Aberrant: 200X - The 200X Bible is in this Thread. Discuss.

[Fortune's Son]

Originally Posted By: Wakinyan

Alleviate these concerns please.

Overlord is his own problem and ironically his own solution. Nothing more is relevent.

In regards to Seph, he does what he says he will or he doesn't claim to be able to do it. If you know him as well then you know that to be true. Now what are we really talking about?

And Moderation is the establishment of the court of last resort in an environment where the community is the definition of greater good. It doesn't matter whether I absolutely want a 100 NP to realize a character concept, Jager wants Q6 or Wakinyan wants to orchestrate a world defining event. That's all about selling to the community, not asking whether the moderators for permission. Get it straight; moderators are involved when adults can't resolve the problem. When two people can't resolve a problem with maturity then it gets kicked to the moderators. I am completely, totally and absolutely fine with Seph being one of those people. He'd put up with Overlord's antics longer than I would, with far more aplomb.

[SkyLion]

Its OverloAd not OverloRd...OverloRds is what you and Nova are trying to become...

[SkyLion]

Maybe if you tried allowing a vote instead of berating me with your fear of losing control I would mellow out. As it is your draconian insistence and attempts to shame me into silence only make me feel more justified in opposing you.

[Fortune's Son]

And yet you wonder why you make so little headway.

I'm Jack actually. Fortune's Son is a nick much as is Overload, Overlord, Serenity, Revenent, Velvet, Jager, Dawnstar, Seph, etc.

Sorry about miskeying your nick. It may have been a freudian slip, a simple oversight or just not reading it.

[Fortune's Son]

Originally Posted By: *Overload*

Maybe if you tried allowing a vote instead of berating me with your fear of losing control I would mellow out.

You do what you do and are what you choose to be. Mellow out or not as you choose but your demeanor is the deciding factor. I'm one of those people that don't actually care one way or the other about your diatribes.

[SkyLion]

I just want to see where the majority stands and have felt unjustly blocked and ridiculed for standing up and speaking out against what I feel to be unfair.

It is unfair to try and rush through some kind of charter and ignore the constituents desires...

[Fortune's Son]

Better. The great thing about this community is how they'll forgive or forget so long as the problem is fixed.

Forget the rhetoric and consider why you feel as you do. Then type that out to make your point. Leave off the rest of it because, generally speaking, it won't work. But explain yourself without throwing stones at the motivations of others and the community will listen. They'll go their own way but they'll listen.

[Drew]

So what do we think? A limit on Taint or not? I can't really see a good reason for it, personally.

[The White Rat]

Originally Posted By: Fortune's Son

That's all about selling to the community, not asking whether the moderators for permission.

And how long would this take? I'm sorry, but I don't like to wait until the 'community' approves what I write. If I wanted everything I wrote, to be stuck in a committee waiting for approval, I'd move to Cuba or North Korea.

Originally Posted By: Overload

It is unfair to try and rush through some kind of charter and ignore the constituents desires...

It seems that way to me. Lets see if they slow down the process so that ll the voices can be heard. I would also like a vote. Without one, we can not be sure what the majority prefers, and the outcome would be illegitimate. Instead it could be seen as a 'pet project' by a few people, who will dictate to the majority what happens. That is why it needs a vote. To avoid that kind of animosity.

[Drew]

You might have a point, actually. I officially change my position.

[Fortune's Son]

Like I said, I just don't want to deal with Taint buttered monsters right out of the box. It strikes me as being insular in character concept. Additionally, and more importantly, quite a few people seem to have problems wrapping their head around the idea of taint. It seems forgotten or undervalued more often than not. That being the case, I'm hesitant to open to say its a great idea to not put a limit on it.

[Sakurako Hino]

As I've always said, give someone enough rope, and they'll hang themselves. Taint = Bad and if people who play Aberrant fail to realize this to point discount themselves...

Well, you made your bed, kiddo. Sleep in it.

[Drew]

And if someone wants to play that type of character, why not? You seem to think that a self-destructive high-Taint character can't be fun to play out, ever.

If someone doesn't play it out, same with Merits and Flaws. Baleful Eye.

[Sakurako Hino]

In ways, yes. But keep in mind at some point a Nova becomes inherently unplayable the closer you get to T10.

At a certain point, any actor just cant get into the role of something THAT inhuman.

[Drew]

I think it could be managed. The option should certainly be there. At a certain point you may have to just let loose and stop giving your character completely rational, thought-out reasons for his actions. And at a certain point you're gonna have to kill it.

But I think that would be fun to play out.

[Sakurako Hino]

Well, then we wander into the realm of watching to see if a certain player of that high of taint can shoulder the burden.

It'd be quite a test.

[Courier]

RE: 200X

Just to check, we are talking about 2008, right?

RE: Q5 vs Q6 vs Q10

IMHO we need to vote on the Q max, but I seriously doubt the vote is in question.

RE: Taint Limits

Same comment, but I've no idea what the vote would be. I don't have a problem with Sloppy Joe + Dorm 5 as a concept, it's not what I'd want but that's a different issue.

RE: 50 or 60

Ditto... but I suggest that people take out a pen and sheet of paper and try a few combos out. One of the keys to this is to leave room for growth. The big limit on 30 is that you have to balance the point effectiveness of skills and attributes. 50 is a LOT.

[Drew]

Maybe Taint 8 max, and if you wanna mess with something greater ask a mod?

[Mr Fox]

Why rush a charter through? Before nova posted her proposal for discussion, several people said they didn't care what the rules were they just wanted to get to posting and didn't want to wait long.

As for taint, I really don't care. Vote on it or not, don't care. I think it is possible to play a 9 taint nova and do it well, but if you do create a 8 or 9 point nova, you can expect that the community will be watching very closely to see that you do play it well. That's assuming the consensus is to abandon a cap on taint.

[Hugin]

I'm cool with Q5. Q6 and the accompanying baggage (Mastery and the Level 4 powers) really, really throw a wrench into the believability of a character being on the same level as even other novas.

Taint I'd like to see bumped to 8. You have examples like Sloppy Joe that show some novas ARE taint-buttered and totally fuckered right at eruption.

50 NP seems pretty cool to me. Bumping it to 60 just strikes me as greedy. And whatever the growth is I'm cool with. I don't have any desires there.

Oh and Nova? Thank you for all the work you've put into this and for restaining your furious wrath in the face of undeserved attacks.

[SalmonMax]

I'm pretty easygoing at this point.

As a rule, I tend to prefer more conservative opening conditions, which then open up as the game establishes itself. Reasoning: It's easier to say, "Shucks, I guess we can afford more NP and taint and stuff...lets raise those caps," than it is to say, "Er, man, we goofed...everyone who built with 60, lets redo you down to 50, and if you have a lot of taint, you have to ditch that too."

That said, I have no concrete objections to lots of NP and as much taint as you like. I'm not sure this constitutes a vote, or even useful information in creating the bible...but it's all I got. I'm maddeningly passive-aggressive.

[Hugin]

Originally Posted By: Lily

As a rule, I tend to prefer more conservative opening conditions, which then open up as the game establishes itself. Reasoning: It's easier to say, "Shucks, I guess we can afford more NP and taint and stuff...lets raise those caps," than it is to say, "Er, man, we goofed...everyone who built with 60, lets redo you down to 50, and if you have a lot of taint, you have to ditch that too."

Pretty good point.

[Velvet]

My preferences.

50NP or 60NP?

50, provided that progress and growth are possible. I'm also fine with less, but more seems like a grab for power that will (in all likelihood) continue to escalate.

Q:6?

Not without mod consensus and approval, and not for beginning characters. It's a milestone that I feel should be justified by extensive character development, much as was necessary in 2018. I honestly cannot grasp the idea that it would be an absolute necessity for a "starting" character, and I get the impression (subjective, I know) that it's less a matter of adherence to a character concept than to a certain level of perceived power. Things can be purchased later. You don't have to start with everything you want for your character's entire career.

Taint Max?

6 seems like a reasonable number as a standard, with 7-8 being permitted by mod approval/consensus. I'm also inclined to support an alternative means of separating Tainted novas in all their horrific glory from those who simply look unusual, rather than forcing those with unique concepts to play twisted S.O.B.s who bear little similarity to humankind in thought or deed. I also believe that those who choose to play heavily-tainted characters (those requiring approval, specifically) should be open to censure by a public vote of the players participating in the forums if they get too far out of line.

I think that covers all the current topics, but if I've missed something I'm sure I'll post my thoughts on that, as well.

[Wargear]

Well, leave it to me to bring up the rear on commentary, but on the whole this looks pretty good. I do, however, have a couple of suggestions that I'd like to air at this point.

Assuming that we're going to retain the current Quantum Minimums on powers, I'd like to suggest that Quantum in the setting default to 3 rather than 1. This allows people to explore some of the more signifigantly expensive powers (Elemental Mastery comes ot mind) at 50 or 60 NP without needing to cripple the character in the short-run by putting all the points into Quantum. If people want to play lower Quantum characters, that should be permitted, but by setting the default Quantum bar higher we allow a wider range of character designs with a minimum of impact on overall power-level. Thoughts?

[Drew]

That's a really good idea. I like.

[Hugin]

Me too.

[Courier]

Mechanically that's the same as 60 nova points, and I'm not sure what the point is.

50 nova points is enough for me to buy a nova with Q5 (10 points), Taint 1, 4 Elemental Masteries (Earth/Air/Fire/Water for 5 each) and STILL have 20 nova points left over for stats.

What is it that you can do with 60 points that you can't do with 50?

[Jordan]

Actually I dislike this idea. I think people are starting to forget that this reboot is supposed to pare down the 2018 boards to more sane and reasonable levels of power.

50 NP to start is more than plenty in my personal opinion. Gaining 4 NP every 6 months is also very generous in my opinion.

Q6 to start? Really? Sorry but not interested, especially if Mastery and level 4+ powers are in the picture. Maybe sometime down the road but it must be accompanied by fictions showcasing the attainment of this power.

Taint I really don't care about but remember; if you make a taint monkey I'm going to treat you like a taint monkey. which could very well result in my characters shrieking like a little girl in fear and disgust at your very appearance....

Oh and just a note on the deplorable behavior that's been rearing it's ugly head in this and other threads. Stop it please. It's tiresome, irritating and only contributes to people leaving the site, which none of us wants.

[Wargear]

Originally Posted By: Courier

Mechanically that's the same as 60 nova points, and I'm not sure what the point is.

50 nova points is enough for me to buy a nova with Q5 (10 points), Taint 1, 4 Elemental Masteries (Earth/Air/Fire/Water for 5 each) and STILL have 20 nova points left over for stats.

What is it that you can do with 60 points that you can't do with 50?

Let's use your example.

Q5 (assuming you're not exploiting the freebie point+ flaws quantum exploit) will cost you twenty nova points. Less, with taint, but not that much less. A single level of each of those four elemental masteries buys you one technique of each and a puny die pool, which will not permit most of the interesting story uses for those powers, and will run you another twenty nova points (5 np/dot). Which leaves you with 10 points of your original 50 to buy other things, like mega-attributes or say, some flight. With the result that almost half your NP, in this character, goes to simply getting enough quantum to take the power you're designing the character around (be it Elemental Mastery or what have you). Not a receipe for rounded characters.

My proposal reduces what you need to sink into Quantum by half, freeing up those points for more interesting uses while not increasing the overall amount of NP you can use to break the system on lower quantum powers (we can all think of examples, I won't belabor them here).

In response to the person who was commenting about Q6 - I'm not proposing raising the Quantum limit above 5. I'm simply suggesting that if people want to have up to Q3 to start with, they should recieve it gratis, to enable the full range of nova powers to show up in PC stories. I'm as interested in paring down the overall level of power to a sane and reasonable level as you are (I think), but I'm also interested in preserving the ability of people to pick up more exotic powers without bundling up to monstrous levels with Taint. Keeping the NP total at 50, flat, while increasing the starting Quantum to 3 and keeping the max at 5 seems to me a good way to strike that balance.

[Velvet]

I've always preferred to spend 14BP to buy Q3, and free up my NP for other purchases.

[Charlotte]

Two thingmes:

- We should have a system for how to buy Q6 and L4 powers with nova points, since I just realized there isn't one in the APG. At least, I don't think there is. Should Q6 cost 5 NP to raise from Q5, or should there be extra costs associated with that bump?

- I would bump number of characters per player up to 2 to start with then 2 per year. Or clarify that this is the number of ACTIVE characters you can have - if you create a character that fizzles you can just spike 'em.

Otherwise, allislove

[Seph OOC]

I'd like to discuss - and possibly instigate some discussion and, if worthwhile, referendums - on a few issues, as well as touch on some of the above debates.

RE: Taint

I think a starting permanent Taint of 8 is reasonable. Some novas - Sloppy Joe and Leviathan come to mind - are that tainted out of the gate, and people should have the option to explore stories that deal with those elements. I would say up the level to 9, but I think that putting it at 8 is a good safety valve for people who might like to have that one last tumble before exploding into a tainted neutron star.

RE: Starting Quantum

I endorse Wargear's proposal. A shifting starting Quantum of 1-3 would, I believe, do what she proposes it would.

RE: Strengths & Weaknesses

As written, the rule basically denies the use of Lvl 4 powers to anybody, under any circumstances. That may sound all well and good at first glance, but it means that players will no longer be able to buy suite powers as single powers at a reduced quantum level. This means that all Lvl 4 powers - including Biomanipulation - is right out.

So what I'm asking is, are you sure about that?

RE: Number of Characters

In case it wasn't made crystalline, I think it's legitimate for someone to say "I'm going to shelve/retire/kill character X to bring in another character". I just don't think anyone should make a habit out of it. Leaving a lot of unfinished stories because you felt like moving on to your next project is a different kind of not-so-intentional dickery that we should strive to avoid.

Having said that, I think the limits are reasonable. Some of us - myself included - get a little ADD about wanting to try out this concept or that and end up spreading ourselves too thin. When making a rule, one should ask if the rule is necessary, and if it does what it sets out to do. I believe this rule fits both of those criteria.

RE: 2010 Characters

I am imploring you all to provide a clause that will allow 2010 characters to make the migration to the new forum. Doing so could ease some of the burden on 2010, with it's massive glut of characters, and frankly, there are many characters who I would like to see worked into a less-structured milieu where they could interact with other characters. Without consulting the players to find how they'd feel about moving, I know that I'd love to see another Directive agent like Nathan operate in a wider canon, or a positive Terat like Primal. There are several characters from 2010 that I think should be allowed to make a migration to the new forum. Perhaps that means a one-way exit, where characters so transposed are written out of the 2010 canon. Maybe it means something even more drastic. But I believe that an option should be explored, if only for the practical reason that I'm sure some people will want to do it.

RE: 2018 and 2010 Forums

I'm sure a lot of people are very averse to the idea of the shutdowns I recommended (closing OpNet 2018, OpNet and Fiction 2010). I won't argue too much if this opposition remains, but in defense of my statement, I wanted to make a couple points:

Part of the reason this new forum began as an idea was because people were spreading themselves too thin. Without shutting off some portion of the site, we as players aren't spreading ourselves any thicker, we're just rearranging where we're spread to, perhaps even spreading ourselves thinner. Does that achieve what we're setting out to do? Will that fix anything? I don't think so. I think that the 2018 Fiction section should remain open for people who desire an unmoderated arena of unlimited play to tell stories that don't fit into the new framework (stories that involve very high-power or high-taint novas, especially).

As for the 2010 forum, some argue that it's merely in a state of decline. They may be right. But what happens six month down the road when the bulk of people on the forum are now trying to play a character (or two, or three) in 2018, another character (or two, or three, or FOUR) in 2010, and still another (or two) in 2008? Again, does this solve a problem, or create a new one? I haven't heard a convincing reason that 2010 characters couldn't simply be exported into the 2008 forums with a few modifications. Or to put a finer point on it, it seems to me there there is nothing that the old 2010 board can do that the new 2008 board cannot, which leads me to ask: why, then, do we need it?

Also:

Originally Posted By: Jager

Is Seph a good choice as a moderator? I like the guy, but his attendance tends to be spotty.

Originally Posted By: Wakinyan

Seph's moderation. As noted above his sporadic nature simply doesn't leave room to rely on him to make the commitment to this forum that needs to be made. I mean no offense to Seph when I say this but his real life takes more turns and ups and downs than a roller coaster at six flags not exactly the stability you usually want in a mod.

Secondly while I have no doubt that Seph is smart enough to do the job I question his social tact in handling it. Let's take Overload for example as a potiential problem player he needs to deal with. Seph verbally strangling him with his own intestines would feel like his first reaction to handling people like that and while it may be what is needed a Mod generally needs to hold it in check better than that.

Let me make it plain from the outset that I did not request the position. Nova asked me, and after some consideration, I accepted. I did so because I believe that I can do a good job at mediation. My "spotty attendance" notwithstanding, I do think I can do the job. If it ever seems that I have left and will not be returning soon or if I ever feel that I need to take a break from the site, I can discuss the matter with the other Moderators and, if they so choose, they can pick a replacement for me, whether interim or permanent. My attendance or lack thereof will be a non-issue because, frankly, one doesn't require a fucking degree to do the job. If I step down, someone else can do the job, same as if Mr. Fox gets flattened by a truck tomorrow. I very much doubt the site will ever want for a replacement.

As to your concern, Kris, regarding my attitude, I'm not going to alleviate it. Anything I could say at this point would be simple sophistry: I cannot convince you that I will be fair and even-handed anymore than I could convince you of anything regarding the nature of my character. Having not been called upon to adjudicate - yet - there's no basis you have to call upon to discern whether or not I can be trusted with authority. You will simply have to wait and see. If I fuck it up, any of you are welcome to address my fellow Moderators, and I have no doubt that if they think I'm doing a bad job, they'll bounce me. Nova is not stupid: pals or no pals, she wouldn't ask me to do the job if she thought I'd be bad at it, and she wouldn't let me keep the job if it turns out I am bad at it. So in short, "time will tell". Until then, keep your buttons on.

[Centimane]

First off, I realize that I am totally the "Johnny come lately" here. So if I'm sticking my nose in where it doesn't belong then I apologize, but this looks like an interesting idea to me, and I'd like to at least try and take part in this if it's allowed. So, for what it's worth, here's my opinions on the topics being discussed here:

Starting Quantum: I don't much like the idea of starting out at Q6 or higher. It takes a lot of the magic out of things for me. I definitely like the idea that it's possible to get there eventually, but for me a big part of the appeal of Q6+ is the actual process of getting there. Actually being there is nice and all, but it's the journey that I'll still be remembering years later, not the size of my dice pools once I got there.

The idea of upping base Quantum from 1 to 3 is pretty good, but Courier's point is valid; this is essentially the same thing as setting the cap at 60 rather than 50, except that the first 10 points are "locked in" so to speak. If the idea of upping Base Q is in order to free up players to "horizontally" explore their charconcepts without the danger of "vertical" abuse, then why not simply set the NP cap at 60 and the Q cap at 5? This is simpler and it accomplishes the same thing in the end.

50 vs. 60: This so completely doesn't matter to me, one way or the other. I will say that, after having read all of the posts throughought this entire forum (as of this writing), there does seem to be a much greater leaning towards the number 60 than the number 50, but I have no idea why. 50NPs is, for me, the "break point", after that anything else is just sweetening the pot. You probably don't need the extra points, but man, they sure do go down smooth, don't they?

Costs of Q6+/L4+: My personal feeling is that the 6th and higher levels of Q should cost 5NP, the same as any other level. Yes, it's a big step, but considering that it's very obvious that no one's likely to get there without a lot of scrutiny on everyone else's part; why punish them more? The Core Book already lists the cost for Quantum, so why change it? (I admit that I'm a big fan of Simplicity Where Possible, so I have a bias here)

Seeing as how the progression, as defined canonically thus far, is L1:1, L2:3, L3:5 (or +2 for each increase in Level), I'd say that L4 should be 7NPs, L5 should be 9NPs, and L6 would be 11NPs (and man is that expensive!).

Taint Cap: I say cap it at 8. I think there's a well thought out reason for why WW set the default cap at 8. Taint 8 nets you a +3 diff and this is nothing to scoff at, while Taint 6 only hits you with a +2 diff. And while +2 is certainly harsh, a character with even 7 regular dice in the pertinent dice pool, and no megas at all, will (statistically speaking at least) beat this penalty more often than not. A character has to have 9 or 10 dice to beat out a penalty of +3.

I realize that, in many cases, dice pools and statistics will not have as big an impact in a setting where Story takes precedence over Statistics or Chance, but if we're going to use hard numbers as a Guideline, then we should be aware of what that Guideline actually represents (and I'm not trying to say, or imply, that anyone here doesn't). A +2 Diff means that it's "Challenging" to interact with baselines, and if that's all we want it to be then great. But we shouldn't get upset with any players who take a Taint of 6 and manage to, more often than not, overcome this "challenge", whether or not they have any social megas. +2 simply isn't that big of deal when you have 50NPs with which to boost all of those base Atts and Abs. Many characters will end with social dice pools that beat this without the players who run them ever consciously intending this outcome in the first place.

A +3 diff however either requires a base dice pool of 10, or it requires megas, and if the player really wants to be able to successfully interact with baselines as a Tainty nova then it'll take base pools of 10 and social megas. And this requires a conscience spending of NPs towards the specific goal of overcoming that penalty, and at this point it becomes much easier to follow the Point Trail and determine if the player in question is trying to abuse the system, or simply pursuing a valid (and hopefully interesting) character concept.

Meanwhile, a Taint Cap of 9 is essentially pointless. It inflicts no extra penalty on the character, and while it does saddle them with a second high level aberration, it also grants yet another dot of something or other purchased at a reduced cost. The odd-numbered Taint dots always seem to provide more benefits than hindrances to me. But hey, that is just my opinion, so take this or leave it as you will.

Merits & Flaws: I probably either missed something or misunderstood something in regards to these, but how does this work? I understand that the common consensus seems to be that Flaws don't grant you any extra BPs, and that's fine with me. But what about Merits? I mean, can I just go right ahead and take Taint Resistant, Eufiber Attuned, and Quantum Recovery for free? And if I do, what does this mean for my character, in terms of hard numbers (do I really get all of those advantages for free)? Maybe I'm missing something, but this seems broken to me...

Strengths and Weaknesses:The posted rules look good to me. Although I'll add to what Seph said above and point out that not only are L4 suite techniques out of bounds, but so are individual L3 suite techniques that players may want to purchase as individual L2 powers. Probably, everyone concerned already realizes this, but I thought I'd point it out because I've always felt that this was a totally harmless option that is almost impossible to abuse.

Okay, so there's my say on things, and this is ---->me<---- hoping I haven't just barged in where I wasn't wanted and stepped on someone's toes. Thanks for listening guys.

[Courier]

Originally Posted By: Wargear

Let's use your example.

Q5 (assuming you're not exploiting the freebie point+ flaws quantum exploit)...

??? And there are people who try to build Q5 characters but shoot themselves in the foot right out the door?

Further, not everyone wants to be a quantum god. The Q1, Taint 0 nova-who-looks-like-a-baseline concept is a staple, and I don't see why they should be punished for not wanting Q3-5.

Fair is fair, start the Q1's with the same number of points. And if we give them those "free" points back, then they'll be starting with 60 nova points. This proposal is a sneaky way to argue for 60 nova points.

Quote:

will cost you twenty nova points. Less, with taint, but not that much less. A single level of each of those four elemental masteries buys you one technique of each and a puny die pool, which will not permit most of the interesting story uses for those powers, and will run you another twenty nova points (5 np/dot). Which leaves you with 10 points of your original 50 to buy other things, like mega-attributes or say, some flight. With the result that almost half your NP, in this character, goes to simply getting enough quantum to take the power you're designing the character around

Only because you insisted on paying for this character in the most expensive way possible. Had you paid for him smart, then you'd have only paid 10 points for quantum (6 if you took them tainted) out of 50. And note please that paying for him smart saves exactly the same number of points you're trying to save.

Further, the bulk of your arguements work just against your proposed set up. "Puny die pool". You're only giving him 10 more nova points. How is he supposed to massively expand his techniques in 4 L3 powers with that?


EDIT:

Quote:

Merits & Flaws: I probably either missed something or misunderstood something in regards to these, but how does this work? I understand that the common consensus seems to be that Flaws don't grant you any extra BPs, and that's fine with me. But what about Merits? I mean, can I just go right ahead and take Taint Resistant, Eufiber Attuned, and Quantum Recovery for free?

I think the idea is that you'd pay for them out of your bonus points. If that seems unreasonable, consider that it's possible to do this by just paying for one of our +1 Quantum points with nova points.

[Wakinyan]

We need a moderator. You're it, until you're dead or we find someone better.

[The White Rat]

Originally Posted By: Velvet

I've always preferred to spend 14BP to buy Q3, and free up my NP for other purchases.

Me too. I would then use BP, gained by flaws, to buy WP or Q4. If we limit flaw points to 3 or 5, it would allow for some to buy WP wihout using NP to do it. (1 NP = 1 WP was always a bad exchange rate for me.)

[Courier]

If we want to increase the number of points we're handing out, and I'm not sure we do, then we should revisit the idea of increasing the number of bonus points from 15 to 25.

This is very close to giving out 10 more nova points for those of us who want lots of Q, and it does so without shafting the Q1 crowd.

It's also in line with the point increase we're already giving out. I.e. we're giving out 66% more nova points (50 rather than 30). If we increase the number of bonus points by 66% that's 25 rather than 15.

[Nova OOC]

Originally Posted By: Wakinyan

We need a moderator. You're it, until you're dead or we find someone better.

No good deed goes unpunished; yesterday nearly killed me. Good job James and Overload. I hope you're not seriously planning on participating in 200X, because you're bound to be pariahs.

I'm taking the day off from N! Prime. Everyone, talk among yourselves and figure out what you want. I'll come back tomorrow and see what you've made.

[Jager]

Originally Posted By: Nova OOC

No good deed goes unpunished; yesterday nearly killed me. Good job James and Overload. I hope you're not seriously planning on participating in 200X, because you're bound to be pariahs.

I'm taking the day off from N! Prime. Everyone, talk among yourselves and figure out what you want. I'll come back tomorrow and see what you've made.

I take that threat personally, but am not deterred. I wanted something for this site that I thought would make it better. If you are going to hold that against me, so be it.

[Nova OOC]

Originally Posted By: Jager

Originally Posted By: Nova OOC

No good deed goes unpunished; yesterday nearly killed me. Good job James and Overload. I hope you're not seriously planning on participating in 200X, because you're bound to be pariahs.

I'm taking the day off from N! Prime. Everyone, talk among yourselves and figure out what you want. I'll come back tomorrow and see what you've made.

I take that threat personally, but am not deterred. I wanted something for this site that I thought would make it better. If you are going to hold that against me, so be it.

It's not a threat, James, it's a promise. Unless a sincere apology* is forthcoming, I will not forgive what you did to me yesterday. You intentionally allied yourself with the most crude and obnoxious troll available out of political expediency. Regardless of the motherfucking that he was dishing out to me--and it was an overflowing plate--you allied yourself with him because his goals and your goals were aligned. That is absolutely unacceptable behavior. I won't associate with people who do that.

I have no use for fair weather friends, and I have even less use for so-called friends who stab me repeatedly in the face.

Good bye, James.


(* A sincere apology includes all of the following elements: A statement of what was done which was wrongful, a statement of accountability for one's actions, a statement of sympathy with the one you have wronged, and a sincere pledge not to repeat that wrong.)