Zuma/Daimons

[Indirik]

This is a question of style. Personally, I see Von Genf's point. If your character's only encounter with the daimons was with an inhuman horror like Screamer, why on earth would you ever try to deal with them again? Why wouldn't you simply try to get as far away from them as possible?

It is commonly know, to those that are looking into the daimons, that they are all different. Even Brance, who has never dealt with a daimon personally, and has never specifically researched the daimons, knows that. So I wouldn't see any particular reason why a character wouldn't think "Woops.... that was the wrong one to talk to. Better try a different one...."

[Gustav Kuriga]

It is commonly know, to those that are looking into the daimons, that they are all different. Even Brance, who has never dealt with a daimon personally, and has never specifically researched the daimons, knows that. So I wouldn't see any particular reason why a character wouldn't think "Woops.... that was the wrong one to talk to. Better try a different one...."

Perhaps that's because traumatic experiences don't tend to mix well with rational arguments. If you have a traumatic experience, such as a dog mauling you, you don't think rationally about it. Many times, after a dog attack, a person will have an irrational fear of all dogs, or at least dogs of the breed that attacked them. You may argue to them that such an attack is rare and most dogs aren't like that, but they aren't going to listen to reason, they're going to remember that attack and avoid any contact that causes the fear of another such attack to happen again.

[De-Legro]

Perhaps that's because traumatic experiences don't tend to mix well with rational arguments. If you have a traumatic experience, such as a dog mauling you, you don't think rationally about it. Many times, after a dog attack, a person will have an irrational fear of all dogs, or at least dogs of the breed that attacked them. You may argue to them that such an attack is rare and most dogs aren't like that, but they aren't going to listen to reason, they're going to remember that attack and avoid any contact that causes the fear of another such attack to happen again.

That is a possible outcome, not a CERTAIN outcome by any means. But it is also irrelevant unless every single possible character that could interact with the Zuma has suffered such. It is not the GM's job to ensure that every single player character can interact with the Zuma.

[Indirik]

Perhaps that's because traumatic experiences don't tend to mix well with rational arguments. If you have a traumatic experience, such as a dog mauling you, you don't think rationally about it. Many times, after a dog attack, a person will have an irrational fear of all dogs, or at least dogs of the breed that attacked them. You may argue to them that such an attack is rare and most dogs aren't like that, but they aren't going to listen to reason, they're going to remember that attack and avoid any contact that causes the fear of another such attack to happen again.

That's fine. That is a perfectly good RPd reaction. If you choose to have your character react that way, then that is your choice to do so. But you should also accept that there are other possible reactions.

[Vellos]

I still have not seen a rebuttal to the proposal of multiple GMs other than hypothetical statements that it will cause problems about identical to the problems that already exist.

That is, no new problems, but possibly some benefits.

[De-Legro]

I still have not seen a rebuttal to the proposal of multiple GMs other than hypothetical statements that it will cause problems about identical to the problems that already exist.

That is, no new problems, but possibly some benefits.

Unless this request comes from the current GM, I will ignore it.

If you think he sucks and is doing a bad job and something needs to be done about it - have the guts to say so. If you don't think that, then kindly leave that decision to the guy who is putting his spare time and effort into providing you with some interaction. He gets absolutely nothing for it, and not pushing in other people without him wanting them there is the least I can do to honour his effort.

Beyond that? My understanding is that the Zuma GM has been looking for new GM's for a long long time. Vates was part of that, that GM added a lot and it was a pity that when he left it was so abrupt and information was not carried over. We aren't against multiple GM's (although to be fair it often sounds that way) we are against multiple GM's where there is no system to support them and no thought as to if the new GM's are going to work out. Like Tom said, if and when the current GM finds someone he is happy to work with, things can be worked out.

If you mean the rotating GM thing, I just can't see that happening. I doubt Tom is about to tell anyone "Hey thanks for all your hard work over the years, but your era is done here is your replacement." Unless the current GM wants to roll with it I would think its dead in the water.

[egamma]

Beyond that? My understanding is that the Zuma GM has been looking for new GM's for a long long time. Vates was part of that, that GM added a lot and it was a pity that when he left it was so abrupt and information was not carried over. We aren't against multiple GM's (although to be fair it often sounds that way) we are against multiple GM's where there is no system to support them and no thought as to if the new GM's are going to work out. Like Tom said, if and when the current GM finds someone he is happy to work with, things can be worked out.

If you mean the rotating GM thing, I just can't see that happening. I doubt Tom is about to tell anyone "Hey thanks for all your hard work over the years, but your era is done here is your replacement." Unless the current GM wants to roll with it I would think its dead in the water.

A private "zuma board" here on the forums would do nicely for coordinating multiple GMs. Easy to record treaties, discuss responses, etc.

[Vellos]

A private "zuma board" here on the forums would do nicely for coordinating multiple GMs. Easy to record treaties, discuss responses, etc.

This.

Beyond that? My understanding is that the Zuma GM has been looking for new GM's for a long long time. Vates was part of that, that GM added a lot and it was a pity that when he left it was so abrupt and information was not carried over. We aren't against multiple GM's (although to be fair it often sounds that way) we are against multiple GM's where there is no system to support them and no thought as to if the new GM's are going to work out. Like Tom said, if and when the current GM finds someone he is happy to work with, things can be worked out.

If you mean the rotating GM thing, I just can't see that happening. I doubt Tom is about to tell anyone "Hey thanks for all your hard work over the years, but your era is done here is your replacement." Unless the current GM wants to roll with it I would think its dead in the water.

Hmm, missed Tom's post in their somewhere. Not a surprise given the thread's length.

Is the Zuma GM actually looking for help? If so, it's very subtle.

[Anaris]

Is the Zuma GM actually looking for help? If so, it's very subtle.

What, did you expect him to be posting want ads?

GM isn't exactly a job that gets advertised for publicly. It's a highly sensitive position, and only people who have proven themselves to Tom—at least to some extent—will even be considered for it.

Even that doesn't always work to weed out the trolls. Remember Prudent in the Fourth Invasion? Talking about teleporter arrays, orbital cannons, and whatnot?

[Vellos]

What, did you expect him to be posting want ads?

GM isn't exactly a job that gets advertised for publicly. It's a highly sensitive position, and only people who have proven themselves to Tom—at least to some extent—will even be considered for it.

Even that doesn't always work to weed out the trolls. Remember Prudent in the Fourth Invasion? Talking about teleporter arrays, orbital cannons, and whatnot?

I found Prudent quite entertaining. :/

But, yes, if they're looking for GMs, I would expect want ads. It's sensitive, sure; and you don't want folks to know who applied. So post a thread asking for interested people to respond via PM. Maybe no good applicants will come along. But maybe they will.

[Anaris]

I found Prudent quite entertaining. :/

Prudent's player went out of their way to deliberately subvert or undermine all the roleplay the rest of the Fourth Invasion GMs were writing, and repeatedly refused to join in the efforts to synchronize RP and present a common, consistent, and understandable storyline to the players.

But, yes, if they're looking for GMs, I would expect want ads. It's sensitive, sure; and you don't want folks to know who applied. So post a thread asking for interested people to respond via PM. Maybe no good applicants will come along. But maybe they will.

Seriously? You think that the position of GM should be treated just like some random job?

How is Tom supposed to judge trustworthiness of random people who apply? "Why, yes, I'll keep all your secrets and make sure to stick closely to all the established RP!" (Two weeks later) "Hey, everybody, here's all the dirt on the Zuma, straight from the source! I know I'll never get a GM position again, BUT IT WAS WORTH IT, BABY! STICK IT TO THE MAN!"

There are enough people whose integrity Tom already trusts, and whose capabilities he knows, to be able to at least look for a new GM from among them before he has to open the gates wide. If he doesn't find one, then I'm sure he'll look at other options—but if he does, why should he even advertise publicly that he's even looking?

[Glaumring the Fox]

I agree one gm is enough, anymore would open up for abuse.

[Vellos]

Prudent's player went out of their way to deliberately subvert or undermine all the roleplay the rest of the Fourth Invasion GMs were writing, and repeatedly refused to join in the efforts to synchronize RP and present a common, consistent, and understandable storyline to the players.

Really? Hm. Didn't know. That is quite unfortunate.

Seriously? You think that the position of GM should be treated just like some random job?

How is Tom supposed to judge trustworthiness of random people who apply? "Why, yes, I'll keep all your secrets and make sure to stick closely to all the established RP!" (Two weeks later) "Hey, everybody, here's all the dirt on the Zuma, straight from the source! I know I'll never get a GM position again, BUT IT WAS WORTH IT, BABY! STICK IT TO THE MAN!"

There are enough people whose integrity Tom already trusts, and whose capabilities he knows, to be able to at least look for a new GM from among them before he has to open the gates wide. If he doesn't find one, then I'm sure he'll look at other options—but if he does, why should he even advertise publicly that he's even looking?

Well, I assumed you'd apply through PMs. And, meh, I pretty much always favor open applications. There is no theoretical framework for search costs wherein closed applications yields a reliably more optimal result to my knowledge. Plus, IMHO, Tom probably doesn't have perfect knowledge of peoples' availability or willingness, and he may forget about someone who would be good for it.

Whatever the case, I myself would not apply for Dwilight; at least not for a very long time. I enjoy the non-GM gameplay of Dwilight far too much.

[Chenier]

If you mean the rotating GM thing, I just can't see that happening. I doubt Tom is about to tell anyone "Hey thanks for all your hard work over the years, but your era is done here is your replacement." Unless the current GM wants to roll with it I would think its dead in the water.

There are plenty of NPC characters. Rotation wouldn't have to mean "okay, you went from controlling all to controlling nothing", bur rather, "you used to control this bit, now control that bit".

I understand the fear of GMs going rogue, though.

[^ban^]

"you used to control this bit, now control that bit".

...this is a remarkably bad idea. Imagine if you were suddenly forced to play someone else's characters instead of your own. That's what you just proposed.