he can become invincible by slipping into Shadow and regenerate himself if killed by any other means than dropping him into the Pit. However, you can scare the guy off with bright light... not quite a paragon, eh? Those are just two of mine that I thought of, but I can guarantee you the list could go on and on for every character based on literal readings vs. actual playing.

So while I can agree with the idea you're pushing here, I really personally favor the advantage/disadvantage system that shows how your character isn't totally unstoppable or is limited in some way, shape, or form. With great power comes great weaknesses, and whatnot

Ideally, we would quantify all the powers possible, and all the disadvantages possible, and assign them point values, and try to get as close to 0 as possible. However, as a site that seeks to try and allow as much diversity as possible, that is simply not feasible, eh? The other option is to give the mods/admin the power to just eyeball it and use their best judgement... but then again, from personal experience it doesn't quite work.

I'd say the biggest way to resolve this is to try and decrease the amount of PvP in game. PvP typically requires winners and losers, and has a tendency to create resentment and drama. Not saying it's not possible to do PvP, but that it should not be a focus of this site, or something we base our rules around. Instead, we should be looking at PvE, player versus environment or enemies. There should be monsters and dark forces and stuff for our characters to show off against, we shouldn't have to turn to other players. More power to the players to create scenarios where monsters and mooks can be present and offed, or tricked, or whathaveyou. And yes, that might result in glory-hogging, where one character destroys all the things 'cause they're awesome, but I hope that's a rare occurrence compared to team events where everyone gets to contribute because no one's playing Doctor Manhattan.

Finally, I thought we already had an appeals system... or was that just de jure "if you don't like what the mod says, ask Gaeva, 'cause she pays for the site and if you don't like it, make your own site with blackjack and hookers" instead of de facto?

Seriously though, nobody play Doctor Manhattan.

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

And just like that Viz has me doubting again with a lot of good arguments as well.

Seriously, I am reading all this, and I feel like there is an obvious solution that utilizes both ideas, both the disadvantages to balance out a character and a system of tiers or otherwise. I just can't quite grasp it, juuuust out of my reach to form a logical mesh between the two. Does anyone else see that as well? Whether the hint to or the actual fully fleshed out idea? Or am I being deluded and trying to see things that aren't really there?

Where's ddpej, she's good at seeing through this sort of stuff.

that is simply not feasible, eh?

The Canadian level of this overall post was pretty high, lol.

[Luxon Cobrat]

Well, I'm liking the tier system myself, even if it may have some kinks.

Though, honestly, I don't think the tier system should imply that a character of a lower tier automatically beats a character of a higher tier ("lower tier" meaning stronger, "higher tier" meaning weaker, which is weird to me...), because that's no fun. Any given encounter should be able to play out in such a way that the underdog wins. That's actually a big part of why I've been pushing for a hard limit on how powerful a character can be, because foregone conclusions are boring and not very good for RP.

But the Advantage/Disadvantage system, as it stands, I don't like. I especially don't like the idea of balancing everything out to 0.

For one thing, it just doesn't do what it's supposed to do. It's supposed to keep a character from being unstoppable, but honestly, it doesn't. Just a few abilities can make a character effectively unkillable and capable of devastating small armies, and the player can give them enough harsh disadvantages to pay for it and get accepted... and then those disadvantages never come into play because the character is smart enough to avoid situations that would expose them. On top of that, exploiting those weaknesses would often fall under player knowledge, or would otherwise require permission, so all of those disadvantages are effectively nullified by the RP rules themselves.

And coming up with one disadvantage to match every advantage is just unpleasantly tedious. It's been argued that it forces people to develop their characters, but that's not so much the truth as that it just forces them to move the character away from the original vision by imposing a hefty design requirement. This is actually much more of a limit to creativity than a hard cap on power would be. There are any number of ways I could create a character that would fall under a given power limit, but a lot of potential designs are unusable if I have to match every ability with an explicit weakness that makes up for it.

That said, here's where I'll get around to the subject of compromise.

I don't think the disadvantage system should be completely done away with. I just don't think it should be treated as a zero-sum game. What actually is effective at keeping characters from being overpowered is placing defined limitations on their abilities. What I think would be a good compromise would be to combine the Advantages and Disadvantages sections on the player sheet into a single Abilities section. In this section, a player is expected to fully describe the special attributes the character possesses - what its powers can do, and how each power is limited, and what the drawbacks to using an ability may be (not every ability should need a drawback, but more powerful ones like magic should have one). This wouldn't really add a counterbalance to the character's abilities because each ability is still an advantage, if limited, but these limitations would be much more inescapable than any set of separate disadvantages.

People actually do this to an extent already, but splitting every ability into its advantageous and disadvantageous aspects to fill out the two sections is inconvenient at best, and can actually interfere with the design process. It's better to keep the whole thing together so the player can more easily think of the utility and limitations of their abilities at the same time. And it also makes reading the character sheet easier, because the full description of each ability will all be in one place so the reader won't have to look back and forth between the two sections. By using this system, an Edge mod should be able to judge how powerful the character appears to be, then decide whether the character is acceptable, and what tier to rate it at.

Of course, this brings me to the issue of arbitrariness. Should a mod be left to "eyeball" a profile and make these decisions using their own human judgment? I say... yes and no. Yes, relying on human judgment is the best we can do. We aren't going to be able to quantify what every possible ability will be worth, so we can't really set up a system of clear rules to determine what is allowed and what isn't. I'd rather have someone making informed decisions about this than going by a hard rule that can't possibly account for every variable. But at the same time, the mod might not always be right. If the player thinks the mod has misjudged their character, or if the mod is unsure of what call to make, either one should be allowed to open a public discussion and give the whole community a chance to say what they think about it, since they'll be the ones that might end up RPing with the character. Let the discussion remain open for a week, at the end of which, the mod makes the final decision - but possibly after hearing some points they might not have thought of on their own. That's probably as fair as it can get.

Donuts.

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

I always prefered it when people put the abilities and disadvantages together, but I also prefer actually having both written down over visual convenience. Anyway, that's not important right now.

If the player thinks the mod has misjudged their character, or if the mod is unsure of what call to make, either one should be allowed to open a public discussion and give the whole community a chance to say what they think about it, since they'll be the ones that might end up RPing with the character. Let the discussion remain open for a week, at the end of which, the mod makes the final decision - but possibly after hearing some points they might not have thought of on their own. That's probably as fair as it can get.

This seems like a fair idea actually. Have the whole joining procedure, then at the end "your character has been accepted and placed into tier [whatever], do you agree with this?" and then depending on their answer the process is completed or looked at more closely by more people.


Another thing occurred to me while reading Lux's post. That/A tier system can also be used the decide how much a character needs to be restricted, whether through disadvantages directly linked to their abilities, or different kinds of disadvantages unrelated to their abilities, or through restrictions OOC. So the higher on the pyramid tier they stand, the more (re-)work they will need to put into the profile. Side effect would be that "normal" characters would become more appealing/easier to get accepted.