The Chat Thread

[Sherlock Holmes]

28 minutes ago, kenod said:

I agree that the points system is rather limiting, but the issue is that it's currently the only way we've found to actually deal with power creep. The problem with creating guidelines is that (based on what I've seen in era 1 & 2) they'll become progressively less enforced as the era goes on, which can quickly spiral out of control, with one or two OP characters being enough to kick-start it. So while I dislike parts of the points system, I dislike what happened before we had them even more.

The issue is that I don't really have any solution for this though. Loosening the limits would simply make everyone design their characters around the new limits instead, while also (as Mac said) requiring a rewrite of parts of the Index. I think guidelines, if clear enough, might work, but it would require everyone in the RP to collectively make sure they're kept, not just relying on the mods to do so. If people think we'd be capable of that, then we could try it, but I think that otherwise we should stick to the point system. If we do try it, we should make sure the guidelines are as clear as possible though, and that everybody understands them, as well as the fact that if we don't manage to keep power-creep in check we'll go back to the point system.

I agree with all of this.

Another issue that I think needs to be addressed: How much OOC and IC activity happens. Me, Sorana, and Emperor Stick discussed this on Discord, and we all think that more activity IC should happen. However, this relies on RPers being more responsible with what they RP.

[Voidus]

1 hour ago, Ark's Boyfriend said:

Anyways, I was thinking about potential changes that could be made to the characters system. Me and Ark were talking about the matter that you can't actually put all of your character's skills, whether or not they're relevant or worth any real points, on their character sheet, since you'll be over the allotted 150 points.

I don't want to sound defensive here, the points system is far from perfect as a solution, it's the best we've had so far I think but far from what I'd say is ideal. But one thing I did believe about it is that it's fairly open for fluff to be added where it's not going to change things much. The only skills that have listed point totals should be those that would have some form of effect on the RP. If there's something that wouldn't have an effect like that that you've been unable to include then please let us know, the Index can always be updated for things like that.

The intention is to avoid everyone creating a jack of all trades with no meaningful weakness who's clever, well-read and knowledgeable as well as experienced in every form of combat, stealth and lockpicking, etc., etc. That being said if you forgo Investiture or limit yourself to less than the full 100 point limit then you can get quite a number of skills wracked up.

So if anyone does have any specific concerns like this please let us know, as with most things the Index isn't a set in stone decision that can never be changed. That being said I personally don't think that increasing the point limit will do much, most likely people will tend towards stronger or more varied forms of Investiture rather than an increased skill portfolio. In my experience most of the best RP I've ever read has been between relatively low-power level characters, or characters with a wide gap in abilities, rather than two OP characters.
 

1 hour ago, Silva said:

Radiant progression in their Oaths is something that should be addressed, though. If that were to be changed, we would have to take into account creating ways to ensure it really is a progression as a result of real character development to the character and not simply at the character's writer's whim.

We have had some discussions around this, definitely something we want to iron out before next era, especially if there's some kind of time skip. In the meantime if anyone does feel like there's an appropriate moment for an Oath progression then let us know and it might get approved. We'd be looking for longer term characters who have had some kind of significant story arc ideally, unfortunately there's no easy way to quantify that so it's going to be case by case for now.

[Sherlock Holmes]

1 minute ago, Voidus said:

I don't want to sound defensive here, the points system is far from perfect as a solution, it's the best we've had so far I think but far from what I'd say is ideal. But one thing I did believe about it is that it's fairly open for fluff to be added where it's not going to change things much. The only skills that have listed point totals should be those that would have some form of effect on the RP. If there's something that wouldn't have an effect like that that you've been unable to include then please let us know, the Index can always be updated for things like that.

The intention is to avoid everyone creating a jack of all trades with no meaningful weakness who's clever, well-read and knowledgeable as well as experienced in every form of combat, stealth and lockpicking, etc., etc. That being said if you forgo Investiture or limit yourself to less than the full 100 point limit then you can get quite a number of skills wracked up.

So if anyone does have any specific concerns like this please let us know, as with most things the Index isn't a set in stone decision that can never be changed. That being said I personally don't think that increasing the point limit will do much, most likely people will tend towards stronger or more varied forms of Investiture rather than an increased skill portfolio. In my experience most of the best RP I've ever read has been between relatively low-power level characters, or characters with a wide gap in abilities, rather than two OP characters.

I agree with all of this. I was bringing it up because it's irritating to have a character who only has one Investiture and two skills, and is at the limit.

[+Sorana]

6 hours ago, Voidus said:

We have had some discussions around this, definitely something we want to iron out before next era, especially if there's some kind of time skip. In the meantime if anyone does feel like there's an appropriate moment for an Oath progression then let us know and it might get approved. We'd be looking for longer term characters who have had some kind of significant story arc ideally, unfortunately there's no easy way to quantify that so it's going to be case by case for now.

Well you already know about Althea, so just let me know once you thought of something.

 

Personally I feel like the current power level is good, if we find a way for characters to advance, to not only developp, but also to learn new skills based on their experiences. I can understand that some would like to have a stronger character with more types of investiture. So mayb ef we can do something like unlocking additional points after every era. Or we give it another try to go without a point system altogether.

 

Something completely different:

I'd like to edit bith the OP of the GB thread and or Oasis. As Meeker is inactive, and according to our chats won't be back anytime soon, is it better to create two new threads I can control, or could you maybe edit the OPs for me? I would write everything of course. I doubt Meeker would mind, as he gave me an all clear to do with the guild as it pleases me, as he isn't planing to come back atm.

@Voidus

@MacThorstenson

[Voidus]

4 hours ago, Sorana said:

I'd like to edit bith the OP of the GB thread and or Oasis. As Meeker is inactive, and according to our chats won't be back anytime soon, is it better to create two new threads I can control, or could you maybe edit the OPs for me? I would write everything of course. I doubt Meeker would mind, as he gave me an all clear to do with the guild as it pleases me, as he isn't planing to come back atm.

Happy to make the edits if you let me know what you need changed.

[AonEne]

13 hours ago, Voidus said:

Happy to make the edits if you let me know what you need changed.

This is a very good idea, and now that I know you're willing to do it, might I also do the same with the TUBA thread - I send you a new draft and you edit it in?

[Voidus]

Sure

[+ZincAboutIt]

On 6/26/2019 at 5:12 PM, Voidus said:

Do we want to retain current power levels, or raise/lower them? Or eliminate scoring altogether?

Hi, chiming in on this. Honestly, I find the power levels to be kind of arbitrary, but I also know why they exist. That said, in a perfect world I'd raise them or eliminate them altogether. Usually, the problem with an OP character isn't the character, it's how they are used. I know that the whole point of the AV is that it's pretty free-form and you can sort of drop in and do what you want where you like, but I also think that crazy plot-hijacking could be curtailed if characters were more developed and planned out, like their personality, their backstory, their weaknesses. The problem is that I'm not really sure how to go about this. So, maybe, disregard my ramblings? 

That said, I think that the point ceiling should be flexible for a longer-term character, someone who will likely be carried over for one or more eras. Otherwise, you run the risk of making them stagnate. Also, I think that not enough people are RPing the character weaknesses they outline on their character sheets. So many people give their characters an outrageously deep and scarring trauma in order to max out on points, then this flaw is never seen or addressed in RP. It cheapens the effect, imo.

[Voidus]

Character growth seems to be something that a number of people are concerned about, will definitely make it a priority to iron out how this can occur. One thought that I'm not entirely sure about, but it's the first thing that popped into my head would be giving out points for things like participating in a major plot, joining a guild, initiating a side plot, etc. and based on that those points can be applied to the characters Investiture/skills.

But that is quite a bit of work and also feels a little gamey, so as I say, not sure how I'd feel about it.

As always if anyone has any specific ideas they're always welcome.

[MetaTerminal]

2 hours ago, Voidus said:

One thought that I'm not entirely sure about, but it's the first thing that popped into my head would be giving out points for things like participating in a major plot, joining a guild, initiating a side plot, etc. and based on that those points can be applied to the characters Investiture/skills.

I don’t like this idea, for one main reason.

Participation in main plot and the creation of side plots should be in and of themselves inherently rewarding. That is, we do them because we want to, and not for some external reward. (Usually because it’s fun - maybe because of character development, which is also an inherent benefit). This is the way it’s functioned for all of the ‘verse. Adding a reward for the inherently fun activity shifts the focus away from the fun and towards the reward - especially for new players. It then becomes an RP around points, and not developing stories and ideas.

Goodhart’s law. Whatever measure you use to gauge ‘participation’, people will exploit it, even on a subconscious level. People will take actions to get points. (That’s how rewards work.) But then people won’t just do things (like join guilds) because they want to, or because it’s fun - but because they can get points for it. (If I join another guild, I get more points!) And if you don’t choose the guidelines carefully, you screw over people who would prefer not to do those things - because they enjoy their experience more not doing that. Like going solo and not being in a guild? You might as well join one, because you could get points for it.

Creating side plots gets you points? That will lead to an increase of side plots. Participating in the main plot has a benefit beyond being fun? People will join the side plot just to get the points. (You might say that this is still beneficial. I argue that it isn’t. They’re not trying to have fun, which goes against the idea of the RP. Having a whole bunch of people doing things that aren’t fun for them benefits nobody.)

This sounds cynical and dismissive, but it’s human behavior. This is how people act. We determine our actions based on the system around us. That’s why the system is so important. And I haven’t even talked about how it would be impossible to track, or how guidelines to prevent exploitation of the system may cause issues around what is and isn’t allowed.

If you wanted a way to reward active people with more powered characters (and I don’t know if we particularly want to - I know people have raised concerns, but in my (admittedly underinformed) opinion it’s probably fine as it is) then I would say that people need to ask, specifically, to go over the limit, and that there is a designated amount that they can go over by. These people need to 1) be very experienced in the Alleyverse 2) be trusted with these powerful characters (ie no history of OP characters ‘just because’) and 3) have an outline of exactly what they need and why. This is up to the mods, and on a case-by-case basis. (I would say that experienced would equal at least one era where they were fully active. No, I probably would not qualify. Nor do I want to.) 

Game theory rant over. TL;DR google Goodhart’s Law and I suggest that it should be case-by-case for more powered characters as it is now.

[+Sorana]

3 hours ago, Voidus said:

One thought that I'm not entirely sure about, but it's the first thing that popped into my head would be giving out points for things like participating in a major plot, joining a guild, initiating a side plot, etc. and based on that those points can be applied to the characters Investiture/skills.

I have to say, that I am not a huge friend of this. I can see, why it makes it "easier" to "rate" how a character grew, but in the end it will make the whole system even more complicated. I am alright with the points system, as it offers a quick and easy way to get a feeling for a character and to exclude OP combinations, but even with that I sometimes see cases where I feel like a nomal attribute like "curious" is suddenly treated as a weakness only to gain points. I can live with that, it's simply something I noticed over the course of the era.

To the "gain points through actions thing". What I really want to avoid is people doing things only to get points they then spend on different skills. If someone goes to the Canton and they spend lots of posts on training a weapon skill there, then I am find if the character learns that skill. Same if someone sits down with Lena and spend the time tp brew poisons, and so on. But if joining a guild grants me points, then in the end every character will join a guild and then spend the points whereever they fit. What intrigues me about the Alleyverse is, that I can focus on character development and that I can rp. If we include a system that focusses on gaining points, then it will disrupt all of that.

I agree that we need to find a solution for character growth, but maybe we can do something more easy:
Everybody gets 50 (random number here) points per era, and they can only be spend on a skill if you've got a reason why the character gained that skill. Because you rped them training, got them spiked, spoke an oath. Points you don't use, either you can stack them, or not. I'm not sure if that's better, but at least there would be no need to act in a certain way to get the points. If a character spends a whole era doing nothing but studying, they can advance in the field they studied and if a character psend time fighting enemies, they can learn something in that regard as well.

7 hours ago, ZincAboutIt said:

I know that the whole point of the AV is that it's pretty free-form and you can sort of drop in and do what you want where you like, but I also think that crazy plot-hijacking could be curtailed if characters were more developed and planned out, like their personality, their backstory, their weaknesses.

Personally I feel like the whole jumping from one plot to the other has happened a lot less this era, than in the previous ones. Of course we still have characters that appear and then vanish, but that is also due to their player rping only for a while and then going inactive again. We will always have some kind of fluctuation in that regard, and I think the amount of times people hopped around was withing good borders this era.

I agree when it comes to the weaknesses though. I know that it's really hard to rate a weakness and to discern it correctly, but I feel like on the one hand there are lots of weaknesses that almost never trigger, because they are avoided and on the other hand there are things count as a weakness, that aren't a weakness. Like the whole moral code thing (yes I know it influences how your character happens, but why should I get points for deciding to play a character adhering to moral values?) either I play a character that is good, or I don't. Same with weaknesses like curious and the like. And then I think it's sad, that weaknesses rarely trigger, or are set to trigger only in a special situation. I am fine, if not every character is as broken as mine, but I feel like so much rp comes out of failing something - it's fine to not be the hero everytime. But then we can't force someone to actively do that, so in the end we rely on every rper.

 

tl;dr: Please no system where I gain points through actions. Weaknesses should be thought over (which ones give points) and included more into rp.

 

===============

Edit:

@MetaTerminal

I agree

But we need a way for character to advance, if only because it's the concept of all KRs to speak their oaths and to advance. So these characters will grow stronger over the time, or the whole character concept is screwed. And I think, if someone rps their character's advancement/ training whatever, it's fine if the character learns/ improves. (If they are a KR or not)

Edited July 3, 2019 by Sorana

[MetaTerminal]

4 minutes ago, Sorana said:

But need a way for character to advance, if only because it's the concept of all KRs to speak their oaths and to advance. So these characters will grow stronger over the time, or the whole character concept is screwed. And I think, if someone rps their character's advancement/ training whatever, it's fine if the character learns/ improves.

Then I would suggest a certain amount of points that a character is allowed to increase by between eras (and a cap of how much they can increase overall, so you can’t use Joe Schmoe in 5 eras and become Oidus-vay; with the requirement must have been active during the era to gain the benefit AND that the increases make narrative sense. (Again, on a case-by-case basis.) That’s not a system that can be gamed easily, but allows for organic growth.

[Voidus]

Yeah I just felt like 'X points per era' felt a little generic, it's difficult to determine whether or not a reward like that should be applied in all cases unless we go through case by case, and that's something I'd like to try to avoid. But the point about points for actions being prone to being gamed is also one that rings true.

Possible alternative thought: Rather than dealing with points at all we can skip straight to what people actually want to do with those points, and then as part of character bios people could submit goals and hopeful outcomes.
Eg. Goal: This year I wish to complete my studies of weapon combat at the canton by winning a duel.
Outcome: Melee Weapon expert

These goals could then be somewhat self rated, letting players decide when they have been met but still limited to once per era and subject to mod approval. Still not perfect but it does place a little less need on overall oversight, let's things be a little more flexible than just a straight points per era type thing. Now this is still somewhat likely to be seen as simply reward for certain actions but it's at the least not gameable or repeatable, ties in necessarily to backstory and encourages RP rather than a purely mechanical 'tick the box to participate in the main plot and receive points' type thing.

[+Sorana]

23 minutes ago, Voidus said:

Yeah I just felt like 'X points per era' felt a little generic, it's difficult to determine whether or not a reward like that should be applied in all cases unless we go through case by case, and that's something I'd like to try to avoid. But the point about points for actions being prone to being gamed is also one that rings true.

I agree this leads to lots of work on your side. Though honestly, it's the best I can think of right now. Maybe we just have to have our apply to characters that were actively rped, and then trust everybody to distribute them faintly, or to write a short summary where their character learned it.

26 minutes ago, Voidus said:

Possible alternative thought: Rather than dealing with points at all we can skip straight to what people actually want to do with those points, and then as part of character bios people could submit goals and hopeful outcomes.
Eg. Goal: This year I wish to complete my studies of weapon combat at the canton by winning a duel.
Outcome: Melee Weapon expert

I like that idea, but honestly for me it won't work. Because I don't decide how my characters will grow before they interact with other characters. Maybe set Althea aside, but even withher I only had her speak her oath, because it fit the situation. If we had found the time to rp her leaning how to use her shardweapon, then she would have fine that.  Maybe we could state that you have a goal, but if something else comes along, something based on good rp, then you can change it. So that you are a new to leave your character in a beautiful scene and don't need to leave because your goal dictates, that you should do this or that, but maybe the thread you planed with went inactive (e.g. the sewer System, the Canton, ...). I fear that might lead to frustration.

In the end we probably all submit a new Version of or character sheets one the era ends. So maybe we just mal which skill the character gained with a short explanation why. Just a sentence. Still a case to case decision, but hopefully people would choose a skill they really rped gaining and with the explanation you don't need to look everything up.

[Archer]

The character bio system is essential for the maintenance of order in the RP. Requiring bios to be fully developed is preferable as it discourages deus ex machina solutions and encourages consistency of characterizations. However, it can be limiting for discovery writers’ development of their characters' skillsets. This is an unintended consequence of an oversight in the initial design of the system: it was oriented towards immortals and martyrs, not survivors. The expectation was that submitted character bios would be for either extremely powerful beings who were already at the top of their game, or for lesser-powered characters who would not live long enough to significantly develop because they would be promptly killed by the aforementioned immortals. The higher turnover of characters a year ago due to the frequency of assassinations and battles meant that few people survived for enough in-game time to warrant tangible development.

The timeskips and general decrease in murders of late messed up that system, and the inherent philosophy of its later versions. A possible solution would be for characters to become less long-lived, but I recognize that that would be an unpopular proposal. People have become attached to their characters and want to see them grow more. Unfortunately, that is hard to fairly accommodate.

As Voidus said, having an RP of exclusively weak characters has numerous benefits. The even power levels create an inclusive environment for new players and a level playing field for less aggressive characters, the inability to tank forces people to cooperate and interact with others in order to achieve their goals, and the danger of dying encourages restraint. (Regarding that last point, that applies to thread hijacking, but also to character’s responses to other’s actions. Serious attempts to kill OP legacy characters can result in them pulling out all the stops and steamrolling their opponent unfairly.)

If the RP is to maintain characters’ power levels at below a certain amount, an oversight process is necessary. The best available forms of that involve a character bio approval process, then subsequent mod intervention if necessary.

The first is what the Alleyverse subforum began with: mod approval based on no publicized criteria, just the evaluator’s discretion. With a small pool (one or two) of knowledgeable evaluators, this can be efficient and flexible. However, it can also be inconsistent and frustratingly vague and opaque to those making submissions.

The second is the current system the RP has in place: a points-based checklist format. This setup is extremely transparent and reasonably consistent. It is also less reliant on the commitment and quality of the mod team. They have preestablished ratings to fall back on if they have not read every Sanderson book, the workload can be shared without significant decreases in consistency, it takes less time to evaluate a bio, and less workshopping has to be done to alter power-levels because more submissions are in-line with their expectations. However, the Index is ultimately just an imperfect quantification of the mod’s opinions about the value of every magic system and skill. It can actually be limiting if too strictly adhered to, as each character is able to use their skillset in unique ways which may not be reflected by their character score. Additionally, to build of Meta's point, people can instinctively focus on the points instead of simply trying to make good characters.

The Index is flawed. It is not designed to accommodate characters who are more than slightly stronger than the targeted maximum level. If it was, scores like the one for Fullborns of Body Stealers would be much higher. But that does not make it meritless; it merely needs to be updated.

The third option is a combination of the previous two: mods work mostly based on their own discretion while using preestablished ratings of magic types as a guideline. This generally allows for more flexibility to approve characters of varying levels based on merit instead of just power level, but makes it harder for players to know what is acceptable. Specific benefits and drawbacks vary depending how similar to the others this system is made to be in practice. 

Those are the three main available options. It should be noted that they all suffer from the flaw that Mac noted, how powerful a character is ultimately depends on how they are RPed, regardless of what the bio says.

The decision about which to use is pretty much up to mods, as they are the ones that need to balance the time commitment with what makes for a good player experience. Whichever one is used, ones of their goals should be to ensure that people to enjoy RPing with their characters. If that involves allowing some character upgrades, so be it. But an environment must be created where everyone has fun and feels that they have an impact on the thread’s developments. While OP characters that have been approved for the purposes of plot development have the potential to make interesting storylines materialize, their success rate has been spotty, in my opinion. It is not a reflection of how well they are played, as most of the time they are responsibly used, it is a reflection of how this RP community operates. Planned plots rarely work out as designed because people have a tendency to conceal their intentions, making their efforts solo-ventures. Picking up on what Ax said about IC planning, more communication needs to happen if people want grand schemes to happen the way they envision them. Otherwise, they need to accept the reality that chaos or the dominance of the strongest personality is likely become the focus of a thread. (Those are not necessarily bad things, just potentially unexpected outcomes.) Even guilds that attempt coordinated thread manipulation, like the BoV, will be thwarted by this unless transparency and communication is improved.

The idea of characters being fully planned in advance, in terms of their development and their contributions to a plotline, is probably an overly-optimistic one. An OP character does not a specific plot make, nor does giving a character skill points in bread making mean that they will not end up quitting the bakery on their first day when something interrupts their training. It is still worthwhile to make bios and try to predict the general direction a character will develop in, but I feel that the RP should allow for adjustments to characters if and when a situation warrants them. For example, if a character ends up being the villain of a thread, then they can petition for permission to raise an army of minions to throw against the heroes. And if one of those heroes learns an important life lesson during that battle, and they have been around for a while, then they can ask to swear another KR ideal. Instead of planning special OP-bios or playing to the points system from the start, everyone should just play normal characters, then have the option to make their case to either the community or a mod that, based on their current situation and past experiences, they should be allowed to have an upgrade.

That’s the approach that I think would work the best. There are other options though.

Something like Voidus mentioned about getting points for reaching certain milestones could work, but will likely not get the results that the community desires. If a metric based on how long a character has been around for is introduced, people could conceivably cheat the system by bringing back old characters just so they can upgrade them. A score of how much training a character has done would be ineffective as well. Let’s face it, roleplay training is generally boring to do and boring to read. Although it can be done in an interesting manner (shoutout to the Canton of Combat!), if a system is established that encourages players to focus on pumping out lengthy posts about their characters doing exercises and weapon drills that contribute nothing to any overall plot, the RP is headed in the wrong direction. The development of a character’s skillset should be integrated into a storyline, not done just to gain points.

Another possibility is balancing characters’ power-ups with additional restrictions on their activity that negates the unfairness of their increased power level. This could even be extended to the location they are allowed to go to; certain threads could be labelled OP-zones for the upgraded characters to frolic in. However, these seem unduly limiting. 

Depending how the community decides to go forward, it may be worthwhile to test the system out in a trial thread before it is implemented. There should be enough time before E4 to do so and reflect upon how it went.

[kenod]

49 minutes ago, Archer said:

Depending how the community decides to go forward, it may be worthwhile to test the system out in a trial thread before it is implemented. There should be enough time before E4 to do so and reflect upon how it went.

We could use the side-universe threads for this, to some extent. Most of them are a lot less strict in balancing and still seem to work (though most have become inactive). And it is true that creating a system that doesn't require the restrictions of the points-system would work too (the Reckoners RP is a great example). I think it's mostly that the culture/mindset of this rp isn't (or wasn't) really fit for it though.

[+Invocation]

Speaking on improvements that could be made to character stuff, what do y'all think about a thread to establish a character voice and find a reliable way to RP weaknesses before actually introducing them into the wider AV?

[xinoehp512]

I don't think I've ever gotten a reliable character voice, so that would be super helpful.

[MacThorstenson]

40 minutes ago, Invocation said:

Speaking on improvements that could be made to character stuff, what do y'all think about a thread to establish a character voice and find a reliable way to RP weaknesses before actually introducing them into the wider AV?

Sounds cool! Would it be similar to like a character developement thread that’s kind of self contained?

Edit: should clarify, would it have its own tiny plot that you can RP in? Or would it be more like the CDS thread from era one, where you posted things about what your character did and it didn’t really interact with anything else. 

Edited July 4, 2019 by MacThorstenson

[xinoehp512]

I guess? You'd need character interaction, because that's a large part of what you do in RP. Probably something more like one of the tavern threads.

[MacThorstenson]

2 minutes ago, xinoehp512 said:

I guess? You'd need character interaction, because that's a large part of what you do in RP. Probably something more like one of the tavern threads.

I really like that idea!

another thing that it could help with is the evaluation of weaknesses from the approves standpoint. 

It’s tough to get an idea for how debilitating a weakness is from just a sentence in a character sheet, but with this thread you could point to RP samples of a weakness and say, this is a more typical occurrence of his PTSD or this is how his missing limb effects his fighting style. 

[+ZincAboutIt]

I’d be totally interested in helping out with people finding their character voice/exploring their own weaknesses through interaction if needed 

Edited July 4, 2019 by ZincAboutIt

[+Invocation]

7 minutes ago, MacThorstenson said:

Sounds cool! Would it be similar to like a character developement thread that’s kind of self contained?

Edit: should clarify, would it have its own tiny plot that you can RP in? Or would it be more like the CDS thread from era one, where you posted things about what your character did and it didn’t really interact with anything else. 

Like a tiny interaction space, self-contained and with only a minimal plot. I have no idea what the CDS thread was, that's from before my time, but from what you say of it, yeah pretty much like that.

4 minutes ago, MacThorstenson said:

another thing that it could help with is the evaluation of weaknesses from the approves standpoint. 

That's also a thing linked to this idea. You can see how the weakness would actually play out and if it would actually work and be RPed accurately or not.

10 minutes ago, xinoehp512 said:

I guess? You'd need character interaction, because that's a large part of what you do in RP. Probably something more like one of the tavern threads.

Yeah, the tavern threads are pretty close to it.

Also, as a side note: this is mostly @ZincAboutIt's idea, I just posted it.

[MacThorstenson]

1 minute ago, Invocation said:

Like a tiny interaction space, self-contained and with only a minimal plot. I have no idea what the CDS thread was, that's from before my time, but from what you say of it, yeah pretty much like that.

I should clarify, the CDS thread was a thread devoted to character developement scenes that you wrote about your characters. It was basically a bunch of one person scenes as no one interacted with each other’s scenes. 

It sounds like this would be very different. 

[+Invocation]

1 minute ago, MacThorstenson said:

I should clarify, the CDS thread was a thread devoted to character developement scenes that you wrote about your characters. It was basically a bunch of one person scenes as no one interacted with each other’s scenes. 

It sounds like this would be very different. 

Ah. Yes, it would be a little different, kind of like a waiting room where people can interact with other characters/have an example scene for their character showcasing the voice, the weakness, and their powers.

Could also be good for OP characters, so people know how they'd interact better.