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

[The_Vizir]

I don't disagree with the problems of the advantages/disadvantages system, because balacing out those is in and of itself pretty arbitrary and can require some fancy footwork just to make the numbers work out. I'd personally like to see it less as a 1:1 ratio than a "every character has a chance at succeeding or failing."

The issue with the tier system, in my opinion, is that it only looks at raw powers of abilities, it doesn't take into consideration weaknesses or disadvantages or personality traits. Someone who's weak but is really good at leading and stirring up the populace is powerful, while someone who has the potential to wreck great destruction but at a cost of their lifeforce or soul of whatever is less so.

Furthermore, the public debate idea just has me cringing from the potential drama. We've had some of those with some characters, and it just created resentment and drama, and we're specifically supposed to be avoiding that with the reboot. We don't want to make people feel like they're being publicly shamed or mocked 'cause we don't want to drive them away. Some early RPers come to this site too learn the craft, and they aren't all going to be flawless at first, some will screw up while building their characters in any number of ways... if they have problems with a mod who can handle things in private, then you want to bring it all public? I don't know, that sounds like a recipe for disaster here. Not that mods shouldn't be held accountable to the community for their decisions, just that there are different methods to do that which would hopefully cause less drama and angst among the membership, which should really be among our top goals seeing as how that has caused some of the mass exoduses (exodi?) in the past.

And yes, I say this knowing perfectly well there's been more hubub over the powers of Grey and Sarah than there's been over NORAD and the Preacher, but that's life! Nobody's perfect, we can just try to make the system as fun as it is for everyone. We should be doing better, refining the system, help ensure that there is fairness within it, but a fair bit of that comes down to player stubbornness and pride, and since we're not thought police, in many cases those problems are not evident until it's a bit too late.

And normal characters, Gaeva? I thought our whole schtick was that we were the place for weird and wonderful? Don't tell me you've gone beige now!

P.S. This is why I love Blackberries... written entirely on a phone at doctor's office

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

I'm sorry! I was trying to turn those statements into rhetorical questions, asking for agreement or disagreements. I had no idea they were bugging you here!

[Norvilion]

The tier system should probably be more of a guide than a rule, and each tier can be a bit wobbly. If we're tying to avoid "better than you" syndrome we might consider calling them power categories (A-E). In the end it mostly boils down to abstractedly less powerful than an angry NPC (5/A), somewhere around the same power level as a single entity (4/B), Somewhere around a group of NPCs (3/C), somewhere around an army of NPCs (2/D), and completely awe-inspiring (1/E). The system describes something of a Fermi estimation. PVP scenarios should probably be avoided if possible, but if they come up there should be enough depth to each character to make it interesting.

Definitely second-thinking the permission for the highest tiers thing, but having the tiers in place forces a person to consider that as a factor in the equation when creating a character. If they know they're brushing on higher power levels it is more likely that they balance it out with opposing traits, if for no other reason but to make it more interesting to RP with lower tier characters. If a high tier character has disadvantages that counter/limit the advantages, in character or otherwise, they become readily playable across most of the site and still have the potential to participate in epic-level events.

In regards to the drama potential, why not make it standard to make a poll when power level disagreements come up. Shoot, it might even be a decent idea to have a poll on the character thread itself to make power level a community decision in the first place rather then placing all the pressure on the mod. After all, with the fuzzy nature of power levels there's bound to be some disagreement. Main advantage here would be that results would be clear and anonymous, so no one directly has to stick their neck out if they tend to agree with one party or the other. Only problem there would be character revisions and inability to change poll answers (unless there's a switch somewhere).

[ddpej]

Er. No pressure, I see.

This is a public service announcement. This is a focused selection of musings. If you do not have a towel, please choose one at the gate. Hardhats and blankets are available upon request. Flamethrowers are frowned upon during this experience. Please remain calm, avoid panic, breathe comfortably, and read the rest of this post in the most pleasantly neutral voice your imagination can manage. Thank you for coming and enjoy your minty-fresh dose of certified dd deliberations!

I am low on sleep and somewhat out of practice, so in no particular order or recognizable organization:

Character limit: The 3+ system worked perfectly well back when members had the advantage of accepted (and therefore useable) characters as well as ample opportunity to use them. The concept mostly died as a result of "I can't add characters because my first three are stuck at the Edge" and "How can I be active enough to gain characters when there's no one here to play with/everyone who's around is stuck in the board plot/etc.". The archive thing would probably do just as well, but either way I see no reason to go about implementing large changes here when it is, relatively speaking, a very minor issue. Also, the removal of the "one thread per character at a time" rule ties in positively here.

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

Rules: Shave down. Shave far down, all the way to the basics. Simple, functional, bare-bones. Build as needed, later. No one wants to try to remember four pages of rules and restrictions when they come to play. That's what work is for (and let's be realistic: even there, people just remember the relevant day-to-day stuff and ask The Powers That Be if something weird comes up).

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

Reporting: It is true that many people are not willing to bring complaints to the management until things get out of control. Consider, perhaps, having a few members who are not mods -- but who keep an eye out for things the mods/admins may need to follow up on, and drop them a line accordingly. Watchers, as it were. People who lurk often/read most posts/have a decent feel for the social state of the community would be ideal for this. The idea is not to add to the management, but rather to designate a few people to be their eyes and ears so that the management can focus on things like profile acceptance and community events instead, unless something actually comes up where enforcement is needed. This would keep enforcement impersonal and private, both of which are valuable, and hopefully catch any budding problems before they had a chance to grow.

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

Tier system: Interesting idea. It's a great base of reference, but I would not recommend making it official, required, or in any way hardwired into the profile or acceptance of a character. Absolutely feel free to outline it as a point of consideration. Include in the outline the suggested "Most people find this range here to be the most fun, though we accept almost anything.". Refer to it in the application outline as useful reading, by all means. Doing this would allow for your outline to convey descriptions of the overall effect of a character (abilities, personality, dislikes, and how it's played all combined) without needing to even try to set up exclusionary metrics by which a mod can objectively judge. Because it's not the numbers and the raw abilities that matter -- it's the combined aspects of the character and how they (as one entity) affect the rest of the world.

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

Setting: I have long been a proponent of PvE rather than PvP, as some of you may know. In its early years, UV (more specifically, Deep Forest) was so new and undefined that members defined the surroundings and the stories every time their characters so much as tripped on a tree root. As time went on and the setting solidified, to the point where the Forest became almost an entity in its own right (helped by boardplots), I think we all got a bit uncomfortable manipulating the environment for post purposes because to do so was less "I need a thing for the purposes of happening" and more "I am changing the fabric of this realm. Eep." When Deep Forest is practically a character itself, you can't throw random things and landscapes into it without in purest essence breaking the cardinal rule. "Thou shalt not Run Amok over another Character", and all that.

That said, and going by the given proposal of Alternate Reality Deep Forest (such that the unconscious unwillingness to [insert obstacle here] is likely to remain), I can perhaps offer a workaround. People like opportunities to, as my brothers like to say, "Do the Thing! Score the Points! Win the Game!" It is less important what, exactly, the game is, and more important that there is a game. Folks are going to want to go on adventures, or go forth and do battle, or train their characters in this skill or that. Defeating a common enemy is an excellent bonding opportunity. So. When you lay out the setting of this place, include known and constant threats that can be freely engaged. To borrow a previously mentioned concept, the idea of a human settlement being nearby, complete with a reasonably steady stream of stout, gung-ho young lads all afire with the promise of treasure. Or ~evil things of nightmare~ that abide in some of the darker corners of the Mountains. Or will-o-wisps who like to play with the heads of those who pass by. Or a mildly irritating rash of kamikaze squirrels scattered around. Or all these and more. No real threat, nothing harmful to the realm as a whole, nothing devastatingly panic-inducing, just a note to the effect of "these are things that happen around here, if you want them to". It makes for easy, no-permission-needed character development/training opportunities/ways to meet people/Things to Do, and encourages exploration and interaction with the environment/NPCs rather than putting the emphasis on playable-character interaction alone.

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

Profiles/Acceptance: Let's split this one up a bit.

Abilities/Disadvantages: I believe my general view of this, over the years, has hovered rather firmly between "Bleh" and "Kill it with Fire".* Not much change there. I'm fully on board with the idea of combining the two into a single "Abilities" section. It is natural to include ability limits in a description of that ability, and more true to the theory that abilities can be trained and developed over time. Personality-based disadvantages really ought to be in the Personality section anyway. Other things that would currently fall under the Disadvantages section but are not ability- or personality-related (phobias, medical conditions, etc.) could go under "Anything else". The poor dear hardly gets any use these days, really.

*Interesting tidbit for those who remember Smoke: There was no Abilities section at all when I brought him in. He had a shape-shifting mention in the Anything Else section, as if it were merely a curious bit of trivia.
____

Wait Time: This is arguably the primary issue with the Edge as it stands. From an activity standpoint, it's deadly. New players are eager to play. Sitting at the Edge is often very much the opposite, particularly now that it's almost always taken literally (because anything else is just plain confusing for most folks). Moreover, there's not even an IC rationale for it any more. Originally, every character who came to Deep Forest was quite literally screened upon entry. Gaeva, Geaven, and later Lep met every "good" character to come through, and Smoke had a personal encounter with every "bad" character.* They were the respective guardians of the groups, as it were, and they operated accordingly. Important IC information was given; IC rules were laid out and agreed to. Nowadays, that's not a functional plot -- and so rather than a literal acceptance/greeting and swearing in, it has become a meaningless limbo that is almost inescapable at this point.

So. What, exactly, is the purpose of the required wait? If it is to demonstrate writing ability, the profile post and the IC entrance ought to be covering that fairly well. If it is to make sure they know they cannot pull new abilities out of midair willy-nilly, the appropriate way to use a profile for this is to include a "This is important to us! Therefore, please mention wombats** somewhere in your joining post so we know you have read it". If it is to see how they react in a roleplay thread, that's rather what the actual roleplay forums are for. Particularly so given the talk of a sniny new enforcement system. It seems not unreasonable to me that without a legitimate IC reason to roleplay, you could almost do away with the roleplay acceptance requirement entirely.

*Interesting tidbit the second: Smoke's original profile and the meet'n'greet that went with it was over and done after a mere four posts total from me -- the profile post and three roleplay responses.
**Purely an example, and realistically a bit obvious; anyone who did not read the rules but looked at other joining posts would probably notice a curious wombat trend and suspect trickery. Other options: "link to [a specific cat picture]", "include the phrase 'zebra stripes'", "make some reference to a dragon with allergies", "mention a pink unicorn", "tell us what you think of Barbie socks".
____

Miscellaneous: If it were my choice, I would destroy in a heartbeat the very idea that we should spell out every detail of a character. Half the fun of a new character is often the hands-on discovery of that character! I had no idea what Smoke would become when I brought him in, and his journey came about only because I had the luxury of letting him tell me who he was and where he wanted to go. I quite literally didn't know. Some people are very, very good at writing out everything there is to know about a character and playing it accordingly, and more power to them! But we can't all do that, and those who can't aren't necessarily willing to try brute-forcing it anyway.

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

In conclusion: When building a community from next to nothing, you can't afford to be snobby. Open the gates and let people in. I would have never become part of this community over twelve years ago if you hadn't done exactly that. Let there be proof.

[Luxon Cobrat]

Furthermore, the public debate idea just has me cringing from the potential drama. We've had some of those with some characters, and it just created resentment and drama, and we're specifically supposed to be avoiding that with the reboot. We don't want to make people feel like they're being publicly shamed or mocked 'cause we don't want to drive them away. Some early RPers come to this site to learn the craft, and they aren't all going to be flawless at first, some will screw up while building their characters in any number of ways... if they have problems with a mod who can handle things in private, then you want to bring it all public? I don't know, that sounds like a recipe for disaster here. Not that mods shouldn't be held accountable to the community for their decisions, just that there are different methods to do that which would hopefully cause less drama and angst among the membership, which should really be among our top goals seeing as how that has caused some of the mass exoduses (exodi?) in the past.

I don't think it would really be the same. Drama happened because people felt like arbitrary decisions were being handed down from above and that there was nothing they could do about it except lash out publicly. And the fact is that public discussion is already a possibility, because no rule says a person can't open up a thread in Away talking about their character. The problem is, people are currently likely to perceive this as an act of defiance, which shouldn't be the case. If it were distinctly normal and even a matter of procedure to discuss a character this way, drama shouldn't really be such a big issue. We just need to require people to be civil about how they deliver their feedback, and actually enforce that requirement strongly. No public lampooning.

As for the perception of public shaming, that shouldn't really be such a risk, because it would generally have to be the player that opts to open the discussion in the first place. And I think it would be a lot less offensive to a player to have people stating any objections they may have directly than to have people quietly telling them to a mod, who then tells the player that "there are people who are against your idea."

On that note, I... don't suppose I really like the poll idea. I can see how it would let people have a say without the risk of conflict, I really think that if you want to say something against someone's character, you should say it to them openly. That's more fair too, because it gives the person a chance to respond to your criticism, either to acknowledge it and maybe propose their own way of fixing it, or to state why they think what they did was reasonable.

Also, the discussion isn't meant to just completely criticize a character. People might actually defend the character, if they disagree with what the mod thinks about it. That's actually the main purpose of this idea - to create a safeguard in cases where a mod might be wrong. Though, I still think the mod should have the final say, unless overruled by the admin, because I don't want people treating this as a chance to "beat" the gatekeeper and get past.

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.

I like this idea. I think we should treat Tier 4 as the "expected" power level, letting characters at Tier 4 or 5 be accepted with no additional disadvantages beyond the limitations of their abilities. For each tier above that, they should need more serious disadvantages to make them still capable of losing out to less powerful characters. And these disadvantages need to be able to come up in actual play, even - perhaps especially - in PvE.

Although, I vastly favor IC disadvantages over OOC restrictions. I think OOC restrictions should only be used as a last resort, if there is simply no other way to reign in something a character can do. It just smacks as highly illogical to have a character running around who can blow up mountains but doesn't use that power when it would be useful because the player isn't allowed to.

The issue with the tier system, in my opinion, is that it only looks at raw powers of abilities, it doesn't take into consideration weaknesses or disadvantages or personality traits. Someone who's weak but is really good at leading and stirring up the populace is powerful, while someone who has the potential to wreck great destruction but at a cost of their lifeforce or soul of whatever is less so.

But I'm really far more concerned with a character's ability to personally wreak destruction. A person's ability to influence others is very RP-reliant, but their ability to personally annihilate enemy armies is going to weigh against the effectiveness of other characters in a storyline - too much power and their allies will be less important, and their enemies more trivial. Also, Mayor Dwarfking might have all the political influence in the world, but that won't help him if Captain Super Zeus flies straight into his office and blows him up. And personality traits might limit a character's proclivity for lashing about against the world, but a low-tier character would still be able to destroy more and stronger enemies than a high-tier one would.

Norad may have lost out against less powerful characters a lot, but he would still be a powerful force against enemies in PvE. He could be very useful to powerful allies against powerful enemies, but would probably trivialize a something that would be a threat to weaker characters.

--

Also, if there are no objections, I'm going to take it upon myself to start thinking up a prototype for a new area. Not that I mean to barge in and take over in that regard, but September is right around the corner, and I'd like to start getting some ideas thrown around for that. I think anyone that wants to could toss out whatever thoughts of their own they have, and we could get something put together based on that. Unless Gaeva has something specific in mind already.

[Norvilion]

*stares blankly* Wow... that was... an amazing and detailed assessment. I can see why you were mentioned by name dd!

I can definitely see your point on character limit, rules, reporting, and tier system. The more rule structures we have in place the greater our barrier to entry. May still be good to have on hand or as Lanadyr suggested mark major plot boards with "This would probably appeal most to those in this tier range", but let the user themselves decide how their character's power might be described. Though I was originally all for categorizing and listing characters under a tier list I can see how that could be complicated and generally unnecessary.

I like the idea of having a set of minor plot hooks to weave into the land, just little things that can be called upon. It doesn't even have to be just a set of antagonists but perhaps also note some ongoing projects within the forest. Perhaps in this version of UV the village is just starting to be built by a single NPC who has posted an undefined list of tasks that he'd really appreciate help with, from gathering supplies to building structures to taking care of miscreant creatures (such as the aforementioned antagonists). Perhaps there is a labyrinth under the mountain for those who want to go on a dungeon-crawl-type adventure, or even just suggest a list of prompts that everyone's character would realistically have to think about but the player might not think to roleplay out. "Where do you sleep?", "How do you get food", "What do you do to pass the time?".

Getting rid of the required wait and the thread limit is an interesting idea, and I can only see that increasing participation. Plus if you are able to use a character multiple places they can't get accidentally stuck in an almost-dead thread and you reduce the nagging impulse to create 57.5 characters (No one likes you Steve, you only count as a half a character!)

In short, +1 to dd's post.

Edit: Just finished Howahkan's new profile and just waiting on the switch. I think I ended up making him quite a bit darker than before o_o;

[Luxon Cobrat]

And dd posted while I was writing mine. Let's see what I've got...

Please remain calm, avoid panic, breathe comfortably, and read the rest of this post in the most pleasantly neutral voice your imagination can manage.

I tried to read it in the voice of Morgan Freeman, but it sounded weird like that.

Rules : Shave down. Shave far down, all the way to the basics. Simple, functional, bare-bones. Build as needed, later. No one wants to try to remember four pages of rules and restrictions when they come to play. That's what work is for (and let's be realistic: even there, people just remember the relevant day-to-day stuff and ask The Powers That Be if something weird comes up).

I mostly agree with this statement, very much. But, I do want us to have every rule we're ever going to need, to the greatest extent possible, in place from the beginning. Creating additional rules later is something to be avoided if at all possible, and we especially don't want it to become a habit.

Clarifying the rules is a different story. If someone violates the spirit of a rule but not the letter, the letter needs to be modified to plug that loophole. But a wholly new rule should only be created if absolutely necessary to preserve the functionality of the board. And, actually, I think any new rule should be vetted to the whole community, not just discussed among the higher-ups. Maybe even go so far as to require a two thirds majority for approval, to encourage more debate and compromise if something is controversial.

It is the whole community that would be affected,after all. The rules should reflect what the whole group wants, not just serve to allow a small faction to impose its idea of what RP should be like upon everyone. Too much of that drives people away.

And I guess I'm starting to become a champion of democracy here. I can understand how one would be hesitant to relinquish so much central control to the masses for fear of allowing chaos. But really, it just allows more brainpower and a wider range of perspectives to be applied to any given problem, and keeps people from feeling like they're being controlled from above. The rules become legitimate because the whole community made them.

Tier system : Interesting idea. It's a great base of reference, but I would not recommend making it official, required, or in any way hardwired into the profile or acceptance of a character. Absolutely feel free to outline it as a point of consideration. Include in the outline the suggested "Most people find this range here to be the most fun, though we accept almost anything.". Refer to it in the application outline as useful reading, by all means. Doing this would allow for your outline to convey descriptions of the overall effect of a character (abilities, personality, dislikes, and how it's played all combined) without needing to even try to set up exclusionary metrics by which a mod can objectively judge. Because it's not the numbers and the raw abilities that matter -- it's the combined aspects of the character and how they (as one entity) affect the rest of the world.

I almost completely agree with that. The tier system probably shouldn't be official, but it is a useful metric to think with. But I do have a couple of hangups.

One is, I still don't we should accept "almost anything," or tell people that we do. I've already stated most of my reasons, but I have one more carrying over from the point above regarding rules: It only takes one rule to disallow characters above a certain power level. It takes many rules to regulate and control what characters above a certain power level are allowed to do, if they are allowed to exist. It's better to have characters within the allowable range able to do whatever they want within the defined limits of their own abilities than for people to have to check back through the rules every time they want to show off.

And I have a hangup about the last statement too. I really don't care if a low-powered character has the personality, wits, and political savy to gain widespread influence across the entire world, as I said in my previous post. Such a character can still make for a fun experience, still face meaningful challenges, and still need the help of other characters to succeed. But a character with extremely powerful abilities and a personality that keeps their overall influence in check can still trivialize a direct threat, or the assistance other characters could provide against that threat. In short, personal power is a lot more of a concern than personal influence.

Setting: [insert entire section here]

[/quote]

Total agreement. PvE is much more fun than PvP. I would have rather seen a lot more adventures of PC groups taking on NPC enemies, but I never really felt comfortable inserting anything into Deep Forest to provide such encounters, partly because I saw the setting as belonging to Gaeva, and mostly because all the rules regarding personal plots, NPCs, and extra characters seemed like too much red tape to cut through.

Going forward, everything needs to facilitate PvE, not get in its way. The setting should provide opportunity for high adventure, and people shouldn't have to ask for permission to provide enemies to challenge characters.

If there' a concern about powergaming with NPCs, just let the rule against godmoding cover it. Assume the best of a player's intentions, not the worst.

And I don't think I have anything more to add but general agreement, and this seems to be running too long for my phone's liking.

I feel like I end these things abruptly, but...zucchini.

[Keltres]

Perhaps a better term than 'disadvantages' would be 'limitations', with a clear emphasis on the limits of their interaction with weaker characters. What will they struggle to do well, and in particular, what keeps them from either dominating lesser mortals or simply exterminating them. Behaviour can be nearly as important as overall power here, after all superman dominates any story he gets into as much due to the heroic arrogance which compels him to enforce his own law and order on whichever world he happens to be in as by his godlike power, but there is a point where it becomes very hard to avoid the stronger characters dominating things. Doctor Manhattan, to use the other example given, can by the end of the movie terrify the world into submission simply by being there, even when, technically, he's not any more, and in much the same way any excessively powerful character will almost inevitably control events around them. With this in mind, limits based purely on a characters goodwill or benevolence often won't be solid enough to keep high tier characters in check, they really need much more definite reasons why they either won't or, preferably, *can't* bend the entire setting and everybody in it to their will.

Personally, I like the joining threads. For me, they work well both as a means of introducing new characters without having to toss them straight into a plot, and as importantly in forming a useful reference library of active characters. If I want to know more about someone's character, I have a useful link just there on the right taking me not only to their profile, but to a short thread which not only includes but focuses on them. This focus also gave me a good chance to work on getting a feel for my characters without the distractions of a plot. They do, however, depend somewhat on a certain level of active characters, so that the joining threads get updated reasonably often, which may make them unsuitable for what is, effectively, a new board trying to establish itself.

A bigger problem for me was what to do with my characters after the joining threads, and this was mostly due to the lack of differing plot threads. With only the one plot thread, there was no real way for my characters to participate except for jumping straight into the middle of an active plot they weren't suited for, and which Galysyel in particular would actively avoid. In my case, this is what kept my characters inactive. Perhaps the revised setting could include a few generic meeting places which new characters would naturally be drawn to, and could even be open to characters which hadn't yet been accepted.

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

Warning, big post ahead! Bring snacks, water and blankets before proceeding!!

*stares blankly* Wow... that was... an amazing and detailed assessment. I can see why you were mentioned by name dd!

*snorts* Yeah, that wasn't exactly a random call, gotta take advantage of people's strengths! Plus I know dd's views are a bit more freedom orientated, which in this case should be considered from every angle till we find a good one.

Thanks for the input, dd! Gonna steal your format now.

Character limit: I'm actually laughing here, because duh...obvious solution. Start with 3 characters, add a new one every 2 months if you want, if all the previous ones are active. So technically you could have dozens of characters if you can juggle all the previous ones, otherwise no new character. For some reason the option of saying "no" to a new character hadn't occurred to me. No archive needed. As many characters as you can handle, get rid of the inactive ones or start playing them to get more. Fair?

Rules: Shave down? We only have 9 rules, what shaving??

• 1. Respect each other and each others' characters.
• 2. Use of violence and sexual content warnings.
• 3. No god-modding or metagaming.
• 4. Once a character has been accepted, it should be played according to the chosen abilities and disadvantages. A character cannot suddenly develop a new ability just because the situation requires it or because the character would loose a fight otherwise. (Ok, maybe this one, or it needs rewording...)
• 5. Follow instructions from the staff/what to do with problems with staff.
• 6. Character limit.
• 7. No humans. (Keeping this one!! It's part of UV.)
• 8. RP in as many threads as you want, except during mass plots.
• 9. Have fun. Now.

I mostly agree with this statement, very much. But, I do want us to have every rule we're ever going to need, to the greatest extent possible, in place from the beginning. Creating additional rules later is something to be avoided if at all possible, and we especially don't want it to become a habit.

By this you mean the addition of "don't do *that* or *this* will happen"?

And, actually, I think any new rule should be vetted to the whole community, not just discussed among the higher-ups. Maybe even go so far as to require a two thirds majority for approval, to encourage more debate and compromise if something is controversial.

I'm fine with this to a certain degree. A lot of changes were minor tweaks and throwing it into discussion every time that happened is just unnecessary. As for big changes however I am fine with feedback before implementing. Not like that would be completely new anyway... Also, people are free to bring up some discussion on the rules anyway, don't have to wait for a change for that to happen. Doesn't mean they'll automatically change, but you can get feedback from others, possibly extra clarification, and maybe some rewording of the rule in question in the end. Just because I tend to resist doesn't mean I'm not open to it. Not gonna advertise it either though, nitpickers lurking everywhere >.>

But really, it just allows more brainpower and a wider range of perspectives to be applied to any given problem, and keeps people from feeling like they're being controlled from above.

Like this thread.

The rules become legitimate because the whole community made them.

That's a trap, don't fall for that. Some will have disagreed, other will join afterwards, no. It does not work like that with a changing community, only a constant one.

Reporting: I'm fine with a neighborhood watch. Would be even nicer if just anybody who sees something questionable shoots off a PM though. Anonymity promised. If that doesn't work a few specific volunteers instead.

Tier system:

but I would not recommend making it official, required, or in any way hardwired into the profile or acceptance of a character.

Agreed. It just leans towards too much controling again, which translates to a lot more work that'll slow things down as well. A loose reference to refer to (hur hur) would be very good though.

It only takes one rule to disallow characters above a certain power level. It takes many rules to regulate and control what characters above a certain power level are allowed to do, if they are allowed to exist. It's better to have characters within the allowable range able to do whatever they want within the defined limits of their own abilities than for people to have to check back through the rules every time they want to show off.

Very interesting point you bring up, Lux, this is food for thought indeed.

Assume the best of a player's intentions, not the worst.

12 years made me go from the first extreme to the second, so sad. Good reminder to work on believing the first again.

Setting: I'm all for PvE, always have been. But this is the first time I've heard of the psychological limits people have been feeling towards the area, so as not to disturb what they feel does not belong to them. That actually makes me sad, it was never intended to be that way. I loved the new areas created by people, whether just a personal shop, or an entire species' territory, they always got added to the maps. Also why there was so much struggling to define what NPCs people can use, to make the option visible so it's actually used.

Also, if there are no objections, I'm going to take it upon myself to start thinking up a prototype for a new area. Not that I mean to barge in and take over in that regard, but September is right around the corner, and I'd like to start getting some ideas thrown around for that. I think anyone that wants to could toss out whatever thoughts of their own they have, and we could get something put together based on that. Unless Gaeva has something specific in mind already.

When I said in one of the earlier posts in this thread that I would provide the lands if you provide the characters, I got started on that right away. New area is almost completely done, and to my current relief it should actually help with this (to me newly discovered) problem, people can explore the unknown again.

Profiles/Acceptance:

From an activity standpoint, it's deadly.

That's our (edge mods) fault, we're not active ourselves. No other excuses there, the Edge works smoothly when we're actually active. All the piled up rules and regulations made the work an absolute chore to deal with, which is my personal reason why I avoid it like the plague, bad as it is. Also why I'm trying to loosen stuff up and make it easier/more fun to actually do the work required in the future. In the olden days I had no trouble working the Edge like a machine, but that was a loooong time ago! Then when I got tired of it, I got you, Nightwolf, Foxy, Shady and Forger to help and do the work. We need Edge not to be the devil's work anymore, it's seriously the only solution.

My thrown in rant: rules started popping up when people started complaining about why that character wasn't treated like that character, why she received more posts than him, why they were allowed more than them, even why others got a post before they did. Three different Edge mods, unlimited different kinds of characters, so many new characters waiting their turn...impossible to have identical outcomes. Streamlining was our only way out and that took sacrifice, characters' and players' freedom and our (mods) freedom, we took a lot of shit from players for the sake of keeping things rolling. I know Foxy and Shady in particular took the brunt of just being human instead of god at the time when it came to complains and attitude. So yeah, I know the rules suck and everything, but they arose from desperate need. And many mods may have left, but I didn't forget what we went through, which is why I seem to cling to these rules so much. Because of when we didn't have these rules.

Disclaimer: I know some people reading this may feel targeted, but the truth is that only a handful were vocal about it. The actual numbers are a lot higher, "dozens" doesn't even scratch the surface.

I needed to get that out of my system, sorry.
/rant

I don't think it would really be the same. Drama happened because people felt like arbitrary decisions were being handed down from above and that there was nothing they could do about it except lash out publicly.

And privately. People will be people, they come in all shapes and sizes. After my little rant I have to accept that once/if traffic picks up again, drama will eventually follow, that's what happens when you have a large enough group of diverse people. Public, private, everybody prefers something else, so there is no ultimate solution.

So. What, exactly, is the purpose of the required wait?

None of the reasons you mention actually, those are just (un)happy side effects! The reason for the Edge is to give people a place to start, where the shy don't have to be forward to take that first step, and the audacious are identified before turned loose. Also everybody is guaranteed one initial thread all about them, which you have to admit a lot of people rather enjoy, lol. Also...to make sure you are met with instant activity when you start RPing Yeah, I get the irony of this development. I don't find it funny either.

If it were my choice, I would destroy in a heartbeat the very idea that we should spell out every detail of a character.

But nowhere does it say that you should spell out your character in full, just that you stick to what you start out with and grow from there.

Let there be proof.

Those codes, ew, I cleaned it up.
Wow, Gaeva literally told Smoke to go to the Mountains! She was so much more forward in those days! And lmao, dd, your signature XD

A bigger problem for me was what to do with my characters after the joining threads, and this was mostly due to the lack of differing plot threads. With only the one plot thread, there was no real way for my characters to participate except for jumping straight into the middle of an active plot they weren't suited for

Something we'll need to be aware of in the future if a plot is started up again. We'll need a good way for people to stay out of its way if they don't wish to be a part of it.

I think OOC restrictions should only be used as a last resort

Yes, obviously, I should have made that more clear. It's a "when all else fails" back-up.

And normal characters, Gaeva? I thought our whole schtick was that we were the place for weird and wonderful? Don't tell me you've gone beige now!

Beige is the new black! Nah, ugh, I don't want to be like that!! >.< No normal, but weird comes in many flavours, including non headache inducing ones.

I'm sorry! I was trying to turn those statements into rhetorical questions, asking for agreement or disagreements. I had no idea they were bugging you here!

They weren't bugging me, I just kept cracking up at your choice of words, it was awesome XD

[The_Vizir]

Alright, let's do this! LEEEEEEEEEEEEEEROY!

Tier system: Interesting idea. It's a great base of reference, but I would not recommend making it official, required, or in any way hardwired into the profile or acceptance of a character. Absolutely feel free to outline it as a point of consideration. Include in the outline the suggested "Most people find this range here to be the most fun, though we accept almost anything.". Refer to it in the application outline as useful reading, by all means. Doing this would allow for your outline to convey descriptions of the overall effect of a character (abilities, personality, dislikes, and how it's played all combined) without needing to even try to set up exclusionary metrics by which a mod can objectively judge. Because it's not the numbers and the raw abilities that matter -- it's the combined aspects of the character and how they (as one entity) affect the rest of the world.

I think if we're wedded to the tier system, this is definitely how we should do it. Put it into the character creation reference document, and use it as a "reminder" or whathaveyou, a way to generally judge the power of a character, and evaluate the number of restrictions that'll have to be placed on their powers. I'm still against hard wiring it in for reasons aforementioned, and ones that dd has articulated here (discrimination, disincentivizing creativity, exclusionary atmosphere, arbitrariness, vizhasawordcalanderitis, etc.) I've been on the receiving end of that twice. I can tell you all that it's really not fun, and it just breeds resentment. I don't want to be the one to drop that kind of hammer down on anyone else for something as arbitrary as Power Levels.

That's also why I really don't want public polling or the like about character acceptance or power approval or whathaveyou. I've been there. I've been shot down. I didn't enjoy it. It was embarrassing and humiliating to feel that people you like and respect don't think you should have something you want, don't think you should do something, that they don't trust you. It sucks, really it does. It's much, much better when things can be handled by private messages, by moderators or others empowered by the Gaeva that Is to handle the situation. Sometimes you do need a deft touch and kiddie gloves, and that really isn't the place for the democratic mob. I love the ideal, but the issue with ideals is that they tend not to survive direct contact with reality .

I like dd's reporting/watchers idea, but I feel it says something about this community when we have to designate people to watch out for other players. I wish I could honestly say "let's just all agree to talk to each other and comment and share our concerns," but we all know that this ideal hasn't exactly worked out in the past. So I'd like to second Gaeva's comment that it would be nicer if everybody just kept a look out for each other, we probably do need a new neighbourhood watch folks just as an added line of insurance. Preferably a voluntary position, but details to be determined.

However, I don't really agree with dd's assessment on the rules (le gasp!), mostly 'cause Gaeva and I've been talking behind the scenes about how far to shave it down. Gaeva has gutted the rules and slimmed them down to the point where I don't really know how much further we can go. The NPC rules were liberated, time lines freed up, even character limits were kinda-sorta resolved though never play tested. If others want to point out where things can be cut, that'd be honestly appreciated, but otherwise I think we're pretty solid in length/complexity.

I love this talk of getting back to a more PVE setting. I know that was a major concern to many folks, and it did hold back some stories I knew were floating around 'cause of NPC restrictions and just the general feeling of "walking on eggshells" on the issue of using things that weren't on one's character lists. This is why I probably tapped a bit too much into portals as a shtick for the forest, but it explained a lot of the weirdness. I loved the idea of things just popping through 'cause a portal opened up somewhere and dropped it down at the Edge, and though I mostly restricted that to items, I know others had some pretty grandiose ideas for plots around the shimmery, shifty things. Plus, it explains how all most of the weirdness got here. So I love the idea of freshening the place up, adding more adventure-y locations and events and just more weirdness! Weird is fun! As are portals! [rolls Will save. Rolls 18. Passes thanks to Priest level.] And I didn't even make a 'thinking with portals' jo- D'OH!

Of course, having adventures does mean that people need to get into the game, so I will second what dd is saying and risk repeating myself. The edge wait times are killing us. More than any drama, more than anyone leaving, it's the edge. Threads die, and perfectly good characters never make it into the forest. Unless your user name starts with a G, every single one of us has probably had that happen to them. Heck, I would not be here if by some fluke NORAD wasn't accepted in three weeks while I was approaching a year's wait on Darien and Sarah - Gaeva asked me to stay and said I should try the weird idea of a crashed warship AI out, and yeah, stuff, much stuff, happened! Honestly, the Edge is a neat place, but it shouldn't be a mandatory purgatory before the Gaeva that Is [I WILL MAKE THIS A THING!] lets you into the Forest proper, in my opinion.

And Lux, I get where you're coming from with your defence of the public process, but it's not really a fun thing to do, man. I mean, what's to stop folks from trying to veto an idea or concept they don't like? I just prefer a much more impartial process. It's not ideal, no, I will agree with you on that. And yes, there is the risk of abuse. But I personally have to believe that the risk of mod abuse is much less of a risk than people's own biased opinions coming out and hurting character acceptance. I don't want to force people from this site unless they start violating the rules, and I just have to think any kind of public process like you're suggesting will do just that. People come to play and have fun, not be judged or critiqued. There's other sites for that. Like Twitter!

However, to be fair, I do completely agree with you about OOC restrictions. The few times they've been used it has either not worked, or just caused as much trouble as they've solved. IC all the way! You want to play Thor, you get his warrior's honour, trusting nature, inability to understand technology, and general mistrust of science. And so on.

And really, Lux, bringing NORAD as a justification for the tier system because of PVE is really is kinda annoying. I really don't want to make this personal, but can we agree that Entropy, or Zom, or Reika has proven to be more effective than the glorified taxi driver who can't aim 'cause his relay is made out of duct tape? You're saying a siege engine is more powerful than a skilled, experienced, and physically impressive commander. That's the kind of disconnect the system creates. It's banning Captain Falcon 'cause of Falcon Punch, but Fox is okay. Superman is out, but Batman is totally fine, may even underpowered. It just doesn't make personal sense to me, and not just 'cause I'm a Supes fan, eh? Some characters are more powerful than what their power tier would indicate, because of skill, age, personality, experience, intelligence, their roleplayer's creativity or willingness to take risks; others are far weaker for similar reasons. A single arbitrary metric that would rank Grey as more powerful than Entropy is not one I can endorse, and neither, I'd have to believe, could you. And this isn't just about my characters, there are a number of others who might very well find themselves in similar positions that I'd be sitting in if I brought over NORAD and the horrors. Great powers do require great disadvantages, but they do not necessitate exclusionary systems. It's up to the roleplayers to realize they're in a communal setting, this is a group thing, collaborative storytelling. You want to go solo? Write a novel! I mean no offense to anyone, but if you're not here to share the spotlight with friends and colleagues, then why are you here? I'd really like to know!

Likewise, while I do agree with public feedback for rule changes, like we've done in the past, like we're doing now, the final verdict is Gaeva's. These should be about what she feels is best for the site. We should by all means feel free to voice our opinions and takes, but at the end of the day, she created UV, she still pays for it, it's her world, she just lets us play in it

And, Lux, you bring up an interesting point - if godmoding doesn't let one control the NPCs and abuse them, why would we have to worry about character power levels? So long as they don't touch your characters, they're not godmoding. A lot of my issues in the past were about people godmoding and trying to get them to adjust. It had nothing to do with character power levels (though those could be used as a convenient excuse to how something could happen), but instead with people doing things they technically were allowed but really shouldn't have done 'cause it impacted other players without their say. Maybe we just need to double down on the whole "you can't affect anything beyond the environment/your character/the NPCs under your control without another player's permission," sure, I will give you that. But that rule should also be what stops abuses in power, right? Every one should have an "out" if they don't like it, and when that "out" is taken away, then we start to have no fun.

Gaeva, that is the best possible solution to the character limit dealio. IF YOU WANT YOUR NEW CHARACTERS, YOU HAVE TO FEED YOUR OLD ONES FIRST! I don't know if two months is too short of a waiting with the infinite character dealio, but whatever. That's an easy thing to adjust if it needs to be increased.

And yeah, Gaeva, there is a cultural thing that really has limited NPC use... I think it's because Lux and I were among the more active ones here for a while, and we were both reprimanded early on in our time here for improper NPC usage. Since we largely passed the culture on to the newer players, I guess that could be a major reason why the NPC issue is still a sore one/one that hasn't really be rectified. No finger pointing, no blaming anyone for anything they felt they had to do in the past, purely hypothesizing an origin point. Regardless, it needs a cultural shift, and that's not really easy. BUT I HAVE FAITH IN US! Mostly. Kinda sorta.

It's sad that I'm a mod, and the one responsible for ensuring proper NPC usage, and I'm still iffy about using them 'cause I'm afraid of screwing up, ain't it?

An aside here, Gaeva, but after that rant, I am so glad I was asked to be OOC mod. Less to deal with, 'cause outside of characters/RP, people here seem to genuinely like each other! Why UV hasn't died despite the dearth of activity; people still show up to talk and hang out. It's a community more than some rule system, eh?

Okay, is that everything I have to respond to here? Jeeze, tell me before you all go on great big rants like this, so I know better than to spend an evening helping a friend build a kobold rogue for Pathfinder

I kid (mostly), it's great to see so many folks invested in this site and its future. Hopefully we can harness this and move forward into infinity and beyond.

I think I'm all out of pop culture references now (Viz? Out of stupid jokes? THAT'S UMPOSSIBLE!), so I'll let you all get back to regular programming before Netflix destroys it all. Those maniacs! THEY BLEW IT ALL UP! OH, DAMN THEM! DAMN THEM ALL TO HELL!

Well, at least I have chicken.

[Norvilion]

Vizir, I gotta say I'm a bit disappointed... everyone knows that the pathfinder ninja beats out the rogue class hands down in terms of flavor, ability, and options

[The_Vizir]

Vizir, I gotta say I'm a bit disappointed... everyone knows that the pathfinder ninja beats out the rogue class hands down in terms of flavor, ability, and options

We already have a kithkin ninja, and he's using the glory rogue with the greaserat archetype so he can craft all the bombs and tanks and airships.

I made not one bit of that up. I have an awesome group.

[Norvilion]

...so he can craft all the bombs and tanks and airships.

Okay, you officially have me convinced- you have a great group.

[The_Vizir]

Okay, you officially have me convinced- you have a great group.

Kingmaker, but set in a steampunk/Gothic Horror setting ripped from Ravenloft, taking the conversion on the Paizo forums to make Pitax a Clockwork Duchy, and using some of the concepts from Tales of the Old Margreve to turn the Stolen Lands into a fey-haunted wilderness they're trying to tame, with lots of weirdness. Literally wilderness vs. civilization, pick a side. Also bbeg from last campaign escaped and is now forming an undead army in the middle of the forest as well, so the PCs can get their revenge. Players include a half-elf cavalier, a half-elf bard, an aasimar paladin, a tifling psion, varana monk, kithkin ninja, kobold rogue, and a psudodragon alchemist using rules from the Book of Drakes.

Yes.

I am insane.

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

the pathfinder ninja beats out the rogue class hands down in terms of flavor, ability, and options

Flavor? Norv, stop licking the ninjas.

I love the ideal, but the issue with ideals is that they tend not to survive direct contact with reality

Ain't that the sad truth.

I've been there.

That's the kind of vital feedback we need here. It may be just one opinion, but still, it's a direct insight into the system "from the other side". Thanks.

Honestly, the Edge is a neat place, but it shouldn't be a mandatory purgatory before the Gaeva that Is [I WILL MAKE THIS A THING!] lets you into the Forest proper, in my opinion.

*facepalm*
Other than that, it shouldn't be a purgatory!! I'm asking for another chance to show it can work, to make it work like it used to work!! If I fail, then you can all berate me like I deserve with as many I-told-you-sos as you want, and we'll change things. I'm gonna be stubborn on this one for a while, I don't want to give up.

So I love the idea of freshening the place up, adding more adventure-y locations and events and just more weirdness! Weird is fun! As are portals!

Repeating what I said before, weird comes in many flavors, some tastier than others. We can have Norv lick them if you don't believe me.

Likewise, while I do agree with public feedback for rule changes, like we've done in the past, like we're doing now, the final verdict is Gaeva's. These should be about what she feels is best for the site. We should by all means feel free to voice our opinions and takes, but at the end of the day, she created UV, she still pays for it, it's her world, she just lets us play in it

Thanks for the support, but we're in this together! I'd just be muttering to myself about mandatory rules if you guys weren't here...that would make me insane. But yeah, final say is mine, no reason to deny it. But it's not like I don't listen, so there's that.

But that rule should also be what stops abuses in power, right? Every one should have an "out" if they don't like it, and when that "out" is taken away, then we start to have no fun.

Ah, could you, maybe, rephrase it or something? I'm afraid I'm not following what you're saying here, I feel like I'm missing something. Could just be the language barrier, or the fact that it's after midnight, but I don't understand what you're saying.

[The_Vizir]

But that rule should also be what stops abuses in power, right? Every one should have an "out" if they don't like it, and when that "out" is taken away, then we start to have no fun.

Ah, could you, maybe, rephrase it or something? I'm afraid I'm not following what you're saying here, I feel like I'm missing something. Could just be the language barrier, or the fact that it's after midnight, but I don't understand what you're saying.

Okay, let's see here. Basically, the idea is that every character should be able to get out any situation their player doesn't want them in. If the character is going to be stabbed, but the player really doesn't want that, they should be able to say their character dodges. That's the "out". If the other player says something like their character runs the other through, that removes the "out" for the player. Their character just got stabbed, and there was nothing they could do. That is godmodding, it takes away the "out," the ability for a player to change a situation.

How that deals with power tiers, well, since NORAD seems to be everyone's defacto choice despite being a really bad option, in my opinion, we'll go with him. He shoots his railguns. They take usually take some time to hit. People can dodge them by running, throwing up a shield, teleporting, blasting the projectiles out of the sky, etc. So long as I don't say "The rails hit your character, turning them into a fine red mist," or something along those lines, the other player has an out. Such things are the norm in most roleplaying, and allow everybody the opportunity to do whatever they want to. Having these outs are a solution to the power level, because so long as your characters still have freedom, you get to decide how the actions of others will affect your character. The big issue with power levels in the past have been when such freedoms have been taken away. I'm not going to point any fingers, out of respect for the RPers, but there have been characters who have used their powers to completely nullify others. That is going to far, that is taking the freedom away from others to play how they want.

The solution is not arbitrary tiers, but the enforcement that godmoding is not allowed. To turn a phrase, my character's powers end the moment your character begins, right? This is the ultimate equalizer in power. And it applies to NPCs are well. If you're running a thread, and the NPCs are under your control, even if hostile, than you should probably be given leeway to say a super-duper-kill-all-the-things attack didn't actually kill all the things, 'cause you want drama. The out preserves your right to make the story, and shows respect to those you're playing with.

Also, Gaeva, the idea with Purgatory is that you get out. Eventually. If you're not a vampire or something.

Oh look, still more pop culture references... it's like I'm addicted or something.

[Gaeva Winged Unicorn]

Ahhh, you were inside the RP when you referred to an out, I wasn't, that's why I wasn't following you at all. Ok, I caught up, thanks for clarifying! And yes, agreed, this extended version is a good way of putting it, as long as the other has an out if they so wish it should be alright (though this can also be abused of course, because the special snowflake is too special and never gets hit). But anyway, such "out" is almost impossible to arrange in a profile, because every encounter is unique.

In the end you have to trust the other RPer to treat you fairly, then have the courage to speak up for yourself if he doesn't. No amount of tiers or disadvantages will change this sadly. Except maybe indeed to watch each other's back, to show and give support to those who need it. Which in turn breeds trust eventually and shows a good example. Just another culture change, right?

Also, Gaeva, the idea with Purgatory is that you get out.

Yeah, but purgatory is bad...make it an elevator...with elevator good music.

[The_Vizir]

In the end you have to trust the other RPer to treat you fairly, then have the courage to speak up for yourself if he doesn't. No amount of tiers or disadvantages will change this sadly. Except maybe indeed to watch each other's back, to show and give support to those who need it. Which in turn breeds trust eventually and shows a good example. Just another culture change, right?

Exactamundo, boss lady!

Dangit, I lost the thing.

[Roose Hurro]

Can't post much here and now, but so long as all the "old" history/threads/stories/years of work are saved/not lost, I think we have a hoard of good ideas here.

[nightwolf714]

Oh my gosh, you guys posted a lot of really long posts.

O.O

Give me a bit, I'm gonna try and read it all tonight and then give my opinion. Though by the sound of it from Norv, ya'll have mostly figure it out. So yays on that.

[Luxon Cobrat]

I mostly agree with this statement, very much. But, I do want us to have every rule we're ever going to need, to the greatest extent possible, in place from the beginning. Creating additional rules later is something to be avoided if at all possible, and we especially don't want it to become a habit.

By this you mean the addition of "don't do *that* or *this* will happen"?

If I understand what you mean, then yes, I think so. It's like keeping a record of court decisions. Governments don't write new laws every time the interpretation of a law comes into question in court, but they do maintain a record of the outcomes of these questions so they can point to a precedent in the future. Though, obviously, don't keep a list of who was involved in each incident in public view, because that would be embarrassing. But it would be a good idea to point out any specific behavior that fell into the grey area and was decided to be a violation, though with enough generality to cover any reasonably similar behavior.

If the rules are written clearly enough, though, then you hopefully won't have too many of these unclear cases. If an act is obviously against a rule, then clarification isn't really needed.

And for the sake of clarity, while I'm at this, the No Godmoding rule should specifically include creating situations a character can't logically escape, at least without a deus ex machina. For example, if I surround your character with a wall of ice, then turn the ground into lava, I haven't directly affected your character, but there's no way your character is getting out of that. This should be considered godmoding, and the rule should reflect this.

When I said in one of the earlier posts in this thread that I would provide the lands if you provide the characters, I got started on that right away. New area is almost completely done, and to my current relief it should actually help with this (to me newly discovered) problem, people can explore the unknown again.

*tears up the map he had drawn and throws it into the nearest incinerator*

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v431/ ... eStars.png)

I don't think it would really be the same. Drama happened because people felt like arbitrary decisions were being handed down from above and that there was nothing they could do about it except lash out publicly.

And privately. People will be people, they come in all shapes and sizes. After my little rant I have to accept that once/if traffic picks up again, drama will eventually follow, that's what happens when you have a large enough group of diverse people. Public, private, everybody prefers something else, so there is no ultimate solution.

Drama will happen, yes. Or, conflict will, at least. Unavoidably. Conflict doesn't have to turn into drama, but suppressing it makes it more likely to. Best to let conflicts be resolved openly before they turn into back room political wars.

And Lux, I get where you're coming from with your defence of the public process, but it's not really a fun thing to do, man. I mean, what's to stop folks from trying to veto an idea or concept they don't like? I just prefer a much more impartial process. It's not ideal, no, I will agree with you on that. And yes, there is the risk of abuse. But I personally have to believe that the risk of mod abuse is much less of a risk than people's own biased opinions coming out and hurting character acceptance. I don't want to force people from this site unless they start violating the rules, and I just have to think any kind of public process like you're suggesting will do just that. People come to play and have fun, not be judged or critiqued. There's other sites for that. Like Twitter!

Well, I'll take the option of a mod bringing up a character in question off the table, but I don't see why a player shouldn't have that option. If the mod is impartial, it shouldn't be necessary. But mods are still human, so you know their opinions are going to color their judgment sometimes. Especially with the degree of trust I'm proposing to hand them, allowing them to deny acceptance to a character and require changes to its design based on their personal judgment of its power, I really think it would only be fair to allow a player one last recourse if they think their character is limited enough and can't change the mod's mind on their own. Again, they would have to do this if they don't want to.

And really, Lux, bringing NORAD as a justification for the tier system because of PVE is really is kinda annoying. I really don't want to make this personal, but can we agree that Entropy, or Zom, or Reika has proven to be more effective than the glorified taxi driver who can't aim 'cause his relay is made out of duct tape? You're saying a siege engine is more powerful than a skilled, experienced, and physically impressive commander. That's the kind of disconnect the system creates. It's banning Captain Falcon 'cause of Falcon Punch, but Fox is okay. Superman is out, but Batman is totally fine, may even underpowered. It just doesn't make personal sense to me, and not just 'cause I'm a Supes fan, eh? Some characters are more powerful than what their power tier would indicate, because of skill, age, personality, experience, intelligence, their roleplayer's creativity or willingness to take risks; others are far weaker for similar reasons. A single arbitrary metric that would rank Grey as more powerful than Entropy is not one I can endorse, and neither, I'd have to believe, could you. And this isn't just about my characters, there are a number of others who might very well find themselves in similar positions that I'd be sitting in if I brought over NORAD and the horrors. Great powers do require great disadvantages, but they do not necessitate exclusionary systems. It's up to the roleplayers to realize they're in a communal setting, this is a group thing, collaborative storytelling. You want to go solo? Write a novel! I mean no offense to anyone, but if you're not here to share the spotlight with friends and colleagues, then why are you here? I'd really like to know!

First, right out the gate, I think Entropy, Zom, and Rekka are all just as high-powered as Norad, at least. Any one of those three would probably stand at Tier 2, according to Norv's description. Entropy is capable of great feats of strength and magic. Zom and Rekka both have the rebirth angle, as well as massive strength. You could all but tear Zom limb from limb, and she could still kill you and immediately put herself back together. Rekka could teleport freely at will, and even hop over to another world instantly at any time. Heck, this might all pile up to even place them at Tier 1. Overall, judging purely by their power and excluding the possible effects of plot armor, any one of them would probably overmatch Drizz't Do'urden's entire party from Icewind Dale. That level of power really seems like it's pushing the boundaries of reason for a fantasy RP, and yet, a large part of why I designed them that way was so that they could get through a hostile encounter with a few other characters in the Forest without being completely overmatched themselves, and I don't feel that their power has been excessive to that end. Still, if this isn't pushing the high end of the allowable power scale, I don't know what is.

But the reason I mentioned Norad and PvE (well, I used Norad because you mentioned Norad because Norv mentioned Norad) was because as far as the tiers go, I really only see value in it with regard to PvE. I think a tier system that rates characters according to their ability to take on other characters would be, if not entirely useless, highly irrelevant to what I'm concerned with. There's no rating what would happen in PvP because characters can apply all the plot armor they want to protect their characters. But in PvE, NPCs are going to get destroyed, and PCs are going to unleash their full potential. In that situation, a large disparity in the destructive capabilities of the characters involved will have a huge effect on how much of an impact those characters have on the encounter. And something that would be a big dramatic threat to a Tier 4 character would be no problem for a Tier 2 or 1 character to wipe out, if the tiers ar judged by the way I'm proposing. Otherwise, if you rate Norad as a Tier 5 and you throw a Tier 5 threat at him (say, a handfull of goblins), what happens? He grabs a chaingun, opens fire, and the encounter ends in seconds.

The tier system isn't meant to be exclusionary, though. It's meant to direct characters towards challenges that are appropriate for them, if they get into combat. I wouldn't want a tier system that rates characters according to their overall effectiveness in the world, because that would be extremely restrictive. I wouldn't want a system that says that if your character is capable of gaining widespread influence throughout the world, that you have to hit him with a disadvantage that drastically weakens his other abilities or else people will consider balors an appropriate challenge for him (as much as I'm sure a few people would like to see Francis Underwood get attacked by a balor). Long story short, I want the tier system used as a simplified, more ad-hoc version of D&D/Pathfinder's CR system.

And finally, I don't think Norad is too powerful to accept, if that's the impression you've gotten. To put it bluntly, I think a fully unrestricted Naira in Reaver form would be too powerful. And that never was accepted, but the way it was dealt with was to put restrictions on her to make her less powerful. And that could still be done, but what I propose is that if a character is already under a certain allowable power level, they shouldn't have to play the strict Advantage/Disadvantage balancing game.

And, Lux, you bring up an interesting point - if godmoding doesn't let one control the NPCs and abuse them, why would we have to worry about character power levels? So long as they don't touch your characters, they're not godmoding. A lot of my issues in the past were about people godmoding and trying to get them to adjust. It had nothing to do with character power levels (though those could be used as a convenient excuse to how something could happen), but instead with people doing things they technically were allowed but really shouldn't have done 'cause it impacted other players without their say. Maybe we just need to double down on the whole "you can't affect anything beyond the environment/your character/the NPCs under your control without another player's permission," sure, I will give you that. But that rule should also be what stops abuses in power, right? Every one should have an "out" if they don't like it, and when that "out" is taken away, then we start to have no fun.

Well, I hope I just answered the question at the beginning there. The tiers shouldn't be about PvP, they should be about PvE combat balance, which is especially important if we're going to start focusing on PvE. As for remaining PvP issues, I agree that we should double down on that, as per my proposal to Gaeva above regarding the godmoding rule. If somebody creates a situation where another character couldn't avoid being affected, even without directly controlling the reaction of that character, it should still be considered godmoding. I've actually always seen it that way, but we should make it official.