Jump to content

Lou Anne Burgess

Recommended Posts

I'm posting this in a seperate thread so as to not derail the discussion going on other places.

At the risk of coming off as a dick,

Nova... you may have stopped doing much/anything with 2018 because of the jumped the shark & thus needs a reboot... Please don't forget that the majority of people who haven't been posting are in that category because of time.

We don't have enough.

To come in today and read that a poll has been conducted already since sometime yesterday and that decisions are proceeding forward from that poll without regard to future voting is at best unwitting disenfranchisement, at worst; I'm not gonna go there.

Because of how insane this week has been I was still trying to write a post from Monday. I'll put parts of that in the next below.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally designed to be posted to the "Why is 2018 dead" thread... I think I caught all of the references to that thread, but I've been writing/editing during/between customer phone calls, so I may have missed stuff & not be clear different places.


I realize that I'm a newer person here. As such, I generally don't give much input on things like this. Perhaps I should have said more at other times in the past...

Unlike pretty much everyone else that's posted on the "why is 2018 dead" thread, I'm not convinced that either a hard reboot, soft reboot a David Eick reimagining is going to accomplish what people are saying they want to accomplish. I'm not even sure everyone is trying to accomplish the same goal. (Also remember that while the BSG reimagining turned out well, the same might not necessarily be said for Bionic Woman).

Why are people wanting to *change*? I know why Nova wants to, she spelled that out pretty clearly.

What are people hoping to accomplish?

Are you sure this isn’t just a ‘grass is greener’ thing?

A little background from me:

I was never one that wanted the 2008/2010. I saw it as simply a bad bandaid to the “I don’t like the Knights/Dreamer interaction because of consent” when the Vox Via situation exploded. Did it accomplish that? I guess so, the rules that 2008 created seem to force people to be accountable for their actions.

Unfortunately it also started a very hard slide away from 2018. I guess I was one of the few that found the 2008/2010 unappealing and have never really had a desire to post there. The fact that there seemed to be a dozen new characters appearing every month didn’t help matters.

Personally I'm not convinced that a reboot of 20xx is going to really make a real, long term difference. I'm also not sure that I'm interested in the way the reboot suggestion is going.

Adding Nova points for an advancement mechanic broke several games I've run at home. For one thing the 1NP = 3/6 dots is a wonky mechanic. Please remind me why people want to increase the NP cap rather than add XP after the first year or so because I don't remember seeing it discussed in my reading through the thread.

What's the plan for what's going to happen to 2018 if/when the reboot is done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I of course cannot speak for others about their own motivations but this was never about new rules and structure for myself. This is basically my thought of 'Putting right what once went wrong, and hoping his next leap is the leap home' idea for Daniel.

Whatever rules are laid out I will play by them. It's not about dots or the minutia of rules with me for this reset. It's how I tell the story of my favorite writing subject for Aberrant and who (IC and OOC) it is with. Maybe with the hindsight I have now I will have the foresight to ensure missteps taken are not done so again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicely said, Waki.

Lou Anne, you're right that some of the mechanics in Aberrant are wonky. Nobody that I know of has ever accused WW of being great game designers, and if I catch anyone saying so I'll argue against their point.

No matter how we alter or remain faithful to the core Aberrant mechanics for our setting, there are bound to be potential abuses. We're planning for that possibility with Rule #1.* Whatever else may happen, the overarching principles of the 200X reboot setting will be that good storytelling and cooperation with the other writers is paramount. Character growth in the form of changes on a character sheet are to be supported by the written body of work which has lead to that growth. This written body of work can consist of works of fiction, semi-real-time interaction in an in-character novas-only discussion forum, or in real-time in-character chat.

I am committed to ensuring that the potentially harmful actions of few--whether they are reckless writers, manipulative power-gamers, or sociopathic menaces--are checked quickly and effectively.

While the tempo of discussion has been surprisingly quick, the discussion has been a very productive one. More and more writers are speaking up to share their ideas and shape the direction of the new era. In fact, right now I see the discussion increasing in complexity instead of winding down. New threads are spawning to discuss the details of particularly thorny areas, for example. I think that we've reached a critical mass of creative input, and that we're doing some very good work.

I'd love to hear your ideas on how it can be made even better.

(* Do I need to keep putting Rule #1 in a footnote?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I tried to join 2010 and didn't feel it was very welcoming or accessible. I'm willing to join the new one because everyone will be on an equal footing and by starting from the beginning there won't be any of that 'outside looking in' feeling.

I'm also encouraged by how good of a discussion we've had in the other thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mentioned this early in the other thread, but basically, everyone seemed to have connections already and because they all knew each other OOC as well as IC, I felt like an outsider. People were friendly enough, but I didn't seem to fit in. Second, one of the threads seemed to be an open thread that many people were jumping in, but when I posted I got a PM chewing me out for stepping on the person's story. I can only assume that the other folks that joined in like I did got similar PMs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted By: Jager
I'm still willing to write in the place that started it all.
You want to write in the Opnet Opinion Poll?

Sorry, I couldn't resist. However, I did want to point out the 2018 Opnet isn't where it all started. First there was the Nova Opinion Poll, then the Opnet, 2008 Opnet and the subnet, etc... etc... etc...

2018 is the direct lineal descendent of it all. I have to admit I'm a little surprised you want to keep it intact as a seperate forum though. From various conversations over the years I was under the impression there were things you wanted to Retcon with Jager in regards to what he's done or revealed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you're just trying to be macho. wink

Seriously though, I remember the conversation where Jager listed all the alternate reality counterparts of the posting characters at Prime. It was great fun, enough so I still remember it well. However, I had the impression you later regretted Jager being quite so open about his background.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My goal for this is to find a solution that everyone is happy with, or at least, a solution that everyone can live with. This is obviously impossible, but I'd like to see how close we can get.

I understand the criticisms, or at least I think I do. If we leave 2018 open, then we will effectively be running three collaborative fiction communities, and I admit there's a strong chance that the central idea - basing a fiction community off a defunct game - won't be enough to support three at the same website.

But closing 2018 off feels... too final, perhaps? It had a nine year run. That's pretty kickass. A lot happened there, and I admit that were I in Jager's shoes I wouldn't want to close the door entirely either.

I suppose I support the reboot because my characters were never deeply tied into the setting. Most of them were off in their own corners, doin' their own thing. They'd export and import well into just about anything that's Aberrant-shaped. But I do see this as a problem and I'm unsure what to do about it.

What I hope to accomplish, to answer the questions in to OP:

I hope that this new board will take the mistakes we've learnt from 2018 and, to a lesser extent, 2010, and apply them in a way that allows for good solo and collaborative fiction, suited to the strengths and weaknesses of a collaborative fiction board, and that brings back lapsed players and brings in new ones.

I'm in favor of the change for two reasons: first, I never felt 100% at home in 2018 for a lot of reasons, and when the notion of the reboot came up I saw a chance to submit how *I* thought such an enterprise ought to be done; and secondly, love it or hate it, it's getting people to talk again, and I'm hoping that this momentum can be transferred into the setting proper.

Am I sure this isn't just a grass-is-greener thing? It's quite possible it is, I admit that. But the way I see it, the worst that could happen is that it kills board-based Aberrant collaborative fiction, and this all started with me genuinely concerned that it was dying all on its own. A revamped board won't solve the problem of people not having time to post, sadly. What I'd like this new board to do, is solve the problem of people not having the inclination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took me 5-6 hours at work yesterday to make my way through the posts from the weekend. A more unpleasant time on RPG-Post I have a hard time remembering. Between the vim, vinegar & name calling I was thoroughly disgusted by the time I got through it. It hadn't been that bad on Friday. Which lead me to wonder what happened to cause it to go south so quickly.

I think the biggest thing that caused the discord (aside from human nature) was simply that the project has (to my perception) had a shift in focus and intent from when it was originally proposed. That's not a good or bad thing in and of itself, it simply is what I see to be the cause.


Point 1: Michael posts the why is 2018 dying/dead & people respond.

Point 2: Nova suggests a revamp/reroll/reimagining of 2018 & people respond encouragingly.

Point 3: More discussion ensues. Some polls are put up.

Point 4: More discussion ensues.

Due to the time I'm not on the site and not in chat, this is where the shift happened I think.

Point 5: The Bible is posted. The bible is different from the way the discussion had been tending [on Thurs/Friday at least]

Point 6: All Hell breaks loose.

In all fairness, I think the Bible reads very reasonably. I don't remember being outraged by anything, but I do remember it being very disconnected from my implicit understanding of where things were tending and I think that's the root of the issue.

If I say we're going to revamp 2018. What does that mean?

Sure, it means that 2018 is going to be re-worked, but if 2018 is the 'high level' board, doesn't that imply that 2018-Prime will be the 'high level' board still. Granted, the discussion was geared towards moderating the power climb & keeping things from being too powerful, but still, it was to be higher powered; I thought.

The Bible for 200x (hereafter referred to as 2008-Prime states explicitly that it is to create a lower powered setting, yet one that has the potential for higher power.

These aren't mutually exclusive, but they are somewhat at odds.

That people are upset is to be expected given the shift. Whether this is the cause of some of the hysteria from the weekend, I really don't know as I wasn't here to witness it first hand.

I do want to ask though? I guess this question is aimed more for Nova rather than the board in general. Is what I've described, essentially a take 2 on the 2008 (now called 2010) set of boards what you're aiming to create with this 2008-Prime or were you really trying to redo 2018?

(apologies if this doesn't make sense, having conversations with irate people [here at work] while writing makes it difficult to keep one's train of thought going).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...