FYI on Q:6ers

[Jager]

Okay. I've given alot of thought to what's been discussed here and in private:

Tarot, I apologize. I didn't give you the same opportunities that I would have expected for my self. I let my anger get the better of me.

[Wakinyan]

Whoa whoa whoa. Let's not get hasty with the apologies.

[Dreamer]

Well, here is my biggest problem with a lot of the post of on this board. The idea that their characters can say whatever the fuck they want and not have anything worse to worry about than a harsh reply.

Come on some of the people on this forum are internationally wanted for killing,countless people. What if Jager got mad and went off to kill Tarot? What would happen? Oh that wouldn't happen, cause Tarot has the ainti-jager field...

[Hugin]

Well, does the character you want to play trump the character I want to play?

Since you (this is the hypothetical you, not any specific you) want to play some muy muy psychotic death machine will all the powers under the son that means I am required to play my character as scared of you and not willing to be the character I want to play? Since you're playing some super-powerful Utopian with the ear of half the nations of the world I can't play a mouthy, eveil Terat because well, you'd just hunt me down and throw me in Bahrain?

What you want to play is no more important or more correct than what I want to play.

We have to suspend some belief here. You have to be able to play the uberbadass and I have to be able to play the mouthy punk. Otherwise I have no reason to play any other character just as powerful as you. And then we're all playing gods and this place has gone from unlikely (smartass surviving) to absurd (everyone is a combat monster killer)

[Ghostwriter]

Quote:

Originally posted by Dreamer:
Well, here is my biggest problem with a lot of the posts of on this board. The idea that their characters can say whatever the fuck they want and not have anything worse to worry about than a harsh reply.

Come on, some of the people on this forum are internationally wanted for killing countless people. What if Jager got mad and went off to kill Tarot? What would happen? Oh that wouldn't happen, cause Tarot has the anti-Jager field...

I distinctly remember one of your PCs threatening to kill one of mine once and trying to get away with the IC consequences if you did. It was only because the Mods got us to drop the whole thing that it didn't happen, though I would have accepted said PC's death - if you'd've been willing to accept consequences.

Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
Well, does the character you want to play trump the character I want to play?

Since you (this is the hypothetical you, not any specific you) want to play some muy muy psychotic death machine will all the powers under the son that means I am required to play my character as scared of you and not willing to be the character I want to play? Since you're playing some super-powerful Utopian with the ear of half the nations of the world I can't play a mouthy, eveil Terat because well, you'd just hunt me down and throw me in Bahrain?

What you want to play is no more important or more correct than what I want to play.

We have to suspend some belief here. You have to be able to play the uberbadass and I have to be able to play the mouthy punk. Otherwise I have no reason to play any other character just as powerful as you. And then we're all playing gods and this place has gone from unlikely (smartass surviving) to absurd (everyone is a combat monster killer)

I hear you, brother.

[Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
What you want to play is no more important or more correct than what I want to play.

Really, what is more important? If I want to play the super killing machine, and you want to play the smart ass. I can't interact with other characters using super killing, but you can interact with other players being a smart ass..So who play style is more important? Well, from my point of view, the super smart ass' has more sway in the game world?

I can't force you to stop interacting with my threads, but I can't interact with your character outside of the forums. This not just about having combat, but also the idea that some charaters could piss others off using thing slick law suits,legal codes,toys and a whole list of other means.

So wh'se fun is more important? I am not saying we should have an open range on those sorts of things, but I am saying if we aregoing to have mods, then let them use their powers. As it is, I haven't really seen them do anything other than preach from high above. but back to my point, if you are making upa killa 2000, and asswhip to the max..Who can better use thier powers on the forums? And who is being favored on the forums?

[Lemmy Chillmeister]

You're simply stating the case again Dreamer.

So the super-smarty or the super-socialite should hold sway and the brick gets to take it like some prison bitch because we don't have combat but we can roleplay social warfare?

That's not fair either is it?

[Dreamer]

not fully.I am stating the off line actions are pontless.Walker can't warp Lemy's car into space, Preston can't track Apep's banking records...

[Slattern]

So, we're left with role-playing. Acting out characters. We're not fighting each other, we're not trying to kill each other. This isn't a TT game. This isn't a PBEM. It isn't a game. Hence we don't have certain aspects you'd expect to find in a game. Things like rules for conflict resolution. I'm doing something you have a problem with approach me, OOC and say "I think this should happen to you." Now, if I think it's reasonable I'll think about it. I'm going to ask something in return. You want to kill Lemmy because I piss you off that much and you come up with a good story then I'll think about it. But I want you to give just as much as I'm going to give. I'd be giving up my character. Are you willing to do the same? If the answer is no you shouldn't be asking me to give up mine. I laugh in the face of anyone who tells me my characters don't deal with repurcussions. I killed Vile Bill because Elites die. I killed Very Bad because Elites die and the guy who came up with his death did a DAMN FINE job of coming up with a cool story I thought would add something to the place. Tarot mentions something that could get Gerald in trouble and Gerald gets in trouble. Do I catch everything? No, not perfect, sorry. But others have done the same thing here. Has everyone? Nope. Some of them have done a piss poor job of it, some have done it only after getting their feet to the fire. But at the end of the day this isn't a game, its a forum for telling stories. Some of the stories are interactive, but thats as far as it goes. If you want more join a game.

[Magus]

Quote:

Originally posted by Dreamer:
not fully.

I believe there are two issues here and since some have pointed out my ethics post was a little dense I will try to restate it here in less dense form.

Walker can warp Lemmy's car into space.

Preston can track Apep's banking record although I have to note that either Apep has changed significantly since I was last a very active poster or you're not familiar with Apep's character.

Is this clear enough?

Lemmy's car is a car and nothing more unless he happens to be in it, in which case some degree of player maturity is expected if Walker reasonably desires to interact with other characters here. Apep's banking records if such a thing were to exist are not Apep, it is what Preston does with that information that is important and again some degree of player maturity is expected.

The FAQ establishes a minimum guideline of what should happen and what is not allowed to happen without the consent of the player, OR the moderators if the players have attempted to work out the issues and failed. Please pay attention to the emphasis in bold as its the last time I am going to bring it to your attention. If there is going to be a discussion of what the FAQ says then I would suggest you know what the FAQ says not what you think it might say.

Is this clear?

The second issue appears to be one asking what sort of freedom a character here has and personally I agree with Prodigy. This is an interactive but cooperative site. If as a player you elected to run a character that will kill a magic user on sight knowing there are two magic users in the group and overlooking the nicety of telling the other players then some things are going to happen. The first is that your character may kill a magic user or two. The second is that you are going to be booted because your character adds nothing to the game and detracts much from it. You are not playing with the group, you are playing with yourself. Pun intended.

Is this clear? If not I will attempt to restate it until it is.

If you desire that I suspend disbelief in your character and their willingness to interact here then I expect you will make the effort to construct whatever rationale is necessary to continue interacting here. Or contact the other player then the mods if the issues can't be worked out between players. What happened between the players of Jager and Tarot is not desirable however 'good' the role play might have been, nor was the IC interaction the only way it might have gone. Jager's player DID role play his character well in that he didn't choose to remove the source of the players frustration pemanently, not because Tarot has an anti-Jager field.

There may be no over-arcing social law regarding interaction of characters here but just because you as a player chose to play here does NOT mean you checked your responsibilities at the door.

Is this clear?

[Ashnod]

I've always kind of looked at this place as a location to tell stories, at least since OPPOSING VIEWS went away and "On Wizard's Watch" popularized the idea of collaborative fiction where characters that previously just debated suddenly were actually interacting in a documented method.

In the beginning, as those old timers here know well and sometimes wax poetic about, all we had was a single forum with a single question where characters would post their opinions on the question. Characters and players being who they are, this lead to about 50 posts pertaining to the topic at hand and about 899 relating to other IN-Character issues. This was time before we had private messages, password-protected logins, and the only way you could contact another player was by email.

Things changed, we got the forums, we started writing stories featuring casts of many and suddenly these characters had intertwining and documented history. We started weaving our own history for these little gems and now we've got a legion of events that are all tied together in a very elaborate tapestry.

Saying that, as much as the OpNet and the Fiction boards are roleplaying it's not much of a game and I don't think it was really intended to be that. It's just stories. We butt heads constantly because all of us are storytellers by default, and we all have competing visions of what the "world" should be like and how our characters can influence it. We want to be sure their place in that "world" is known and understood.

Someone wants to tell a story about a killer bad-ass, well, that's all fine and dandy. But it's not as though you can do anything with your killer bad-ass powers except tell stories about them. That's why so many times someone's had to beat down the old line of "it doesn't really matter what the character sheet says" because there's not much you can do with that anyway except as a guideline for writing your stories. You can't take your sheet of doom and use it as justification to squash the smart-ass character unless the two of you want to write a story about it.

That's what's supposed to happen. I'm wondering why everyone is so concerned with why the freedom to SQUASH another character inside the IC world is restricted here. We're not playing a game. We've no objectives, no experience, nothing that defines this as anything more than as telling tales within a common setting. The production and moderation staffs came up with rules for just what you can do in the setting to keep things fairly level, but we're not in competition with each other.

Could your bad-ass killer squash smart-ass? Sure. Smart-ass might also be connected enough to send an Elite after you for no more reason than you threatened to kill him if he didn't shut up on the IC OpNet boards. Since there's no ST to arbitrate this and neither one of you probably wants to lose your character, why put yourself into this situation? Neither one of you are going to relent unless you feel the story is good enough, but in my experience, most players will insist their character could and should come out alive, if not completely unscathed. Not all, I know.

OPPOSING VIEWS was created, I believe, as a way to share ideas and perspectives ICLY to make the site more interactive, and the forums that came after a way to expand that beyond a single two-sided issue. It was about character interaction, not competition, and it was never about using the forums as a means to actually conduct an ongoing game.

Can you make bad-ass killer? Sure. The question becomes why you want to for the purposes of this type of interaction. You know going into it that you're limited in what you can do. The purpose of the forums is to interact. PERIOD. That's it. Sure, you're a bad-ass killer on a character sheet that means nothing when all that's supposed to get done is character interaction. Same reason for phenomenal cosmic power being kind of useless: you've got all this power but there's nothing you can do with it HERE. You want 5 dots of Mega-Intelligence? Well, okay, but if you can't do it convincingly IN-Character, the stat is absolutely meaningless. There are no puzzles for you to solve to save the world, no 50-year long Sphinx plots to spoil. There's no ST providing you antagonists and no need to have that kind of die pool in this environment.

I know some people are thinking, "But I WANT to play (insert stat-defined character here)." Well, in what sense do you mean "play?" If you mean interact AS, well, that's kind of limited by how you're going to be able to roleplay out the personality of someone that intelligent (using 5 dot Mega-Int as an example), or write stories about someone that intelligent. If you mean play as in be able use those abilities in a game-like way, ergo, solve puzzles, then why bother? This isn't a game, and the stat doesn't give you any benefit.

Asking me for a collaborative story wherein you get to kill or seriously injure my character for no other reason than I smarted-off to your character on the forums isn't reason enough for me to give you that satisfaction. It's not my fault that you're playing a character who is defined by their ability to inflict damage and destruction in an environment where that actually means very little, and it's not my fault that you feel you're being restricted in your character because the only way you feel your character can deal with an insult is to find this person within the "world" and hurt them. You make these decisions based on the limitations of the environment when creating the persona you're going to play, and then complain when the environment restricts you later.

That's what the OpNet and Fiction boards stories that are consided OpNet canon are, for better or for worse. There are PBEM's, TT's, and even ST ran forums on this site where you can have those stats and those character concepts apply to something other than simple interaction.

[Magus]

Well spoken. The following is merely personal opinion but please take it as interested in your characters while there being things about them of greater interest than their earth scorching power.

I am more interested in how Preston deals with the temptation (on the part of his family) to ask a question than I am in how someone invaded the Citadel of Doom, defeated 100 Totentanz duplicates before retiring to depths of their sanctum sanctorum to enjoy connubial bliss with the rescued princess in between reading passages from the book of infinite knowledge (aka the AB Core Book). I will read the Citadel of Doom story but only if its extremely well written and engage my attention in the first paragraph. Otherwise my interests lie in other areas.

I want to know what Prodigy does for fun even though I likely lack the intelligence to understand it.

I want to know what Jager does besides being the most dangerous man alive.

I want to know who Widget is mind blowing at the moment, how and why.

I want to see more witty repartee between the irrepressible Tarot and the dour Gerald Haney and understand how such unlikely personalities became friends.

I want to hear how Tangent felt when the secret service agent he was dating broke up with him (read the story if you don't know what I'm talking about).

I want to hear what a nova does when its the weekend, you have the power of a god and there's nothing to do. From someone OTHER than Tarot and Gerald for a change.

I want to hear what Walker feels like the morning after having done something really embarrassing or stupid when altering his biology. Transcendence is all well and good but it doesn't explain waking up in a mini-skirt and bra next to a pack of hounds.

Hasn't there ever been a Terat that felt the tug on their heartstring only to realize it was a baseline they were looking at?

What about a Utopian that frightened people while trying to do the right thing?

Stories about novas winning can be interesting but why is it inconceivable that they ever lost or failed?

I want to know what drives a relatively benign nova in a beastial form to become a little more dangerous every day despite wanting the opposite.

Merely some thoughts for consideration.

[Jager]

::sigh::

Which causes me to ask the question again:

Why is it necessary to limit on-line canon characters, since they can't do anything to any other poster without poster consent and they can't alter the world without moderator consent?

The limiting of an individual poster so that one person doesn't flood the environment with uber-character begs the answer of "so what, it isn't like I can do anything more than any other poster."

A limit of two characters (or three in really special circumstances) per posters is an artifical construct. In theory, it could effect everyone here, but with the usual poster longevity that isn't likely to be a consideration. Essentially this ruling favors the discarding of characters at a certain point in their development, if you want to develop other characters along to a place you want them to go. I think that sucks.

[Hugin]

Okay Jags, I'm not particularly eloquent so I'm going to just fire of a couple shots.

Why is it necessary to limit on-line canon characters, since they can't do anything to any other poster without poster consent and they can't alter the world without moderator consent?

Because we're trying to tell stories about a world and the characters in it.

This world has been described to us in the Aberrant Books.

This world is NOT populated solely by Q6 monsters. This world doesn't have a majority of Q6 monsters. This world doesnt' even have a significant percentage of Q6 monsters. This world simply has a few Q6 monsters.

So, when you start breeding Q6 monsters like rabbits and bringing them all here, you and you by your lonesome are trying to re-define the entire world.

It makes zero sense for out of 30 some odd novas who happen to get together in this OpNet Paradise for 20% or more of them to be the upper 1% of all novas. Zero sense. Nothing about this place defines it as the gathering ground for the gods among the gods.

So, by pumping this place full of your own brand of Quantum Cheese without regard for how the world is supposed to look your are trying to force me to accept your world view. FAQ says canon is the default and even in 2015 Q6 shouldn't be present in these numbers.

Characters should be the exceptional? Yes, you're right. But in Aberrant, just by being Novas they are exceptional. The node alone makes them exceptional. Hell, Q5 makes them the exceptional of the exceptional. Q6, well thats just self-indulgence.

Limiting Q6 doesn't, except in the smallest way, limit you developing your characters. Bastian's a Q6? Why? You've never once told a story in which him having a Q6 was completely necesarry. So, you've developed a fun character and not needed to have him be GOD. Except in your own head. Jager's a Q6? Except for one occasion in which you didn't even write out did he really need to be a Q6 for him to do what he's done. Only one occasion in a bazillion posts. You've created and developed a character that didn't need Q6. Preston is the only character you've written that consistently is actually presented as a Q6 (and as I've said to you before, very well done at that)

So, one out of a bunch actually seems to need the Q6 to be played as you developed them. Why have the rest? So you feel good? So that when you do get into a cooperative fiction and something happens you get to say "Well, I'm tougher than you" and suddenly you can point at that big 6?

What makes up character development? Well, off the top of my head I can see:

NPCs

Interactions

History

Opinions

Beliefs

IC Goals

Sense of Humor

Heck, Personality which is HUGE.

Power Level

9 items thought up in 48 seconds and Q6 is only one of them. That's hardly stifling the development of a character. Unless to you that is the only defining characteristic of the character and I don't believe that you look at it that way.

In one of our discussions once you used the analogy of having been driving 65 and suddenly being told the speed limit is 45. That's not accurate. With the exception of Preston you haven't been driving 65. You've been doing 34-40 mph like the rest of us. But now that you've been told 45 is the limit you're freaking out.

So I ask you, is the characters power level so all fire important to you that if you cannot play a Q6 then it isn't fun anymore?

On the chaffing at limits I say join the party. It's a cooperative environment and we all accept certain limitations. We have to. If we're playing TT characters we have to dump huge sections of the characters experience so that we can fit in. That's a limitation. If we want to play a Utopian we have to have some justification why we talk to half the folks here. Thats a limitation. I had to drop Micheal. Cornelius wasn't allowed to do his Blue Monkey Freak-Out. Cin got shouted down for some of her additions. Vixen left because her desire for a more four-color universe was unfulfilled. Ashnod has some of the "incorrect" Terat interpretations thrown in her face every day. Totem isn't getting to beat the shit out of people he honestly thinks his characters should. Sakurako can't whip out the anime tech as much as she'd like. These are all limitations, we all deal with them. We've all had to weigh the positives and negatives and decide if we want to stay. Now you do the same. You having limitations put on you doesn't make you special, it doesn't make you a martyr. It makes you one of the crowd.

[Wakinyan]

Wow it's an interesting read and all of you put forth some superb efforts however I think you all have greatly missed the mark.

This is a game. If not then it is glorified Fan Fiction devoted to a game.

When we agree to all sit down and play in the same sandbox that can possibly makes some of us antagonists against one another. That makes enemies. Enemies who could harm one another in one form or another. If we all exist in the same world then some form of conflict MUST happen. Otherwise this is all static. We have to create generic antagonists in order to tell any compelling story of conflict. Why? Because we can't do anything to cannon NPCs. We can't do anything to other PC without their express written consent.

Some of you seem to entirely miss the point. You want to be a Cull and not expect to be taken down. You want to be a leader of the Teragen and not expect anyone to take a shot at you? I play a Nova on the brink that will likely lose in the end. The story of that conflict has compelled me. When others goad him and incense him that isn't just a conflict between my PC and their PC it is a conflict within himself. Humans in reality kill each other for less reason.

This is a game, a game we are all trying to run together. Their is conflict, their has to be. If there is not then what compells and drives us? How many stories can we write that dances and tip toes around the fact that while enemies exist on here their isn't a thing that can be done about it because something far more powerful than Quantum protects people here.

Some of you can't seem to look past this notion of. "Well you made a powerful PC so you must just want to kill people." And continue to rant and rave about that. There are more ways to deal with antagonists than that and we all know it. The real trouble here is not that people don't want their characters to die. They simply don't want their character defeated in any form. The bruising of Ego cannot be tolerated.

[Timeslip]

OK, I've taken a stab at a fiction piece to give Timeslip a kick in the pants on pursuing Q6. I know I've got a heluva long way to go before I can justify it, but it's a start.

[Jager]

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
Okay Jags, I'm not particularly eloquent so I'm going to just fire of a couple shots.

I wouldn't expect anything less.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
Because we're trying to tell stories about a world and the characters in it.

This world has been described to us in the Aberrant Books.

This world is NOT populated solely by Q6 monsters. This world doesn't have a majority of Q6 monsters. This world doesnt' even have a significant percentage of Q6 monsters. This world simply has a few Q6 monsters.

First off, why the term "Q6 Monsters? Is Ashnod monsterous? Has Jager done "monsterous" thing while here? Preston?

This board does not profess to be a representative body of the nova population. Moreover, in 2008 there are multiple NPCs who are at Q5 and have alot of power. That is the world they are showing us. The next logical step is the growth to Q:6, following in the steps of Pax and Mal. It isn't retirement to some far off asteroid field, or monestary.
In the books, the Q:6ers they talk about are movers and shakers, even if their power levels are not well known.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
So, when you start breeding Q6 monsters like rabbits and bringing them all here, you and you by your lonesome are trying to re-define the entire world.

Redefine the entire world? The game allows for the steady progression to Q:6. The xp cost is the same formula for levels 2 through 5. There are no other pre-reqs required by the game. Pages 120 and 121 of the Aberrant Player's Guide clearly discuss the possibilities of higher level powers and Quantum.
The quote is:
As of 2015, characters with Quanutm 7 and a good spread of powers are on par with Ceastus Pax.
What does that mean to you?
To me, it means that by 2015, there can be PC's of that level, mainly because the book tells me so.
In 2008, Q:6 is rare and there is only one Q:8, but SEVEN years have passed.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
It makes zero sense for out of 30 some odd novas who happen to get together in this OpNet Paradise for 20% or more of them to be the upper 1% of all novas. Zero sense. Nothing about this place defines it as the gathering ground for the gods among the gods.

It makes zero sense to you. I am glad my opinion means nothing.
Nothing about this place says it isn't a gathering place for Gods, either. Not until the moderators decided it would be that way, anyway.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
So, by pumping this place full of your own brand of Quantum Cheese without regard for how the world is supposed to look your are trying to force me to accept your world view. FAQ says canon is the default and even in 2015 Q6 shouldn't be present in these numbers.

There are no precise numbers of Q:6ers ever listed. If it was about my world and how it was supposed to look, I would be proposing that people HAD to be Q:6, but I'm not.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
Characters should be the exceptional? Yes, you're right. But in Aberrant, just by being Novas they are exceptional. The node alone makes them exceptional. Hell, Q5 makes them the exceptional of the exceptional. Q6, well thats just self-indulgence.

There are multiple examples of novas being Q:5 and even erupting that way. For some novas, Q:5 can be the starting point from which they grow. I thought the game allowed that.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
Limiting Q6 doesn't, except in the smallest way, limit you developing your characters.

If it is such a trifling deal to you, why support such a policy? All I want to do is maintain that possibility for my characters as long as I act responsibly with them.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
Bastian's a Q6? Why? You've never once told a story in which him having a Q6 was completely necesarry. So, you've developed a fun character and not needed to have him be GOD. Except in your own head.

Correct, its in my own head until moderations steps in. You point out a really good example, btw. What has Bastian done to ever make other posters wary of him? Hasn't he been played responsibly? The only poster who has ever dealt with Bastian in a "powerful" manner has been Vixen, and we talked about it. How he was indeed a seasoned terat and she was a newbie. She used the experience as a growth experience and we did a pretty good fiction together about it.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
Jager's a Q6? Except for one occasion in which you didn't even write out did he really need to be a Q6 for him to do what he's done. Only one occasion in a bazillion posts. You've created and developed a character that didn't need Q6.

Proof that someone can live in the limelight, or close to it, and not have everything known about them.
So, Jager is usually cautious in the way he publically displays his powers. Perhaps the lesson here is that he feels it is more important that other novas learn to do for themselves instead of having Jager do things for them. Maybe I see Jager being more of a mentoring type, who doesn't want novas to die needlessly, or having to deal with more mundane aspects of existance while discovering who they are as novas.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
Preston is the only character you've written that consistently is actually presented as a Q6 (and as I've said to you before, very well done at that)

Thank you. Again, while Pretercognition is a bitch of a power to have in an open environment, I hope I have done a good job with him.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
So, one out of a bunch actually seems to need the Q6 to be played as you developed them. Why have the rest?

-Because I have been reasonably responsibile to date dealing with powerful characters and not wrecking the forum.
-Because the game, Aberrant, allows for characters to grow to that power level.
-Because up until I asked for Neil to become Q:6, there wasn't a limit on how many characters a poster could have at that level.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
So you feel good?

Yes. This is a hobby site and I thought the reason to come here was to have fun, while not wrecking the fun of others.
Have my characters to date, played the way they are, even after you knew they were Q:6, ruined your fun?

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
So that when you do get into a cooperative fiction and something happens you get to say "Well, I'm tougher than you" and suddenly you can point at that big 6?

When has that happened? Even in a cooperative fiction, I couldn't do that, Q:6 or not. The other posters can simply void the fiction if they feel like it at any time.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
What makes up character development? Well, off the top of my head I can see:


NPCs
Interactions
History
Opinions
Beliefs
IC Goals
Sense of Humor
Heck, Personality which is HUGE.
Power Level


9 items thought up in 48 seconds and Q6 is only one of them. That's hardly stifling the development of a character. Unless to you that is the only defining characteristic of the character and I don't believe that you look at it that way.

Good list. Why is banning a player from getting Q:6 important to the moderators then? Power level is only one aspect of how I see my characters as well, but I would like the freedom to at least propose that any character I develop would have the opportunity to become Q:6. As it stands now, an ordinance was specifically designed to end that possibility.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
In one of our discussions once you used the analogy of having been driving 65 and suddenly being told the speed limit is 45. That's not accurate. With the exception of Preston you haven't been driving 65. You've been doing 34-40 mph like the rest of us. But now that you've been told 45 is the limit you're freaking out.

Right. A better analogy is that after a good many years driving, and after making a good deal of money, I would like to drive a Ferrari. After a bit, I would like to drive several Ferraris. Now, because the belief seems to be that there are only a limited number of Ferraris, that I shouldn't be allowed to get any more. Essentially, I have to "turn in" several of my older cars if I want a new Ferrari.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
So I ask you, is the characters power level so all fire important to you that if you cannot play a Q6 then it isn't fun anymore?

It isn't fun to have my advancement artificially frozen because of moderation opinion. The game doesn't say "There are forever a limited number of Q:6 novas", or even "a group of novas can only have so many at Q:6."
Nor has this forum ever been seen as a realstic GameWorld window on the world.

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
On the chaffing at limits I say join the party. It's a cooperative environment and we all accept certain limitations. We have to. If we're playing TT characters we have to dump huge sections of the characters experience so that we can fit in. That's a limitation. If we want to play a Utopian we have to have some justification why we talk to half the folks here. Thats a limitation. I had to drop Micheal. Cornelius wasn't allowed to do his Blue Monkey Freak-Out. Cin got shouted down for some of her additions. Vixen left because her desire for a more four-color universe was unfulfilled. Ashnod has some of the "incorrect" Terat interpretations thrown in her face every day. Totem isn't getting to beat the shit out of people he honestly thinks his characters should. Sakurako can't whip out the anime tech as much as she'd like.

-This isn't a TT game.
-The Utopian's limitations are RolePlaying in nature, not a matter of game mechanics or moderation limitations.
-You could have a functioning AI by using the Gadget rules.
-Cornelius brought in several non-canon elements, such as the disappearence of all chimps on Earth, a continuous gateway to another completely terraformed world, and other FutureTech out the yin-yang. Then he added Alien contact to the mix. Yep, sounds just like having 5 different characters at Q:6.
-Cin brought in non-canon information as fact from her TT game. It is usually accepted that PC's don't go around killing Mal and the rest of the Teragen, or things like that.
-This isn't a four-colored game. It tells us so.
-The game tells us that there are different outlooks on what is and isn't terat thought.
-The forum already had the "you can't maliciously bash my character" clause in there.
-Nor is this an anime game, though Endeavor has shown amazing longevity. Perhaps she is more than an anime concept?

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
These are all limitations, we all deal with them. We've all had to weigh the positives and negatives and decide if we want to stay. Now you do the same. You having limitations put on you doesn't make you special, it doesn't make you a martyr. It makes you one of the crowd.

Incorrect. It does make me special. A limitation was created to specifically stop me from doing a non-continuity threatening action. A limitation that enforced the gameworld view of a select number of mods because they don't like the idea of any player writing for so many Q:6 characters.
There was no game mechanics reason. There was nothing in the books that said what numbers we were dealing with, only that it was rare.
We don't count the number of Q:5 individuals here, even though they are exceptional (your own words).

Then there was the addition that everyone could have two Q:6ers, which meant only two posters (that I am aware of) were actually limited.
Assuming everyone here eventually has two such characters and there are roughly 20 such posters, that will mean we have over 40 such novas here. What then?

Basically, I don't want Q:6 to do anything for anyone else but me. The examples you have given only show that I haven't been bullying anyone with the power I've had to date. I don't understand the fear that I will attempt any such action in the future.
Again, you didn't even realize most of my characters were even at Q:6, so what does it matter to you if one more of my characters advances?

[Vixen]

Quote:

Originally posted by James 'Prodigy' Meehan:
Vixen left because her desire for a more four-color universe was unfulfilled.

You are incorrect, sir.

[Jager]

Btw, I've missed you here.

[Timeslip]

This is getting ugly, folks, and it doesn't need to do so.

So Jager has a number of Q6 characters...and? It isn't as if he's used it to beat down anyone and everyone who looks at his characters funny.

So limits have been put on the number of Q6 characters...and? Because of Jager's non-abuse of Q6, it should be easy enough to "retrofit" all but a couple of his characters to Q5.

Really, it's not that huge a deal, at least not huge enough to need to turn into the kind of -- to be blunt -- hurtful OOC drama that is playing out in this thread.

Heck, my one character -- Timeslip -- was predicated entirely around the concept of Crosstime Travel. This is a character that, right at the core, was designed for and needed Q6. Imagine my surprise when I found out that that was going to be out of her grasp on this board for quite a long time to come. I didn't blow a gasket; I just cut her back a notch, redescribed her previously stated CT experiences as "visits from an alternate Timeslip", amended her bio, and started working on moving her forward. Inconvenient? Certainly. Game-wrecking? Not at all. And when the day does come that she hits the big Q6 and figures out Crosstime Travel, it will open the doors for some interesting stories, both independent and group.

[Magus]

Quote:

Originally posted by Totem:
Wow it's an interesting read and all of you put forth some superb efforts however I think you all have greatly missed the mark.

That was insightful. Discounting the statement that Prime is either a game or a fan fiction, neither of which is intrinsically better than the other, there are some points I would seek clarification on.

Speaking strictly IC there is conflict but lets overlook that as well for a moment. While I find it absurd to believe that a nova described as a quantum powered James Bond of the 21st century would care in the slightest what one foul mouthed dilettante in the middle of nowhere would have to say, even more preposterous that he would act on any ill feelings and substantiate how easy it is to get to him, there are other issues and many of them relate back to ego as you pointed out.

The story of a lone nova about to succumb to madness is one told as well at Q2 with no destructive abilities as it is at high quantum levels with a vast array of destructive options. Yet more often we see the player select the greater power and then explain that somehow its necessary to "the story". I am sorry but I do not see it if the story is what has been described. It is not a surprise that the aforementioned foul mouthed dilettante would be the one to be break the last straw on the camels back as you point but that does not seem to be the full story. The character of Tarot could very well be the one that drives the character of Totem over the edge but that doesn't seem to be what we're discussing as Tarot has NOT driven Totem over the edge nor has Totem gone on a rampage. How is exposure to Tarot any different as a goad from the racism Totem sees every day? Why hasn't Totem gone into a rage and destroyed his village, some bigots or a church of Archangel Michael? Why is there anyone that looks sideways at Totem and if there isn't why haven't you indicated that?

Personally I greatly like the view expressed by Ashnod, however, if you choose to see the site as 'game' rather than a place of interaction then you have rules in places to allow it. It is not the rules you had in table top, it may not be consistent with what you desire or feel is best but the rules do exist. Have you tried to use them? Have you spoken with Tarot's player and tried to arrange something? Have you failed to reach agreement with Tarot's player and still feeling there was validity to the issue petitioned the moderators?

I honestly do NOT agree with the view of Prime as game in the manner you seem to. It is not so much that I feel you are wrong, as that the results of that view when it is ultimately taken to its logical extreme is going to subtract all that I enjoy about this site. The cure being worse than the disease is a simple summary of my views on that. Characters who serve as aggravation to others for whatever reason will be removed. As a player I have some knowledge of the character Jager and therefore know it would be useless to attempt to attack him directly but the other characters on the site are not so gifted. All of them are vulnerable, all of them would fall and then the site is no more.

If I want to game on that level I have options ranging from Doctor Zero's game, to arranging my own PBEM game to simply arranging my own TT game. It appears that you want to tell a story but ultimately want the freedom to use the characters and creations of others to serve as a backdrop to that story. I don't find that particularly enticing as an offer but if I've misunderstood or you have a better offer please make it and I will consider it. At the very least I'll hear you out. If the fundamental idea appeals, i.e. you want to use my characters and creations as something other than a backdrop, then I will give it genuine consideration even if I elect to make a counter-offer rather than outright accept your offer.

[Jager]

TimeSlip, you, the player, still have hope of taking TimeSlip, the character, to Q:6 and developing CrossTime Travel.

I don't have that option, unless I gut, or drop, other characters. Other characters who have interacted here for years.

How would you feel that if after a year of effort, you submitted TimeSlip for Q:6 then learned that the mods had decided to put a cap on the number of Q:6ers on the site?

The story of a lone nova about to succumb to madness is one told as well at Q2 with no destructive abilities as it is at high quantum levels with a vast array of destructive options.

Not really. The person who faces madness when the only life they affect is their own is a different story than one who fears their madness may affect dozens, hundreds, or even thousands.

It may not be a story you are interested in, but it is one I would like to see.

[Magus]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jager:
It may not be a story you are interested in, but it is one I would like to see.

Likely a difference in tastes as I'm made mine known to the public in a post from yesterday. I would very much like to draw your attention to the fact that to the best of my knowledge we have yet to see those "dozens, hundreds, or even thousands." We see one. The nova causing it all and it seems to be a common shortfall that those wanting great power are those most likely to tell stories of their great power while least likely to tell stories about the people affected.

I would also like to point out that you allowed the possibility of a number ranging from dozens to thousands. There is no guarantee implied but tell me a story wherein it is a dozen that are affected and they are as integral to the story as the nova then I may be more amenable to listening to the one that affects thousands.

Edit; This is not an indictment of the way you play, James. Rather an observation on the boards and made after reading a great deal of sometimes self indulgent fiction stored in the archives.

[Jager]

Correct, but a dozen lousy fictions doesn't mean we should stop allowing fictions to be written. More to the point, if someone wants to play a super-powerful character that only effect themselves, what gives us the right to stop them?

I'm all for protecting continuity and keeping the game true to the rules. This is a matter of RPing tastes, not moderation.

[Jager]

Also, what's wrong with self-indulgent fiction. It isn't like its required reading.

[Wakinyan]

Quote:

Originally posted by Psimon:
While I find it absurd to believe that a nova described as a quantum powered James Bond of the 21st century would care in the slightest what one foul mouthed dilettante in the middle of nowhere would have to say, even more preposterous that he would act on any ill feelings and substantiate how easy it is to get to him, there are other issues and many of them relate back to ego as you pointed out.

That is the point. What holds humans back from braining one another during flame wars on the Net as it is now? Not much more than annonimity that the Net grants us and the scale and distances between people. When those things are not issues people have killed one another for nothing more than insults or events that happen inside computer generated worlds. Take this into account in a Nova age where distance isn't an issue and societies laws may or may not be able to stop you and a whole new situation arises. What stops someone with a predisposition to anger from acting upon it?

Quote:

Originally posted by Psimon:
The story of a lone nova about to succumb to madness is one told as well at Q2 with no destructive abilities as it is at high quantum levels with a vast array of destructive options. Yet more often we see the player select the greater power and then explain that somehow its necessary to "the story". I am sorry but I do not see it if the story is what has been described.

I disagree for two reasons. One in game reason is that higher taint means you usually have more power since it was easier to gain said power. Second, The fact that power increases the scope and the scale of the story. The bigger they are the harder they fall. How do you stop a rampage by the Hulk for example when nothing can stop him. This is scale this is scope. While madness at lower level can and is a compelling story it would be a more singular level story rather than a broad stroke that some might prefer. Not invalidating either but I am saying that both can and do exist.

Quote:

Originally posted by Psimon:
Have you tried to use them? Have you spoken with Tarot's player and tried to arrange something? Have you failed to reach agreement with Tarot's player and still feeling there was validity to the issue petitioned the moderators?

To be honest I have never tried or asked. For the most part it has always remained and the level of board IC chatter. I know all to well what is the result of such things here. Plus I have been insulted outright OOC so the issue of Totem and Tarot is moot to me now since for the most part I know it would be difficult for me to seperate IC and OOC due to that.

Quote:

Originally posted by Psimon:
Characters who serve as aggravation to others for whatever reason will be removed. As a player I have some knowledge of the character Jager and therefore know it would be useless to attempt to attack him directly but the other characters on the site are not so gifted. All of them are vulnerable, all of them would fall and then the site is no more.

See this is exactly what I was trying to say wouldn't happen. There are other ways of conflicts resolving than death of one of the characters. In fact the book even discourages that Novas kills one another constantly. There is a lot of rivalries that swing back and forth. But we don't get that here. No one can beat anyone else in any real regard. Therefor no substantial conflict takes place other than Opnet board bickering.

Quote:

Originally posted by Psimon:
At the very least I'll hear you out. If the fundamental idea appeals, i.e. you want to use my characters and creations as something other than a backdrop, then I will give it genuine consideration even if I elect to make a counter-offer rather than outright accept your offer.

The point is this. This is a interactive fan fiction. We all lend to it. However there are ground rules. These rules are more than what the moderators have set forth to us in the FAQ. There is a book that gives us a background to the world and rules to play within it. We have to abide by that or else diverge. If we diverge then anyone can write anything they want and we all have to accept that you have to pick and choose what does and does not apply. That idea is preposterous if we are trying to claim we all exist in the same story together. We have to accept that some things we don't want to happen might happen. I know none of you can look past this as my attempt to say "Ugh me smack you all down with uber character ugh." But to be honest this is me as a ST realizing a flaw to this system and saying. "There are ways to fix it and make it better for everyone."

I have not posted much at all in the past few months because over the past year and a half I have been playing it the same issues come again and again. Everytime I step forward and say. "Hey there is a better way." I get the same responses and hinted accusation. So do as you will. If you don't think it is broke then don't try to fix it and continue to resist me from at least trying to contribute.

I now realize I am articulating my case poorly because no one ever seems to see or understand let alone agree with what I am trying to accomplish.

[Magus]

James;

Nothing is wrong with it but I don't read it either.

The point is that we both have stories we'd like to read, at opposite ends of the power spectrum, and neither one of us have gotten to read one yet. To me that indicates that the moderation doesn't affect the stories we see.

Totem;

I'm out of time at the moment but I will return to this later. For now I would point out that madness doesn't require taint, nor does taint require power. That's a mechanic of the game.

I do not ignore your contributions. I do not agree with you on this issue and am trying to make my reservations known to you. There are a hundred ways to go about this and yours are no less and no more valid than the other ninty-nine which is why I say that you are not wrong but rather that there are ramifications that I feel make the outcome you desire an unworkable one.

[Jager]

Well, if I wanted certain stories to be canon, that has changed.

[Hugin]

Okay James. Heaven will Fall and Hell will freeze before you and I agree on this issue it seems. That's cool.

Same with you Totem.

I've read both of your opinions and I don't find them persuasive. You've read mine I assume and aren't buying it. Fine.

Personally, I like the way things are, the way the rules are and I'm not going to support a change.

As for Cull, no one has ever approached me wanting to stop him. I'd have been open to it, he was getting boring. Now things have changed and I'd like to wear him a bit longer before I dump him. In fact he started out as an experiment. How fucking nuts could someone be and still have folks actually willing to talk to him. I was suprised to be honest.

[Kirby1024]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jager:
Well, if I wanted certain stories to be canon, that has changed.

And why, precisely, is that your right?

[Neil Preston]

Kirby, if it harms no one, why isn't it a right for everyone?

In my opinion, we are better off the freer we are. Likewise, I understand my freedom ends at another's "space". I don't want to tred on anyone.

[Magus]

For everyone;

After a great deal of searching through the archives I finally found this . I strongly believe it has a bearing on the issues at hand. This thread was started by the player of the character Widget who argued with some success that a major problem is players desiring their beliefs surrounding their characters to be objectively true with absolutely no possibility that the belief might be sheerly a subjective matter and/or subject to individual interpretation.

I would recommend reading the thread at this point in the current discussion.

Totem;

You've not been forgotten or ignored, my evening is simply busy and it may not be until tomorrow that I have time to read your post as carefully as I should and respond. In the meantime I think it might be productive for you to construct some examples on how your idea of interaction would work. Then, rather than argue philosophy we could see exactly what you are describing in action and pose direct questions.

Agreement is not promised, however, some examples would decrease the possibility that your points and goals are being misunderstood.

James;

You're correct but that statement you just made has always been true. You can't have forgotten Quantum Promise or Doctor Cornelius.

[Jager]

I had a longer response, but its pointless.

[Vixen]

It's not pointless. Talk to us. I can't speak for anyone else, but no one behind this keyboard's going to give you a hard time.

[Magus]

Quote:

Originally posted by Totem:
That is the point.

Certainly though its also a point that does not take into account the artificial nature of this site. Who is going to reach out and brain someone? Certainly not Ashnod who would have no use for this site with so many other venues open to maximize her gains while minimizing her expenditures. Nor Jager who has better things to do than become upset with anyone that has no concept of the life he leads. As you've described Totem I have difficulty imagining him wasting his time here when there are so many sites in the game world that would welcome him with open arms for the chance of being that close to any nova. Utopians conversing with Terats on philosophy in public is too ridiculous to even consider.

Psimon would not log onto a site and provide his real name nor any details of life to a mixed group such as this anymore than I would do so on a site in this world yet for the sake of interaction Psimon does so and in the doing of it I am asking for the other players to suspend disbelief in a small way.

Quote:

Originally posted by Totem:
I disagree for two reasons.

Without invoking game mechanics and a predisposition for the taint taking its toll mentally, madness is madness. No one will care in the end or even the middle whether its "the taint" or a little too much / too little of a particular enzyme. I will agree that power increases the scope of the story but my opinions on story content and execution has been broached twice in the last 24 hours on this thread alone.

I truly enjoyed your story on Tangent playing tourist in Washington as the well written piece it was but I don't mistake it for an objective report of life in the Nova Age. You had the freedom in a work of fiction to set the stage and place the marks for the character anywhere you chose without advice or consent from others. That is not the case in the opnet. I would likely be the first to point out the report was major news in an age where information is instantaneous and the Department of Defense has its own novas. It was still a well written story that I enjoyed as I might enjoy a well written and drawn issue of the Fantastic Four without asking the obvious question of where the Avengers, the Defenders and the X-Men were during the alien invasion. As I bought an FF book for far too much money I am willing to overlook the rest in order to enjoy that FF book. The Opent isn't a Tangent, Tarot, Psimon or Jager book therefore I tend to view it differently.

Quote:

Originally posted by Totem:
To be honest I have never tried or asked.

Information that is presented as real or objectively verifiable is factual. My purpose in asking the question was not to discredit or provoke you but rather to determine if there were facts involved or opinions. Without facts we're discussing opinions and whether we agree or disagree they are still only opinions. Having tried to use the system and presenting the results as evidence would substantiate conclusions on how well the system works.

I have empathy for not desiring to interact with someone seen as a problematic or insulting poster.

Quote:

Originally posted by Totem:
See this is exactly what I was trying to say wouldn't happen.

This is a point where your examples on how the system you propose is going to work would be useful. I look forward to seeing them and hope they take into account players whose multitude of characters share similar views on lashing out and how the reaction of a player whose taken something IC personally can be reigned in to conform with their role play of the character and hopefully the continued meaningful interaction of players.

I also hope you keep my example to Dreamer of the magic user killing character in mind but that is a personal preference not an obligation.

Quote:

Originally posted by Totem:
The point is this. This is a interactive fan fiction. We all lend to it. However there are ground rules.

I am of the belief that I can tell nearly any story within the shadow of canon, even that which appears to break canon, so long as I provide a rationale of why it does not on which to suspend disbelief. Understand that there are probably moderators who experience a sphincter spasm whenever they hear such things but until they tell me "no" I have passably solid evidence that it is true.

On the remainder of your paragraph I can only say again that its not possible to evaluate your goal further without examples on which to illustrate your points to us and then we can discuss merits and shortfalls.

[Magus]

Bump.

[Vox Via]

One thing i have striven to do is to place my charatcers in areas that do not have many of othe other players on the board.

Vanguard has a few places that he Chills out in, and I do nto think any of the Opnet novas really go anywhere near them. The biggest place he calls home is Denver.

But my point is this, we as a board have to share a world. I can't really say that Vanguard has an underground fortress in Boston, or Chi-town. As well some novas would notice it. I can't really have Vanguard go to those places and be shocked when other novas show up.No, Preston your cop doesn't notice the riot.

[Tarot]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jager:
Tarot, I apologize. I didn't give you the same opportunities that I would have expected for my self. I let my anger get the better of me.

It's cool. Sorry you felt the way you did about it.

We'll just keep the back and forth down to a minimum between Jager and Tarot.

[Wakinyan]

Quote:

Originally posted by Psimon:
On the remainder of your paragraph I can only say again that its not possible to evaluate your goal further without examples on which to illustrate your points to us and then we can discuss merits and shortfalls.

I have been running through a few scenarios in my head and come to the following examples. These scenarios ask the question of what should be done not what I think could be.

1. Prodigy's Chysalis. During his Chrysalis let us say Jager suspecting he was in Chrysalis wanted to find and capture him while he was incapacitated. Prodigy's player could of course say no to this however what real reason could he reject it? ICly he is helpless other than the preperations and safe guards he has set up to hide and protect himself. (which could be formidable) But Jager is the cream of the Nova Hunting crop. How does this kind of impass get decided? It could lead to a great story if it happened but... Because someone wants to protect (or even overprotect) their character that story cannot happen. Seriously on the flip side Jager doing this could be endangering his life or someone important to him as they may be held hostage to exchange prodigy. This is unrealized drama.

2. Typhoon vs. Cull. Typhoon comes across Cull being Cull in the open sea. A battle ensues. Who wins? Does it have to end in death? What repercussions are felt on the board. Cull being a loner means not much but what if it was Leviathan? Even a Cannon NPC being involved would be a great thing to do. But we cannot really involve him. But once again we cripple our own story telling abilities because we cannot take risks.

I will come up with more as we go but I welcome input into resolutions on these examples. Personally I think that if we don't "always" have 100% total control over what happens to our characters it opens vast avenues of storytelling that normally we might not think about.

We can always tell a story about winning but the stories about losing are just as interesting and even sometimes more compelling.

[Magus]

Begin Part 1:

In the following we will be setting aside the fact I disagree with your assumption of NPrime as game in order to address your examples, which are questions rather than examples of a system you feel would be an improvement.

Firstly, I would prefer that you had chosen other characters for example 1 as I have previously stipulated to a player that I would not become involved with OOC discussions on the nature and capabilities of their character for several reasons. Therefore I will not be engage on that example other than to point out that what you characterize as 'unrealized drama' is that of a completely passive character A with absolutely no interaction potential while character B has a disproportionately large interaction potential based partly in that character B is the only one that can 'interact'. Taking this a step further, any possible 'drama' appears to be solely of benefit of character B and player using the circumstances of character A as a plot device with which to tell their monologue. Unfortunately, we cannot discuss the example further in the current circumstances.

Example 2 is free of such restrictions however I believe you've overlooked the basic fact that the situation arising, Typhoon meeting Cull in the middle of the ocean, is the result of a previous agreement between two players not the results of a roll of die and consulting a random encounter table. It is no more valid a result than the two never meeting. While I dislike generalizing from limited examples, it would appear the heart of your improved system seems to be a desire for interactions that are in some degree unilateral in nature. I agree that lacking one hundred percent control of a character places that character in situations that are challenging to both the player and the character. It is an accepted axiom of table of top play immediately after the first axiom that conflict is interesting.

However, I would also point out that 'challenge' is not something players readily accept without some sort of bias and there must exist a degree of trust that does NOT inherently exist in this dynamic. Related to this, consider as well the simple matter of taste. Some do not wish, or are not suited, to engage in lengthy discussions of ethics or philosophy. They lack the knowledge, the desire, or the enjoyment of those matters while others can think of nothing else and are bored beyond belief by what passes for casual or even deep discussion. Definitions of what constitutes conflict is likewise contested even if conflict is seen to be as simplistic as combat. I'm very certain you've encountered STs or players who absolutely must have at least one combat encounter, if not more, or feel the gaming session wasted time while others feel even infrequent combat is ludicrous to the point they question their storyteller vigorously to explain/justify why the attacker would respond with violence, let alone feel they are opponents in anything but a capricious display of force in a pseudo-random encounter, all the while seeking to explore the underlying rationale in order to assess validity.

You have only to look further back in the thread to see a fundamental disagreement between James and I, in that case on what stories are worth reading and whether the simple matter of someone penning a story is sufficient to make it worth reading. While I have a taste for stories that show a high degree of interaction, responsibility and repercussions that concentrate on the details of the world around the characters, James enjoys sweeping epics involving vast powers centered around individuals. Neither of us are objectively correct in what makes a story intrinsically worthwhile and both our tastes are equally valid for us as individuals.

Why is the preceding relevant? Using the example of James and I; we are highly familiar with each other having known each other for over five years. In that entire time he has allowed me to determine the actions of his character exactly once while simultaneously noting that the results were 'wrong but acceptable'. How does knowing this affect your premise that I should be in a position to be allowed, even required, to write for his character and he for mine?

End Part 1.