General OOC

No problems! Take your time, it's clear what are the next steps now. :)

So, I guess I'm learning that playing PCs on days I'm training is doable, but organising and synthesising posts and writing something in response to them as a GM seems to be too much. Sorry again for the delay. Am going to assume I'll be too tired again tomorrow, but that Friday I'll get this post up.

I've read through the OOC and in-game posts and propose moving forward like this.

The issues are around the kind of tasks/jobs the ship takes on, the feel and properties of the ship, and the general purpose of the ship. It will still be a ship you stole just after escaping prison. And the prison can have been a low-security one that was on a station with other kinds of activities on it - such that the station could have had any kind of ship docked to it (and thus available for you to steal). We're doing it like this, so that we have more flexibility to find a ship concept that we're all OK with.

Based on previous messages, lines for the ship will be

- no mega-cow cargo
- the ship will not be ugly, run-down, or torn-up
- the ship will have some defences

With this in mind, I would like your votes/contributions on the following topics. I'm not going to make these decisions on my own, as the point of doing this is to try and find a way forward that we are all happy with - and I feel that's both slower, but also more likely to work, if we do it collaboratively.

For each of the categories, please indicate either "YES", "NO", or "OK" - hoping we can find a selection of choices which are either "YES" or "OK" for everyone. The resulting ship and story might not be a very logical fit of characteristics, but I accept that potential narrative dissonance in the interests of finding something we are all OK with. I may look for another image for the ship, depending on what we decide here.

I also want to know/have your vote on how you'd like to move forward once we have this input from you all.

If any of you don't want to go through this process, I totally understand. I know it's slowing things down - but I know won't enjoy this game if I have the feeling that some of the players don't want to be playing in the scenario as it's written. If you don't want to keep going, just let us know, and hopefully we'll have fun playing together in some other game.

So, your choices:

Descriptors/characteristics of the ship
fancy-looking and obvious
non-descript

large
small

offence systems
no offence systems

fast
slow

manoeuvreable
cumbersome

Class/type of ship
luxury yacht
cargo transport ship
fighter/assault ship
courier ship
military cruiser/warship
passenger transport ship

Moving forward to finalise ship integrating the above input
GM decides unilaterally the details of the ship
GM proposes options and we vote on them to choose one
Players and GM propose options and we vote on them

So, for example, your response to the above post might be:

Descriptors/characteristics of the ship
fancy-looking and obvious YES
non-descript OK

large YES
small YES

offence systems YES
no offence systems NO

fast YES
slow NO

manoeuvrable YES
cumbersome OK

Class/type of ship
luxury yacht YES
cargo transport ship OK
fighter/assault ship YES
courier ship OK
military cruiser/warship NO
passenger transport ship NO

Moving forward to finalise ship integrating the above input
GM decides unilaterally the details of the ship YES
GM proposes options and we vote on them to choose one OK
Players and GM propose options and we vote on them YES

Descriptors/characteristics of the ship
fancy-looking and obvious YES
non-descript NO

large YES
small NO

offence systems OK
no offence systems OK

fast OK
slow OK

manoeuvreable OK
cumbersome OK

Class/type of ship
luxury yacht YES
cargo transport ship YES
fighter/assault ship NO
courier ship OK
military cruiser/warship NO
passenger transport ship YES

Moving forward to finalise ship integrating the above input
GM decides unilaterally the details of the ship OK
GM proposes options and we vote on them to choose one YES
Players and GM propose options and we vote on them NO

Descriptors/characteristics of the ship
fancy-looking and obvious OK
non-descript OK

large OK
small OK

offence systems OK
no offence systems OK

fast OK
slow OK

manoeuvrable OK
cumbersome OK

Class/type of ship
luxury yacht OK
cargo transport ship OK
fighter/assault ship OK
courier ship OK
military cruiser/warship OK
passenger transport ship OK

Moving forward to finalise ship integrating the above input
GM decides unilaterally the details of the ship YES
GM proposes options and we vote on them to choose one NO
Players and GM propose options and we vote on them NO

Descriptors/characteristics of the ship
fancy-looking and obvious: OK
non-descript: OK

large: OK
small: OK

offence systems: OK
no offence systems: OK

fast: OK
slow: OK

manoeuvreable: YES
cumbersome: OK

Class/type of ship
luxury yacht: OK
cargo transport ship: OK
fighter/assault ship: OK
courier ship: OK
military cruiser/warship: NO
passenger transport ship: OK

Moving forward to finalise ship integrating the above input
GM decides unilaterally the details of the ship: OK
GM proposes options and we vote on them to choose one: OK
Players and GM propose options and we vote on them: OK

I realize that the above kind of amounts to "whatever", so it may not be very helpful. But I can have fun with any ship.

All good, @timplausible. Exactly the info I'm hoping for! I think also good for us all to get a sense of what's important to the others.

I find it helps me to be reminded of how different what we want and don't want, can be for different people.

Thanks for responding to the questions - your responses and the combined outcomes are described below. I'm not taking any option for which there is even one "NO".

On the basis of this, I'm now going to re-write the Character Sheet for The Ballerina. Then I will re-write the first post for the in-character play. I'll then ask each of you to check your initial post, and if you feel it needs any changes on the basis of the changed ship and first post, to make them.

Then hopefully we are all synchronised, all OK with the scenario, and all good to move forward.

fancy-looking and obvious YES OK OK OK
non-descript NO OK OK OK
LOOK: FANCY-LOOKING AND OBVIOUS

large YES OK OK OK
small NO OK OK OK(just not cramped and crowded)
SIZE: LARGE

offence systems OK OK OK YES
no offence systems OK OK OK NO
OFFENCE SYSTEMS: YES

defence systems YES
no defence systems NO
DEFENCE SYSTEMS: YES

fast OK OK OK YES
slow OK OK OK NO
SPEED: FAST

manoeuvrable OK YES
cumbersome OK NO
MANOEUVRABILITY: HIGH

Class/type of ship
luxury yacht YES OK OK NO
cargo transport ship YES OK OK OK
fighter/assault ship NO OK OK OK
courier ship OK OK OK NO
military cruiser/warship NO OK NO NO
passenger transport ship YES OK OK OK
SHIP CLASS: choice between CARGO TRANSPORT or PASSENGER TRANSPORT

Moving forward to finalize ship integrating the above input
GM decides unilaterally the details of the ship OK YES OK OK
GM proposes options and we vote on them to choose one YES NO OK YES
Players and GM propose options and we vote on them NO NO OK OK
NEXT STEP: GM DECIDES UNILATERALLY DETAILS OF SHIP BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM THIS SURVEY

If we get to choose I would like a cargo vessel over a passenger ship.

Got me in time, @JoshuaMabry - cargo vessel it is :)

I've updated The Ballerina character sheet, and edited the initial post to the Day 1: Everything's shiny, Captain thread.

I felt it was OK to make only a few changes to the initial post, but please still check back at what you posted previously, make any edits you feel are needed to retcon to the new version of the ship and the situation, and let me know when you've done so. Once I've heard that everyone has done that, we'll start moving forward with the situation again.

Please give me a little time. I think I need to do a total rewrite as I based my post on the now defunct mega-cow mission.

I'll leave my post as is, didn't need to change it.

Thanks for checking in so quickly @htech and @JoshuaMabry.

Normally I'd go by the default of three days waiting for people to post before we move forward without them. And when that happens if possible we'll just assume their PC passively follows the others - or if something impacts them directly, I'll take over their response.

But this time, given how much time we've all invested in this set-up already, I really want us all to have a chance to move forward together, so am OK for you to have a few days longer than that to write a new post.

I'll be chucking my entire original posts and writing something new. I'll get that done later today.

Thanks for that @timplausible

FWIW I feel I've learned some useful things here about GMing PbP. In particular, a better understanding of:

1. the kinds of issues, topics, expectations that can influence whether or not people will enjoy playing a game - and that it is thus worth including in the recruitment post (even though that makes it longer) to make it more likely that player and GM expectations align

2. the amount of time, work, concentration, attention it can take to adjust course in a story/scenario

3. tools, possibilities, that can help collect input from players

If I run this again, I'll make quite a few changes with how we start things off.

Thank you for bearing with it as we find our way through this. I appreciate your forebearance and support and collaboration.

No problem. Still looking forward to the game.

Done :)