Sanderson Elimination: Questions & Answers and Game Meta Discussion

[Nyali]

As someone who used the old mobile site a lot, entering everything manually by swiping in the BBCode wasn't that big of a deal. It's no different now. I believe the red and green text are clear and well understood. This isn't the only forum where I've seen that convention used either - it's just a really sensible way to do it. Background highlighting makes it harder to read, imo, unless you do something like this: [ Wilson ] and [ Stink ] (code below)

[b][background="ffcccc"][[color="cc2222"] Wilson [/color]][/background][/b]
[b][background="ccffcc"][[color="118833"] Stink [/color]][/background][/b]

(btw, the BBCode for highlights is "background")

 

EDIT: By the way, if you want to play around without posting, the "switch to raw code" button on the far left of the graphical toolbar has been replaced by a "Preview" button. The Preview is really useful for checking formatting without having to immediately edit after posting to fix any mistakes (though I do miss the raw code view which I can't seem to find now). Before, while there was a Preview feature, you couldn't access it in the "quick reply" box, you had to go to the "full" mode. This is much better.

Edited June 14, 2016 by Nyali

[Young Bard]

I still don't see what's wrong with Wilson.

[color=red]Wilson[/color]

Edited June 14, 2016 by The Young Bard

[A Joe in the Bush]

Nothing is wrong with it. I just wanted to see people's thoughts on using @'s instead, since it's so easy to view. @The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe

Edited June 14, 2016 by The Only Joe
Shhh, there was never an edit.

[Mailliw73]

7 minutes ago, The Only Joe said:

Nothing is wrong with it. I just wanted to see people's thoughts on using @'s instead, since it's so easy to view. @The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe@The Only Joe

I just have the same concern Wilson does. What if I just want to grab an inactive's attention or just make sure someone sees my post? I don't want to actually vote for them, just call their attention. 

@Mailliw73

[A Joe in the Bush]

That is a good argument, so I will submit to the Brightness Ascendant's ruling on the matter.

@The Only Joe @The Other Joe @ The Joe no one talks about.

Edited June 14, 2016 by The Only Joe
No edit, I just wanted to type silly things in this box

[little wilson]

I'm not sure if I should feel appreciated for all those votes or hated...

And thank you, Nyali. I was so close to figuring it out too! I spammed Maill's inbox with a PM where I went through all sorts of attempts, from hl to background-color and more. The mystery is solved.

[A Joe in the Bush]

If there's a moderator with some spare time and sanity, the new update killed some of the writeups. Like this one. I don't know how many others, but somebody with locked thread editing privileges should go through and fix them. (I'd volunteer, but you'd have to trust me with the ability to edit the posts of others. (Though Seriously, I would volunteer happily))

[Ecthelion III]

How about this? Easy to do with a few clicks, on desktop at least.

Green

Edited June 15, 2016 by Ecthelion III

[Master Elodin]

41 minutes ago, Ecthelion III said:

How about this? Easy to do with a few clicks, on desktop at least.

Green

I just like the normal system. It's widely used, so friendly to newcomers and comfortable and familiar. The highlight seems a little overwhelming. If I were a GM I would count both highlight and color.

[Metacognition]

There's still some glitches and rough edges to smooth out from the looks of it. I tried editing that write up to see if that would fix it and it just went back to the way it was once I had finished (Not to mention that sometimes the text just didn't show up to be edited at all). We'll see what we can do once the bugs are all worked out, but I think Eric deserves a chance to rest after spending all of today just getting the new site up and running!  

EDIT: Nevermind. I got it to edit properly this time. I'll start going through games, but it'll be a slow process. 

Edited June 15, 2016 by Metacognition

[Metacognition]

Just to let everyone know, there are quite a lot of formatting issues that we're trying to address with the site change. We're even going through past games to try to get some of the issues there taken care of (as well as some helpful things that we've wanted to do for awhile now  ). 

This is most noticeable with the Pinned threads, as those are our introduction to our (Uber-Awesome, Utterly-Amazing, and Definitely-Not-Filled-With-a-Bunch-of-Serial-Killers  ) Community here. So we'll be trying to reformat everything to continue to make it easier for everyone to read going forward. We won't likely be reformatting every post (so feel free to help out by finding your own and doing that as well!), but we'll make sure that all of the rules, etiquette, and such are done to make it as easy as possible for people to join in our fun.  

Please bear with us, as this will take quite a bit of time; which means we'll all be pretty busy; beyond our typical duties.  

Everything will continue as it has been; don't worry about that. The games will still run on schedule and such. Just, if we're not as quick on the uptake as we tend to be or something happens, cut us some slack. Also sorry if that happens. We're trying. 

Thanks in advance, because I know already that you'll all understand. This is just a heads up so we're all on the same page.  

[STINK]

13 hours ago, The Young Bard said:

I still don't see what's wrong with Wilson.

[color=red]Wilson[/color]

But it misspells colour!

[Young Bard]

23 minutes ago, STINK said:

But it misspells colour!

Yes! Thankyou! Another non-American, at long last! What country are you from?

[Metacognition]

Don't start that you guys. 

As far as the coloring (so there) of votes goes, I'm of the opinion that if it's not broke, don't fix it. 

As long as what we already have working is still easier on everyone, then I'm all for it. We shouldn't switch it just because. But anything we can do to help make things easier on everyone should be an option.

I just don't see how changing it from coloring to highlighting to bolding to anywhere in between will actually make it any easier on those that have to put in the BBC code each time.

At least with the color, they're already used to doing that. 

So far, it just seems like there's a lot of extra steps to go through with a lot of these new systems and we want everyone to feel welcome to join us in our wholesale slaughter of each other.

[Nyali]

What if the rule was left as "mark or in red/green," but it didn't matter how you did the marking, as long as it's clear? I find Ecthelion's coloring and the one I posted above to be just as clear as the standard, just more annoying to enter. Would it be okay for people to use those if they felt like it? Or is consistency preferred?

In either case, personally, I'll always bold color changes, which is a thing I do everywhere. I just find it makes the change stand out far more.

[Young Bard]

In QF16 and LG22, I've started voting like this:

@The Young Bard

That way, it's both in red and it notifies the player. (Small tip: For some reason, you need to write the name first. If you start writing the code first, the @{player} won't register.) Unless anyone specifically has a problem with it, I'll probably keep doing it that way.

[Ecthelion III]

I'm confused about how write-ups and roleplaying work in Sanderson Elimination. So the write-up is what the players see storywise at the start of each cycle, right? And it details the story of what happened during that round, correct? Are the write-ups written by the GM, or do the characters who died during that cycle write them and PM them to the GM?

[Haelbarde]

Just now, Ecthelion III said:

I'm confused about how write-ups and roleplaying work in Sanderson Elimination. So the write-up is what the players see storywise at the start of each cycle, right? And it details the story of what happened during that round, correct? Are the write-ups written by the GM, or do the characters who died during that cycle write them and PM them to the GM?

The GM will write up a story based on the key events of the last cycle for the new cycle's writeup. Players, while living, can post their own RP during the game. It's optional, though, and so how much it happens varies game to game. Players can contribute to writeups, even their own death scenes, though that usually only happens as an eliminator, when you have a fair idea that you will be dying and write it beforehand. But in most cases, the GM's will do all the writing, but they are more than happy for the players to contribute if they want to. 

[Gamma Fiend]

29 minutes ago, Ecthelion III said:

I'm confused about how write-ups and roleplaying work in Sanderson Elimination. So the write-up is what the players see storywise at the start of each cycle, right? And it details the story of what happened during that round, correct? Are the write-ups written by the GM, or do the characters who died during that cycle write them and PM them to the GM?

Basically what Hael said below, the write-ups are just extra story and a way for the GM to have fun with it, just including the key events that happened during the cycle, mostly whoever got killed during the lynch/night actions, and then whatever other information that gets revealed, the situations can differ between games and how the different GMs decide to run it. Any player can RP as much as they want to during the game, and that just helps build their character and how they want to interact with the rest of the players storywise -- but it's all usually cosmetic and has no real affect on the game. Although I know I personally enjoy when players RP more than not, as that makes the job a lot more fun for the GMs when they do write the write-ups, as that gives us more to draw and base our write-ups off of, and helps really cement that whole storyline narrative.

And some players do like to ask the GMs for special conditions or requests that they'd like for their death scenes, just to help add that much more flavor. (Of course, GMs don't have to do that, but it's certainly a nice touch. Mostly depends on the GMs whims.

TL;DR - Do much more RP when playing! It's fun!

[A Joe in the Bush]

Adding on to that, in some cases, GM's who are to busy, outsource their Writeups. They provide the details, and a chosen player (Usually Elbereth, occasionally myself, even less ocasionally other people) write the writeup after the details have been posted, that's what's happening in the curent QF with Ripple and I.

[A Joe in the Bush]

I would like to sign up for the Medium range GM list.

[Straw]

Testing vote: Testing

Testing vote: Testing

[Young Bard]

On 6/12/2016 at 2:23 PM, The Young Bard said:

Sign me up to run an LG, please. Running a game sounds like fun.

Is there any reason why this hasn't been updated in the Doc? (I'm not too inexperienced or anything?)

[Metacognition]

There's no such thing as too inexperienced, IMO. How would anyone get experience without being new at it sometime? And yes, GMing requires an entirely different set of skills than playing, so you're not too "inexperienced" in that right either.

We've just been busy. You guys don't see it, but constantly updating all the lists and charts and such that we use to keep things as organized as they are takes up a decent chunk of time because they're constantly changing. The best example I could give (for those that have been in this situation) is being a GM full-time. 

We'll get you updated there as well and thank you for reminding us. But, as long as you're on one of the lists, we won't forget you.  You'll get your chance at ruling over the fates of others.

[STINK]

Uh Can I have a place on the LG GM waiting list please?