OOC Chatter

I'm going to be away from tomorrow (15th) until Wednesday 23rd. I'll try and get Fei-fei's response up by tonight, but I might not get the chance.

I'm also traveling (for spring break), I'll post of it can, but Totes_McGee can feel free to play Chillmera if/when necessary

10-4. Have fun!

I'll roll for/play your characters if needed, but I'll try to keep the posts limited so there's not an overwhelming amount of stuff to catch up on.

I've only been here a short time, but I'm enjoying the game so far! I'm interested in rescuing the 2 PC's from Malkengard, and my character is too. It's just that unless Ive missed something, I don't see a way there.

Glad you're enjoying it! As for a rescue, there are plenty of options.

- Bulwark is at your mercy, and knows stuff.
- Eliza is a master builder. Could you also enlist Echo, even though she blew you both off?
- Fei-fei mentioned a mystical option.
- This world has a website called Hero Help Now, the premier site connecting heroes to those in need. If you post something, can you find a cross-dimensional teleporter? Or at least someone with a helpful skillet.

These are just four. There are plenty of other ways to tackle this problem.

However, it wasn't my intent to separate you all for this long, but everything takes 10x longer in PbP. I generally want you to stick together, as maintaining separate storylines can get confusing for all involved. There's also the meta-gaming aspect, where one group has to pretend they don't know what the other group is doing.

Well, Bulwark said he didn't know anything, and Echo confirmed it. I guess I can ask him again nicely

I'm fine with fast-forwarding if others are. It feels handwavey, but almost necessary to get the gang together.

Happy to do either or, honestly. It's whatever's easiest for you as GM!

Maybe consider a soft reboot, since all of our characters are new-ish and removed from the original setup? Whatever works. A couple of questions, though.
- I'm not sure what the tone of the story is supposed to be. I went into this thinking it was going to be silly superheroes, but then it got dark. Even if she weren't crippled, I didn't feel comfortable about leaning into Tomo's gimmick for jokes when people are actually dying for real. I didn't particularly enjoy Tomo being sexually harassed either.
- Why would we be at Jimmy's house? I don't think any of our characters know him at all. Part of the reason I suggest a soft reboot.

Regarding the vibe: the Games Tavern posting said "more Vertigo than Marvel," though I did post an update later on that encouraged people to read the IC posts to get a feel for the vibe.

So if you're just looking for "silly superheroes," this isn't the right game. There will be some silliness, but also violence, corruption, darkness...and on the flip side, hopefully some comedic or uplifting moments. Mixing it up keeps things fresh.
When did this happen?
Doesn't have to be the meetup point. Could be the Caldwell residence, since I believe everyone knows them except Chillmera.

I haven't read the Vertigo comics, so I built my expectations based off of reading the game itself, which was fairly lighthearted and pulpy the whole way through, where "crazy" means "mad scientist you knock out" and not "psycho who murders on a whim". I'm not sure if anybody else had the impression of a stark tonal shift like I did, but I'd like to make sure that I'm on the same page as everybody else here. If that's the tone we decide to roll with, I can adjust my expectations.
The whole thing with Ragnar? Unless you have any other way to describe a naked Ragnar chasing down a crying Tomo to spank her after not taking any hints about Tomo not being receptive to Ragnar's persistent advances? I think the power imbalance between a demigod imposing on a person of baseline human ability is what firmly tipped it into being weird.

I do agree that my initial impression was something more lighthearted and not people talking about killing, and the brutal nature of some of the engagements. Fei-fei, being generally a "normal" person, if a little eccentric, beyond her powers, isn't the type to immediately jump to "lets kill a bunch of corporate lackies.

Admittedly that might've been my fault though, since at the time of making my character I'd only read up to the end of the introduction (and the defeat of the neighbour and his dog) so the tone might not have been established. I might've made a different character if I was intending to play something more dark in tone.

Confused about this. You have Tomo puke on a prideful, impulsive demigod twice, but don't expect him to retaliate?

If spanking is out of the question, how should I have handled the fight? Is getting zapped by lightning, slashed with a sword, or bashed with punches or kicks acceptable...but not getting whacked in the butt a few times?

As for "power imbalance": yes, that's part of RPGs. Navigating those situations is what makes them fun. At least for me, maybe not for you. And your foes will indeed try to "impose" on you. Not sure how I can handle conflict if your enemies aren't really trying to harm you.

And the "power imbalance" wasn't really an imbalance, at least 2v1. The math gets tricky, what with pumps and inappropriate cliches, but you and Rocketeer had a 75-80% chance to defeat Ragnar. IIRC, you pumped too much and KOed yourself early, leaving Rocketeer to face him alone. Which is fine; one of the reasons I use Risus is that defeat in battle doesn't necessarily mean death. But this was hardly some unbeatable foe who does whatever he wants to you, with you being completely helpless.

Regarding the tone: again, I was trying to mix things up, so it's not always "standard superhero battle with sorta bad person," but sometimes "holy shit this is serious!" If this was confusing, my bad.

I'll be gone Tuesday and possibly Wednesday (6th and 7th), so I'll ponder this some more. Keep chiming in with your thoughts, and we'll see if we can come up with...something? Best practices, I guess is the most fitting term.

Honestly? yes. I can't speak for Saevikas, but from my perspective I'd ask you to think about the framing and the implications of the characters. At least with the lightning or swords etc it's not demeaning, and suggests Ragnar treats her as an enemy, let alone the obviously suggestive nature of a naked man doing that to a woman. (And include "who has responded negatively to said man's advances.")

Context is very, very important.

I can definitely see how Ragnar's nudity is an issue, so I can refrain from that sort of thing in the future.

But I still disagree on the spanking...not that it's demeaning, but that's it's a proportional response to an equally demeaning action. Puking on someone twice? Once could be considered an accident, twice is no bueno...especially since Tomo and Rocketeer were in open air, and nothing was forcing her to puke again on Ragnar. Even if she claimed it was an accident, Ragnar didn't see it that way...nor would I, if it happened to me IRL.

As for Ragnar "treating her as an enemy," he didn't treat her as an enemy, even after that. At least, not one he wanted to slay by any means necessary. He just wanted to teach her a lesson. As I mentioned at the time, that was "light combat" to start, though Rocketeer escalated. But to start with, there's no reason for Ragnar to go all out, as he had no intention of maiming or killing Tomo.

And if we're talking about being demeaning, stealing Ragnar's sword, as Rocketeer did, was incredibly demeaning, as were her comments about his unworthiness. Fei-fei is also sassy, in her own way.

I'm not complaining about this. I think all of it is cool, and sent the narrative in unexpected directions.

But if people want to do whatever to NPCs, because "they're just NPCs," but then get frustrated when their character is put in a comparable situation? Really hamstrings me as a GM.

I don't mind that the fight happened, that we lost the fight, that conflict can happen, or that things are mechanically balanced. To put it simply, I didn't enjoy the interaction with Ragnar because Ragnar is a creep.

I agree with Tickettbror that the framing of a naked man trying to assert dominance over a girl by spanking her and "teaching her a lesson" is offputting, especially given his sexual interest in her. To quote Ragnar when Tomo taps out and apologizes:
Do you see why this feels rapey? Say what you will about Ragnar's motivation for his actions, it doesn't change how offputting they are and that I didn't enjoy this interaction because of that. This is not "sassy supers taunting each other" kind of demeaning, this is "demigod knows he can do whatever he wants with you" kind of demeaning. I'm sure that you did not intend it that way, but that's how it comes off.

If something less drastic like demanding an apology or reparations won't do, lightning and swords would've at least leaned into Tomo's death defying gimmick. It still maintains the aspect of Ragnar being not taking well to his pride being sullied, while not making things so weird. Is it a disproportionate response? Yes, but what Ragnar did was a disproportionate response anyways. You don't get a news crew pointed at you or a call to the police for throwing up on someone twice. However, "naked man chases a girl to spank her" does.

Even putting aside the fight, Ragnar was a creep from the get go.

I've already addressed the nudity, so don't have anything to add.
Well, yes, he can do whatever he wants to you, if he wins the fight. Not rape or anything of that sort, but Risus rules state the winners decide the fates of the losers, within reason based on the type of conflict.

If you're worried about someone "doing whatever they want with you," I don't know what to tell ya, because that's a possibility for every high-stakes fight.
As I've said plenty of times, Ragnar did not want to fight full strength. You're saying he should've, so you can use your cliche? If he tried to slaughter you just because of puke, he'd be a full-on villain, which isn't his character.

If he's a creep from the get go, why not just attempt to leave? He wasn't antagonistic. But puking on him twice is both a challenge to him, and to me, the GM. It's saying, "Yeah, I puked on your NPC...twice! What're ya gonna do about it?" Which is cool. I'm game! But then Tomo gets spanked, and suddenly everything's super-serious, and the encounter should've happened a certain way so Tomo could flex, even though it's against Ragnar's intentions.

It seems like you want to be deliberately provocative, but then want to nitpick the response to your actions.

I don't know where you got the notion that I'm saying this to metagame and not because it genuinely was uncomfortable for me. This is not a complaint about losing or wanting to show off. This is not some sort of attack, this is not an argument, this is not a negotiation. This is me explaining what made me uncomfortable about the situation so that we could work out an understanding before we move forwards.

If I came off as provocative, I apologize for not using a more eloquent tone to convey my explanation. If I came off as nitpicky, I apologize for not addressing every point you put forward for discussion. At the same time, I ask that you refrain from the deliberately provocative and nitpicky behavior that you accuse me of. It's disrespectful and unproductive.

If you want to understand what made me uncomfortable so that we can move forwards, I can do my best to rephrase in a less charged fashion. Maybe we can do some sort of structured Q&A so that we can organize and address our concerns without getting lost in the weeds.

If you are not interested in moving forwards, then let me know how you want to deal with this situation.

I understand your reasons for being uncomfortable, and also understand the concerns with nudity. But IMO, it doesn't mesh with the way you've portrayed your character.

Let's go back to your intro. You careen into the Caldwells' backyard, and die with a fire extinguisher poking out of your body. You then leave without much explanation. Is it OK to subject a young girl to this amount of gruesomeness and weirdness? (I don't care that you did it, just posing the question to highlight your behavior.)

Then moving on to Ragnar. You puke on him twice, which demands a response, even though you claim you disliked him from the get go. If you abhorred him, the best plan would've been to simply play along with him for a bit, then fly away. You didn't, which signaled to me you had no problem with how the story was going.

Also:
Again, you seem to be having a fine ol' time with this.

Looking back, I also found this:
This happened before Ragnar spanked you, though to be fair he'd declared his intent. But the versus roll was still in question, so if you won he wouldn't have had a chance. A low blow is OK (again, before the egregious spanking even happened), but a few spanks isn't?

The vibe I got from Tomo is that she's a meme/joke character, and that you welcomed weirdness. Now you claim otherwise. You also don't seem to want to scrutinize your RPing, instead basically saying "that's different" when you do it, but "that's inappropriate" when I do it.

Such a situation is impossible to GM.

This is also the first time you've mentioned your concerns. This happened roughly two months ago. Why didn't you bring it up then, when memories were fresh? This makes the situation even more perplexing.

Here are my thoughts going forward:

1.) No nudity onscreen. From my end, however, there is a possibility that NPCs will be flirtatious, sleazy, or creepy.

2.) Your characters will be challenged. That includes the possibility of getting beat up, slashed, bashed, spanked, demeaned, or humiliated. This doesn't include sadistic, gory, R-rated stuff, like getting disemboweled and choked with your own intestines or something. This is regardless of any "power imbalance." It's your job to navigate these situations...though as I've already explained, the math is usually in your favor with these "imbalances."

3.) My RP follows from yours. If Tomo low blows someone in battle, expect a retaliatory low blow. "But Tomo's a girl, and the opponent is a big powerful dude" isn't a valid argument. Think carefully about how your RP will be perceived before posting. If necessary, also write an OOC note to clarify your intent.

3.) The tone of the game will shift from time to time. Nobody needs to change their character. A character who's more heroic encountering a darker situation makes for a good story. Think about the interaction between Daredevil and the Punisher.

4.) NPCs will behave in ways relevant to their personality and the current situation. If anyone wants to avoid an NPC/situation, make an effort to do so. This won't be possible during conflict, but conflicts will eventually be over, and you can be on your way.

There's also the question about actually continuing the game. If I'm out of sync with what people want, it's time to retire the game, as a large re-recruitment at this point isn't something I want to tackle.

Personally, if my PC got spanked with a magical sword by a drunk, nude demigod, I'd think it was awesome, and would be coming up with creative ways to repay him. Same thing with a shift in tone. We all have our sensibilities, and if they're as disparate as they appear, then this game becomes a chore for all involved.

Is Ragnar's behavior creepy to an uncomfortable degree? My answer is yes. To me, Ragnar's behavior, crosses the line from funny, quirky, memey or whatever you intended, into being creepy. My one concern is toning that kind of behavior down moving forwards. I appreciate that you're trying with the nudity, but that's not really the issue, the nudity just happens to make the framing of that kind of behavior more obvious.

All other concerns you seem dead set on attributing to me are not even issues I've brought up. I literally did not state that I had any problems with losing, consequences, conflict, math, mechanics, fairness, or whatever other issues you'd like to think I'm bringing up that I'm not. If Ragnar wasn't so creepy, and the rest of the scene played out the same, losing the fight and all, I wouldn't have issues. But you're assuming that I'm somehow trying to metagame a situation that happened months ago like that matters at all. It's like you've made up some munchkin version of me in your head to argue with.

You know, I'm tired. I had intended for this to be a offhanded bit of feedback while you were already doing an OOC check in with everybody, a simple little side note to bring up while I was thinking about the shift in tone. If it weren't for the shift in tone, I might've not even bothered to bring it up, leaving it as a one time anomaly, given my initial impression of a lighthearted game. So, it is vexing what should've been a short and painless explanation is being continuously dismissed in favor of you trying to make arguments against points I never made.

And what I've heard from you in terms of my one concern are attempts at justifying Ragnar's behavior or victim blaming Tomo or accusations borne from your preconceptions of me as a problem player. But there's a concerning lack of actual acknowledgment of Ragnar's behavior being creepy. I'm not holding it against you that you had Ragnar act the way he did, or anything other decisions you made as GM. It happens, sometimes you do something that makes sense in your head without realizing how the framing of those actions might come off. I just want to take the opportunity to tell you my one concern, and I'd like you to address my one concern directly if we're going to move forwards.

Do you think that, or at least can see how, Ragnar's behavior is creepy to an uncomfortable degree? Yes or no?

If yes, then can you please tone down that kind of behavior? Thank you.

If no, I'm not going to hold it against you. If you can accommodate anyways by by doing your best to tone down that kind of behavior, then I am willing to work together with you on that. Thank you. If you can not accommodate, then let me know. Thank you.