SURVEY QUESTION: MOVES!

[Handsome Jack]

If we don't revamp the system, I'd at least like to see some more detail on what Drawbacks can do other than "dey make yer Muuvs betar!". Right now, there doesn't seem to be much difference between a pistol with unlimited ammo and one with a 6 round capacity, other than that one has an unknown amount of "betterness".

I also think we need to not only evaluate Moves of the number of different things they can do, but on what additional effects each thing can do. A Firesword and a bog-standard sword cost the same OM, even if the former can light people on fire. We talk a lot about "Well, the less extra stuff it does, the more powerful it is", but in my 5ish years here, I've seen very few instances of this actually mattering in any real way. With things as they are, a Firesword will always be a upgrade to a regular sword because it grants you more "writing fodder".

[Strazio Rockwell]

I really don't think that an overhaul would be the best, if I'm honest. I believ the core of the system is good.

I think 2 major factors of the system need ot be tightened up and polished:
1: What counts as a "variable"
2: What details are pertinent for other writers to know about a move.

These are my ideas as of thus far:
1: A variable is something that adds narrative functionality outside of the powers that you already have.

Just as a rough, unpolished stream of thought for 2:
What does it look like?
If it's a physical object, what are some of the important dimensions?
If it's something that doesn't appear in the real world, what's important for us to know about how it operates?
What happens if you are targeted by this move (outside of the expected)?
What are some of the downsides (if it's beyond what we expect)?
What is it especially good at doing (if it does anything beyond what we expect)?

I agree with your two points. Both aspects could/should be polished and tightened.

The second half I have some disagree with, not because it's bad in theory it just seems too nebulous to be properly defined.

What do you mean by narrative functionality? That seems like such a vague term. If I have a gun that can shoot ice bullets and fire bullets that's obviously two seperate functions narrative wise, but how is that different than our current system?

The problem I see with writing "what does this move do outside of the expected" is that the expected might not be the same between members. Not everyone is gun/sword savvy. Same as not everyone knows your particular canon universe.

For example if I have a gun that I know has 30 rounds because I'm a gun nut do I not have to write that bit of information into the move? As their opponent do I have to do google searches to find the capacity of an average magazine for said weapon? Or, God-forbid, the submitter has an incorrect idea of how that particular weapon works and they think it shoots 40 rounds but in real life it is 30.

And please dont take this as me attacking your idea, but things like this do need to be taken into consideration. I do think it is a good start though.

[Bandit With No Name]

Ah nah, you're just seeking clarification, that's chill my dude!

I didn't really wanna dump the full layout of it here, just throw out the rough sketch.

As far as the question abotu how the variables work, and how it's essentially the same as it is now: That's kinda the point. It's not meant to be a huge change, just a way that we can reasonably and pointedly quantify the value of something. I ran a bunch of tests with older moves, especially Guu moves because BOY are her things fuckin weird.

Basically the concept asks us: What functionality is gained that does not already exist within the Pre-Requisites for that move? What's the BENEFIT outside of what you already have?

Fly Paper Skin (300 OM) Physical Strength, Debuff Proficiency, Malleability, Shapeshifting
With a half a second of focus, Guu can make her skin incredibly sticky. It takes very little focus to maintain, but the effect applies to her whole body, slowing her down by half. She can use the move to stick to surfaces, objects, or even an opponent. This will increase the strength of her overall grip.
Of course, the increase is kind of subtle, and a reasonably strong opponent could yank her off without too much effort. Moving around while sticky immediately breaks stealth as the noise of her moving is a dead give away, unless if she was moving at one quarter her speed. It takes a half a second to deactivate this move.

This move is weird as hell. How do you QUANTIFY stickiness? I'm not going to try to count all the myriad ways that it can be used under creative scenarios. I'm not going to count then umber of required Powers to make it work, because it would be outrageously expensive. But I can ask, "What does this add to the her creative writing potential that Malleability, the ability to grab things, and the ability to change her shape don't already add?" Simple: she's sticky. That's basically ONE THING it adds that's outside of the already existing power structure. 300 OM.

Proficiencies are a bit of an abstract ask when we talk about "what does a move add that Physical Strength doesn't afford?" But when you apply the same concepts here, the Profs don't actually give you anything actionable, they jsut allow you to get moves that fall under their purview. So the added benefit of a Sword when compared against Physical strength is actual USE. It lets you DO something. The added functionality of a Sword Move over Physical Strength is use. 300 OM.

Let's talk abotu fire and ice bullets. Do they light things on fire? Do they freeze them? Nah? Ok, it's just flavor. They're tungston rounds. They're electric rounds. They're made of... plastic or something, whatever. It doesn't add any narrative functionality; they JUST do damage. It's just fluff, not really affording any new narrative possibilities. 300 OM for an Elemental Gun, because all the elemental shots do the exact same thing, but with a bit of fluff. Now, if the fire rounds can light things on fire? That's an additional narrative tool. +300 OM. The Ice bullets freeze things? +300 OM. If you had a gun that did rounds that shoot things, light them on fire or freeze them? Ok, that's 3 distinct narrative opportunities. 900 OM.

If you wanna throw more examples at me for more explanation of this particular concept, totally down for that. It's a little hard to plug in, but once you've got it, it's pretty easy.

As far as that second segment goes: Why is it important that we know a gun can hold 30 rounds? We know it shoots bullets and that it has a limited capacity. You can narratively decide when that happens, OR, if the person that has made the Move wants for it to be specific (say, in the case of a revolver, where that makes sense to "count the shells" for cool narrative reasons) they can absolutely do that. The number of bullets isn't a really important aspect of the gun to know, unless the Move maker decides it is.

The primary reason for those last 3 questions is to flesh out concepts that we aren't really sturdy on for objects that don't actually exist in the real world. Destructo Disk, for example. If I didn't watch DBZ, I need to know:
It's a red energy disk about 2 feet across that spins horizontally, a bit like a Frisbee
It's made of ki energy, and it flys from the user's hand in line
If you get hit by it, it cuts things in a clean, cauterized slice
It has a wide arc, so it can be avoided if you see it coming
It can still be controlled by the wielder

Now obviously, make that into a compelling, interesting description of a cool thing your character does, but really that's all you need to know to work with that move in a narrative sense. That's really all the information the SHOW has on the disk, and we as viewers or a person imagining the disk in other scenarios need to figure it out.

If we're talking about our good old Gun of Fire and Ice:
It's a heavy machine gun, with along, ventilated barrel, with chains rows of ammunition coming in from either side. The ammo on the left glows icy blue, the ammo on the right glows burning red. It sounds like a real world counterpart.
It's about 3 feet long, and weighs about 35 pounds.
It's an elemental firearm, that uses trapped spirits in each round as it fires. It fires automatically when you pull down the trigger.
The fire bullets will hurt you like normal bullets, but also light things (and people) on fire. The ice bullets hurt liek normal bullets, but freeze things (and people) with a thin layer of ice.
It has to be reloaded when the belts run out, which can take a few seconds.
It's pretty much operates like a machine gun that can light things on fire or freeze them.


Now, again, this information is NOT pretty, it's not eloquent, and it might not burrow down into the belly of beast, but it's really all you'd ever need if you were gonna write with this Move. You could easily take all those details and qhip them into something beautiful, but if that's all you had, that's all you'd need.

[Daniel]

I just wanted to stop by and let you guys know that I've been following this thread silently and that I've been working on a document that I hope will help to clarify and simplify the moves process.

[Reece]

I feel like I'm starting to understand your system a bit better, Bandit, and I can see where you're coming from. The narrative opportunities thing doesn't really sound all that different to what is already done when you put it like that... and also sounds like what Jeff was saying about a fire sword costing 600 OM for having both fire & a sword. So yeah, that seems reasonable to me.

I still think giving a number of rounds for a gun should be necessary, though. It's not like it's super hard to do, so I'm not sure why it's such a big issue?
When I wrote a gun move for my character, Hijiri, it only required a quick Google to come up with the information I needed... it really wouldn't take long at all to do. If people aren't willing to put in even such a minimal amount of effort to get a gun move, then maybe they should just avoid buying guns for their characters.

What I will say, though, is that I've seen people being asked for a rate of fire for their guns... which... admittedly... is probably a bit excessive. If I was making a full auto gun, I'd include an RoF, personally, because I like realism... but our characters are never gonna be noticing details like that mid-fight, so just saying full auto should be plenty to go off, if people want to do that. And obviously you should never be asked for the RoF of a semi-automatic, since it just depends on the speed your character can pull the trigger (i.e. it rises based on your SPD stat, just like the rate at which you can swing a sword around would).

That all said, if our goal is creative freedom, I think that Jeff's way is still best, and would support Ezzy's suggestion of performing some kinda beta test of that system (and/or any other systems which people may come up with that are significantly different from what we currently have).

[Bandit With No Name]

The number of bullets thing is primarily one of "wow is this really important?" It's kind of a touchstone example issue rather than one that's a specific hill to die on.

If a gun has 5 shots, 40 or an infinite number, they all cost the same, and it really doesn't effect effect the writing in a significant way, and that's the real issue: We're being told we have to include details that don't matter in most cases.

And yo, if you like realism, then by all means, include the number of rounds! Maybe it makes sense for your character, or its your writing style. But for the vast majority of characters and the vast majority of writers, its just hyper specific minutia that doesn't make much sense. Especially think about anime characters, or characters from videogames or cartoons: the reload when it's cool or when its narratively important in their home canons; wouldn't it make sense that their weapons work the same way here?

For that matter: EXACTLY how long is Gut's sword from Berserk? It actually changes CONSTANTLY, because he's an animated character. What matters is that it's big as hell, roughly as tall as he is. Saying "about roughly 6 feet" is like, fine.


Additionally the biggest reason I would like to switch to a, "what does this add to your character's narrative ability that they don't already have" is another fix for another touchstone issue: the goddamn selector switch problem. Why should it cost me MORE to give myself a power that does LESS than what it's already capable of? Making people narratively nitpick about using less than a Move or Power's current capabilities, and then CHARGING them for it absolutely ridiculous. It doesn't make sense from EITHER a writer's perspective OR a game designers perspective.

[Reece]

Good points... but I still think that people who want their guns to work that way (i.e. they do require reloading, but it only ever happens when the writer feels like including it) should have to specify as such in their move description... and, of course, having a gun that works this way would also give their opponent the freedom to have them run out of bullets whenever they felt like it too, if they wanted to do their own cool little story moment... just like they currently can with the more specific numbers of shots.

If people don't write that information in then I'd say that the most sensible assumption is that (because Omniphysics) the gun has infinite ammo, doesn't ever need to be reloaded, and as such cannot be reloaded for any interesting little story moments that someone might feel like including.

And yeah, I agree about the sword thing. There's no reason why approximate sizes shouldn't be totally fine.



Regarding the selector switch... keep in mind that we're still having to balance guns with magic (or superpowers or ki or chakra or whatever else you wanna call it). If it's okay for you to have a 300 OM gun that is both semi-auto and full-auto, then it should also mean that someone with a spell that shoots a single bolt of lightning should be able to modify that spell to shoot hundreds of bolts per minute without paying extra.

Now, personally, I wouldn't mind that. It'd be a big change from the current system, but not necessarily better or worse. It just depends on whether you prefer creative freedom or artificial restrictions.
So long as it's done correctly, it could be great. That's the important point, though... if this change is made, it absolutely must affect every move equally. We can't just apply it to guns and say that magic is different, because doing that gives an objective advantage to certain move types, which goes against the whole point of the inter-fandom balancing idea which is central to this site's story.

I'm not suggesting that this is what you're intending, Bandit, but I just want to make sure we're all on the same page here, because one thing I've noticed in the past is people getting asked to add charge times and higher energy costs to their magic-like moves, while people with guns just get... y'know... proper guns.

Having to reload is basically the only drawback guns have, since almost everyone just completely ignores or forgets about recoil (I know I'm guilty of doing this in my own writing, though it hasn't been a major issue so far, as Hijiri has yet to be in a graded fight)... so if we're removing the need for reloading and the need to pay extra for variable firing speeds as necessities then we also need to make other move types less limited in their usage, in my opinion.

[Rick]

I personally don't have a problem with the current system. But one thing i noticed that other games seem to have that we don't is a generic list of pre-aproved moves, particularly common weapons like some real life guns, swords, claws, fangs, a generic ki beam, a generic ranged sword slash, etc. Of course, the players would have the option of "donating" their moves to the generic list, so anyone could buy a kame hame ha or a shadow clone, if the authors of such moves agreeded with it.

I'd envision it as a stickied thread in the update forum, with its first post explaining how to use the moves ("to buy them, you'll have to link here from your log IF you didn't modify anything") and a part explaining how to modify them ("you want your absurdly long broadsword to be special and have a dragon imprinted into it that glowed each time a guy named Jeff is nearby? Just add the visual description in the first paragraph of the move, change the meassurements of the sword to match yours, and post it [link to move aproval topic] for aproval"). It will also serve as a more extensive example list of moves, which is always nice to have.

[Greg]

I can see about a million different opinions here going in a million different directions and here's the truth of it: there's no "best" or "worst" system.

There are people who want MORE detail or impactfulness ("If we don't revamp the system, I'd at least like to see some more detail on what Drawbacks can do other than "dey make yer Muuvs betar!". Right now, there doesn't seem to be much difference between a pistol with unlimited ammo and one with a 6 round capacity, other than that one has an unknown amount of "betterness".")

... And there are people who want LESS ("If a gun has 5 shots, 40 or an infinite number, they all cost the same, and it really doesn't effect effect the writing in a significant way, and that's the real issue: We're being told we have to include details that don't matter in most cases.")

I certainly don't want to make the system more complex than it currently is, and I already did some work so that we 'assume' certain things about the move. For example, a ranged attack keeps going until it hits something. We just ... assume that. I don't ask people for range and I asked staff to stop asking for range.

But for example, the number of bullets in a gun is pretty important description, I think. A six shooter is different from a pistol that holds 12 bullets.

Frankly I don't want to tear this system down. The way I see it, the problem is that move approvals are too frequent and time-consuming on staff. (That, by the way, is why I never organised staff into concrete categories - it turns a hobby into a literal job; people get burned out on the hard stuff like move approvals, and I like to let people self-adjust to their schedules).

The solution I'm going to likely be implementing is twofold:
1: Put a limit on the number of moves you can purchase per level, to stop "big purchasers" from creating a load of update work. Something reasonable like 1000 OM spent on moves per level of your character. Maybe 900 because that fits the system better.

2: Possibly, remove "carryover OM" from switching. So when you switch, you go back to 0. I've been thinking of this for a while, for a number of different reasons.


This is not a solution that will make everybody happy. Some people want a simpler system. Others want more impact and choice. Frankly I think this system does accommodate for simplicity. If you want, all your moves can be simple, more-or-less using the examples from the moves page. And as I said before, I don't want to overcomplicate things; we already have a fairly full complexity budget for this RPG.

I hope, however, that this will reduce the overwhelmingness of move work for staff.

[Sasuke Uchiha]

The solution I'm going to likely be implementing is twofold: 
1: Put a limit on the number of moves you can purchase per level, to stop "big purchasers" from creating a load of update work. Something reasonable like 1000 OM spent on moves per level of your character. Maybe 900 because that fits the system better.

2: Possibly, remove "carryover OM" from switching. So when you switch, you go back to 0. I've been thinking of this for a while, for a number of different reasons.

I hate both of these options and only see them as things being taken away from the players. I understand how they could lighten the workload for staff, but at the cost of limiting a player's style of play (Heavily creative move builds) and the ladder, while again lightening the workload, completely diminishes all the work a player has spent being active on the site. Sometimes you are just done with a character. It's not cool to just throw away all the hours of effort people have spent being an active member of the site. I absolutely am against these two options.

I did however love your idea about not needing permission to refund an unused purchase. Also glad to see you around the site again! But yea, hate these to solutions you've proposed and hope you are open to compromise and/or alternative ideas.

[Bandit With No Name]

This doesn't seem to address the issue of people's frustration with the Move making process? There are definitely ways to streamline the process of making moves so that it's less irritating, more enjoyable, and most importantly: faster? If those things happened, it wouldn't be as draining on staff, either

[Dane Regan]

Another option me and Luci mused over a while back (it was mostly Luci) was having a list of "template" moves. Basically moves similar to the example ones where the person buying them can change a couple of numbers and visual stuff without needing to go through approval. (But would need to specify how they modified it in their log or something)

I would really rather steer away from capping the moves allowed to someone. Not staff anymore, but I'm always happy to deal with lots of moves in the MCW. Same for approval when I was there.

I never switch, so I don't care about the switch thing. I just figured it tied into the refunding system.

Anyway, if someone is spamming moves too fast, just tell them to slow down.

[Bandit With No Name]

I also don't think anyone here really wants a tear down of the Moves system, cause it works pretty well at a foundational level. Just figuring out the stuff that matters so that pricing and approval can feel more expedient and fair

[Dane Regan]

While staff will try to be consistent and are almost all the time. Sometimes one or two things might slip though. If you feel someone else has a similar move priced "better" (or worse) than yours, you can point it out. Just be cool about it, yo.

Regardless of how well a system is defined, they'll be some mistakes or slip ups.

[Bandit With No Name]

Mmm, I wasn't really referring to like, slip ups, but it's cool. I don't think there's much more conversation to be had that hasn't been already.

[Dane Regan]

Yeah. I won't deny that some things can be better defined. Primarily through example moves, I'd wager. As that seems like a simple way to do it.

[Sasuke Uchiha]

The moves debacle really just stems from move approval descriptions becoming too tedious with the need of unnecessary information. Things are being hard-lined that should be more fluid and left to interpretation. Like asking to describe the fodder of an illusion that has nothing to do with the mechanic or the effect of said attack. Also, we are being asked for the range of things now and many other things that matter IRL but not in a writing rpg. There are loads more examples, but really, other than this, move approval was fine to me.

If you ask me, the only thing move approval needed was a little refresher course for the staff running it, as it has began to run ramped with needless information requests. Other than that, I really think move approval was close to perfect for the function is covers.

[Dane Regan]

The fodder of an illusion means a lot, imo. People need to know how to write your moves. Even vague suggestions of how it might looks is good enough.

I can't see anyone asking for range outside of instant-hit sorts of things, ranged materialise stuff, and explosion sizes. At least, they probably shouldn't be. But, again, they likely did have a reason.

If you don't understand something a staffer asked you, or why they asked you, you do have the right to ask them about it. Just check there's not a legitimate rule for it first. And be polite. Like "hey, dude, why do I need to add this?" Rather than acting like they shouldn't have asked that. I don't like the idea of people thinking of the moves system like a black box and never knowing what'll come out after they put their move in there. But there is a thread made for questions about the moves system for people to use. It might be worth surmising some questions there - if any haven't been asked there yet.

[Sasuke Uchiha]

The fodder of an illusion should be left up to the writers, if it doesn't effect the actual result. IE, I use an illusion to confuse you to hit something, it doesn't matter what I made you see and that should be left up to the writers as its very circumstantial, asking someone to flesh out every possible circumstantial illusion is the tedious stuff I was stalking about, it doesn't matter what I made them see, it only matters that I did make them see. Myself and my opponent should be given the freedom to work with circumstantial illusions, but this is just a small tangent of the needless info we are being asked for.

[The Humble Sage]

Disclaimer: Moves has always intimidated me from a staffing end so I avoided it.


I feel like putting a cap on the number of moves that a player can have would actually only make the move problem WORSE if anything. To my understanding the current problem is people feel like moves are being to used to "out-power" other players by "having the strongest build" rather than being used to give other writers (and yourself) a solid grasp on the kinds of things that your character can do in the Omniverse.

If you limit the number of moves a player can have, that suddenly makes the system "how much can I get out of this move?" rather than "how do I explain this thing my character can do?" Sure some people will take joke moves still, but those characters are now taking a measurable disadvantage, that they would have to then deal with. I also feel like it would give rise to a much more debated definition of a "fluff move" since I imagine they wouldn't be part of the limit.

Basically, I think the problem with the moves system, from both the staffing end and the player end, has always been a quality issue, not a quantity issue, which is what both of those changes would fix.