SURVEY QUESTION: MOVES!

[Bandit With No Name]

How would that work for moves that are more... out there?
Things like Clowno's Torch or Summer's Storm-summoning?

You'd break it down into the parts that effect the writing. If I was gonna go into a "direct translation" with M&M:

Torch
Artefact (it's a physical object you use), Perk: Bound (you can't lose it)
Strike Perk: Linked (Confusion)

Confusion, Perks: Range (20 meters), Duration (Ongoing), Linked (Reckless Fervor, Agitation, Focus, Paranoia, Schizophasia, Phantom Pain, Uncertainty, Folie à Deux, Am I Seeing Things?, OR Vanish)
Flaws: Charge-Up

Then I'd set up the stats for each of the types of beam.

Again, this is a raw conversion to a Tabletop game, so the exacts of it wouldn't be directly translated. I also pulled out all the ranks for each power, so eh.

[Handsome Jack]

It would definitely require some time to figure out all the options, pricing, and balance, but I do think it'd be a really solid system for handling Moves. Thaal is a champ.

[Mickey Mouse]

Ok, long story short: It's way to complicated and pricing seems esoteric.

The purpose of moves, powers, stats, and literally EVERY mechanical part of this site is to give good prompts for writing, and to open up creative avenues for players to do interesting things with, and the current way Moves are generated and priced does not reflect that. The amount of specificity is WAY too high, and the strictness of "variability" costing more is way too much. A Pistol, a shotgun and a machine gun are all fairly different weapons in the real world, but in the OV, they all function essentially the same. You're not gonna get a WILD amount of creative differences in writing when it comes to a fight, and fights are graded based on WRITING.

I feel like most of the irritating things about Moves rules (fatigue, Focus, Damage, exact ranges, extremely precise measurements, by the second refresh times) are metrics that hold next to NO MEANING in an actual fight. They would make sense as things to measure in a tabletop game, but we're not playing by those rules. Those numbers all fly out the window as soon as rubber hits the road.

Trying to focus on how something effects the WRITING of the writer and not the "stats" of the character is something that would help this out a lot, I think. 300 OM per "variable benefit" of a move is a decent way to price things, but when we start pricing an M4 at 900 OM because it has a selector switch with 3 options is completely pointless. Firing a cutting beam laser and firing individual laser "bullets" would be a meaningful difference, so, sure, I can see that being 600 OM.

What does it ADD to the game (meaning, how does it ADD to the writer's potential) to have that many specifics? If a person really wants to include the caliber and the exact range and the refresh time on a Move, that's their prerogative, but it shouldn't be the standard.

This basically sums up my current thoughts so I'll just reiterate it in a quote and add it to the pile.

I, too, generally agree with Bandit. 

I'm just going to add a couple of two cents in here just about how, in general, the overt specificity of moves removes to me any sort of creative thought when coming up with them, and sometimes isn't necessarily easy to follow to an end. 

I feel like I've been pretty shit at creating moves since I came back, because I just can't wrap my head around all the things I need to talk about. I submitted a move for approval today, which was approved, that is essentially just Mickey transforming his sword into giant yo yo that he can fling around with a blue laser string and use, essentially, as like, big bludgeoning weapons. Two issues came up while I was writing this move: a) I overcomplicated it for myself and thought just being able to fling it in two different ways (i.e. a straight forward fling and a sort of wild, spinny fling) constituted it being variable, and so I overpriced myself, which Dane proceeded to point out (thank you). That stemmed out of my confusion over the nitpicky details of variability. b) I look at the description and find it full of numbers which I'll never ever write, and absent of details I actually care about. Just as an example, I look back over it and don't see anything about what the yo yo look like, or the exact aesthetic specifics of the transformation, which are things when I'm writing that move I'm actually going to care about. I'm not going to note, and probably neither is my opponent, that I conjure a yo yo that is one foot in diameter and shoot it twelve feet at my opponent. 

Certain numerical details are nice -- I appreciate range, sometimes, especially since as the system currently sits it affects proficiencies that I have to buy -- but overall I think these numerical values are unimportant, and have clearly taken a precedence in my creation of moves that, in my opinion, I'd rather attach to narrative or aesthetic qualities that will help someone actually write these things. I'd much rather talk about how they're a "pair of blue yo-yo with stainless steel, metallic teeth encircling them and a Monsters, Inc logo emblazoned in blue on the side" that I can "fling at the opponent as fast as a normal whip" than say I can "fling them at six feet per second." 

Maybe that's my bad, for skimping on details I care about because I'm distracted by the minutiae, but to me it just is a concept that reinforces the idea that these numbers mean something quantifiable in relation to writing, and I just don't think they do. Like I said in the other thread, I've never seen any fight actually use the damage counter outside of Dante's Abyss and Graveyardverse, and I don't see any reason why over-specificity doesn't absolutely reinforce the idea that creating a numerically-sound move is more important than creating a narratively-sound one. 

This isn't to say I don't think specificity is important -- just to say that I think the particular specificity being focused on comes at the sacrifice of other, in my opinion cooler, specificity. And if people want to write their moves with all these exact numbers, I think they should absolutely be free to; I just think some of us can get the same message across without having to sit and crunch numbers. Everyone understands that "as fast as a whip" is probably the same as "travels six feet in one second." They're just different styles of saying something, and right now it feels like one style is being required and for some players, it's just flat out less fun and not as useful and definitely more daunting. 

Also, mildly unrelated, I'm going to quote a question I put into the other thread, because it's less of a question and more of a constructive feedback. To summarize in a tl;dr way, right now there's a certain level of what I view as lack of incentive to incorporate canon character assists into your story narratively, because literally it's cost me about the same -- and a little more -- to include Simba as a character than it costs me to buy a Tier 3 Super Move, and he's much less powerful. (1000 OM and 1 SP for use in combat for a T3 SM vs 1000 OM, 1 NPC point for Simba, plus 1 SP every time he's used in combat, plus 900 OM for his moves since he obviously can't use Mickey's, narratively). 

On that note, and this is sort of a personal gripe, what’s the logic in having to pay NPC points for an assist to exist outside their combat capacity? They already cost more OM than almost anything else and it doesn’t always make sense to roleplay them as Shiva-style assists that just pop up and shoot ice (which, once again, feels like something that could even be rationalized as a move instead of an assist). If they show up for long periods of time (like my Simba and Retane’s Arith) should people like me who choose to integrate these canon characters into our story really need to use up one to three NPC points in addition to 1000+ OM? I can imagine a compromise on this that we should pay something if they’re A-listers, but it seems silly to drop OM and NPC points (and, for that matter, SP) on someone like Bambi. Especially when you also have to spend at least 300 OM (usually more) to make them even relatively useful bc it usually it doesn’t make narrative sense for them to use your moves? Like what us Simba without claws and teeth? He can’t exactly wield a keyblade.

[Bandit With No Name]

"Details are only pointless if you choose not you use them."

If I have the option to ignore them, why are they mandatory?

[Dane Regan]

I actually like the M&M idea Thaal tossed out. It could allow for customizable Moves that are easy to balance.

Let's say I want a katana that coats people in ice and can fire ice beams at people. I could grab "medium length melee weapon" "slow debuff" and "medium speed projectile", each of which would have their own costs associated with them. If I wanted a M4 with a Grenade Launcher I could just purchase  "fast projectile" and "explosive projectile", both of which again would have their associated costs. It would allow for the same creativity, speed the approval process, and make actually creating Moves fun and easy.

How does that system work though? From the way you're describing it, it makes it sound like you can just pay more to get a stronger move. Unless it's balanced differently?

Getting stronger with raw OM is expensive. It costs 25k OM to get 50% more stats. So paying more OM to get stronger moves should definitely not be a thing. (And capping the cost would wall off other options, probably)

[Bandit With No Name]

I actually like the M&M idea Thaal tossed out. It could allow for customizable Moves that are easy to balance.

Let's say I want a katana that coats people in ice and can fire ice beams at people. I could grab "medium length melee weapon" "slow debuff" and "medium speed projectile", each of which would have their own costs associated with them. If I wanted a M4 with a Grenade Launcher I could just purchase  "fast projectile" and "explosive projectile", both of which again would have their associated costs. It would allow for the same creativity, speed the approval process, and make actually creating Moves fun and easy.

How does that system work though? From the way you're describing it, it makes it sound like you can just pay more to get a stronger move. Unless it's balanced differently?

Getting stronger with raw OM is expensive. It costs 25k OM to get 50% more stats. So paying more OM to get stronger moves should definitely not be a thing. (And capping the cost would wall off other options, probably)

Ah nah, the power of a move wouldn't be linked to the actual power. You'd jsut mix and match stats to put together the thing your move does, paying more for things that make it more versatile and getting refunds for flaws. I'm actually not the hugest fan of converting to this system because it would require the ENTIRE SITE to be recreated, and that's more trouble than it's worth? I'd much rather jsut fix how we currently manage Move creation and keep it relatively the same.

[Handsome Jack]

Moves that DO more should probably be more expensive. Right now, if I want a sword that can light people on fire, one or the other effect is going to be nerfed in the interest of balance. And I understand why. It's just awkward and clunky.

Right now we CAN get more powerful Moves already, by including drawbacks. A charge attack does more damage than a regular one. And as Sans pointed out, time is kinda arbitrary in a written roleplaying game. Fatigue is subjective to the judge as well. Drawbacks just aren't the balancing tool they should be.

The fact is that the current system is convoluted and even when it all goes according to plan, it can leave people with but a shadow of what they actually wanted. What I'm trying to suggest is paying more OM for Moves that move further away from the "simple". Even in an IC sense, a simple sword should cost a Prime less to summon than a magical crystal that slows time in a certain area, but because they both do only one thing, they cost the same.

I'm trying to reconcile "usefulness" with how much something costs to buy. Whether you equate that to power or anything else, I can't say. I would suggest, however, that each option you would purchase be clear in what is included within it, to keep things balanced.

[Handsome Jack]

I dunno if it'd require the entire site be recreated, but we'd definitely need to reapp all the Moves everyone has, to fit in the new system. Which would be an ordeal and a half, yeah.

[Dane Regan]

"Details are only pointless if you choose not you use them."

If I have the option to ignore them, why are they mandatory?

I mean, everyone glosses over some details in fights. Some people focus in more on parts than others. You might say "he fired a bunch of bullets". Or you might choose to have him place every shot more perfectly over a longer period of time and have your character be like "I got 2 shots left, better make it count" or something.

If you say your gun has 6 bullets, you can't shoot 7 and not need to reload. What I meant by ignoring it is brushing over the details, like "unloading the whole clip". Part of the want for specifics is so people can't change moves to suit the situation. The other part is as writing fodder for both you and your opponent.

I don't really see how attributing a couple of numbers to a gun is really a big inconvenience. 

Obviously, you'd have to ask Omni or Alex for the mega official reason for why it was decided moves need details since I just enforce the move rules. (And primarily agree with them, but my reasoning is my own)

Ah nah, the power of a move wouldn't be linked to the actual power. You'd jsut mix and match stats to put together the thing your move does, paying more for things that make it more versatile and getting refunds for flaws. I'm actually not the hugest fan of converting to this system because it would require the ENTIRE SITE to be recreated, and that's more trouble than it's worth? I'd much rather jsut fix how we currently manage Move creation and keep it relatively the same.

Yeah. I'm not gonna spend time trying to implement some big new system unless I think it's really good and it's got a lot of support. That said, using it as an optional move builder/template that should be accurate (but moves from it still need a stamp from a staffer) is a potential idea - depending on how many people feel it'd be useful and how much work it'd be to sort out.

[Bandit With No Name]

"I don't really see how attributing a couple of numbers to a gun is really a big inconvenience. "

It's a big enough inconvenience that it's not only driving away potential players from the site, but also making people who have been writing here for a long time NOT want to participate in the mechanics, so it's clearly and irrefutably a problem big enough to address and make changes for. Trying to say, "this isn't a problem" when there are large swaths of current and potential players who refuse to engage in the site because of it is really dismissive and not good game dev.

"using it as an optional move builder/template that should be accurate (but moves from it still need a stamp from a staffer) is a potential idea - depending on how many people feel it'd be useful and how much work it'd be to sort out."

That's a thing I could get behind and would be happy to help create. Having a road map to this shit making any sense even at all would be amazing.

[Dane Regan]

Moves that DO more should probably be more expensive. Right now, if I want a sword that can light people on fire, one or the other effect is going to be nerfed in the interest of balance. And I understand why. It's just awkward and clunky.

No, since making a sword that sets someone on fire and cuts them cost more in exchange for not being weaker is basically letting someone pay more OM in exchange for a stronger move. If they want both the cutting and fire to be 'normal' strength, the move should either cut someone or set them on fire (but would cost more OM in exchange for that versatility).

Right now we CAN get more powerful Moves already, by including drawbacks. A charge attack does more damage than a regular one. And as Sans pointed out, time is kinda arbitrary in a written roleplaying game. Fatigue is subjective to the judge as well. Drawbacks just aren't the balancing tool they should be.

Yeah, time is arbitrary. No one really counts how many seconds probably went by in their post, except some people who like doing that, I guess. But I'd wager most writers can be like "yeah, 5 seconds have probs passed by now". Or "I got to by 5 seconds for my teammate to charge a move, how would I do that?" 

5 seconds and 6 second might be basically the same, but 5 and 7 would probs be a bit more different. Yeah, it's fluffy in writing. And the degree at which it's accounted for depends on the level of detail the writer puts on that part of their post.

I dunno if it'd require the entire site be recreated, but we'd definitely need to reapp all the Moves everyone has, to fit in the new system. Which would be an ordeal and a half, yeah.

We're never going to backtrack on a move. Unless it shouldn't have been approved. So any old move that doesn't fit a change in what info is needed or something doesn't need to be thrown back in. Obviously, we might try to persuade people in some cases or help them update stuff, but it will never be a requirement. We don't want people to disappear for a couple of years and need to redo everything when they come back.

[Wyatt the Swift]

Ok, long story short: It's way to complicated and pricing seems esoteric.

The purpose of moves, powers, stats, and literally EVERY mechanical part of this site is to give good prompts for writing, and to open up creative avenues for players to do interesting things with, and the current way Moves are generated and priced does not reflect that. The amount of specificity is WAY too high, and the strictness of "variability" costing more is way too much. A Pistol, a shotgun and a machine gun are all fairly different weapons in the real world, but in the OV, they all function essentially the same. You're not gonna get a WILD amount of creative differences in writing when it comes to a fight, and fights are graded based on WRITING.

I feel like most of the irritating things about Moves rules (fatigue, Focus, Damage, exact ranges, extremely precise measurements, by the second refresh times) are metrics that hold next to NO MEANING in an actual fight. They would make sense as things to measure in a tabletop game, but we're not playing by those rules. Those numbers all fly out the window as soon as rubber hits the road.

Trying to focus on how something effects the WRITING of the writer and not the "stats" of the character is something that would help this out a lot, I think. 300 OM per "variable benefit" of a move is a decent way to price things, but when we start pricing an M4 at 900 OM because it has a selector switch with 3 options is completely pointless. Firing a cutting beam laser and firing individual laser "bullets" would be a meaningful difference, so, sure, I can see that being 600 OM.

What does it ADD to the game (meaning, how does it ADD to the writer's potential) to have that many specifics? If a person really wants to include the caliber and the exact range and the refresh time on a Move, that's their prerogative, but it shouldn't be the standard.

This basically sums up my current thoughts so I'll just reiterate it in a quote and add it to the pile.

Ok, long story short: It's way to complicated and pricing seems esoteric.

The purpose of moves, powers, stats, and literally EVERY mechanical part of this site is to give good prompts for writing, and to open up creative avenues for players to do interesting things with, and the current way Moves are generated and priced does not reflect that. The amount of specificity is WAY too high, and the strictness of "variability" costing more is way too much. A Pistol, a shotgun and a machine gun are all fairly different weapons in the real world, but in the OV, they all function essentially the same. You're not gonna get a WILD amount of creative differences in writing when it comes to a fight, and fights are graded based on WRITING.

I feel like most of the irritating things about Moves rules (fatigue, Focus, Damage, exact ranges, extremely precise measurements, by the second refresh times) are metrics that hold next to NO MEANING in an actual fight. They would make sense as things to measure in a tabletop game, but we're not playing by those rules. Those numbers all fly out the window as soon as rubber hits the road.

Trying to focus on how something effects the WRITING of the writer and not the "stats" of the character is something that would help this out a lot, I think. 300 OM per "variable benefit" of a move is a decent way to price things, but when we start pricing an M4 at 900 OM because it has a selector switch with 3 options is completely pointless. Firing a cutting beam laser and firing individual laser "bullets" would be a meaningful difference, so, sure, I can see that being 600 OM.

What does it ADD to the game (meaning, how does it ADD to the writer's potential) to have that many specifics? If a person really wants to include the caliber and the exact range and the refresh time on a Move, that's their prerogative, but it shouldn't be the standard.

This basically sums up my current thoughts so I'll just reiterate it in a quote and add it to the pile.

I, too, generally agree with Bandit. 

I'm just going to add a couple of two cents in here just about how, in general, the overt specificity of moves removes to me any sort of creative thought when coming up with them, and sometimes isn't necessarily easy to follow to an end. 

I feel like I've been pretty shit at creating moves since I came back, because I just can't wrap my head around all the things I need to talk about. I submitted a move for approval today, which was approved, that is essentially just Mickey transforming his sword into giant yo yo that he can fling around with a blue laser string and use, essentially, as like, big bludgeoning weapons. Two issues came up while I was writing this move: a) I overcomplicated it for myself and thought just being able to fling it in two different ways (i.e. a straight forward fling and a sort of wild, spinny fling) constituted it being variable, and so I overpriced myself, which Dane proceeded to point out (thank you). That stemmed out of my confusion over the nitpicky details of variability. b) I look at the description and find it full of numbers which I'll never ever write, and absent of details I actually care about. Just as an example, I look back over it and don't see anything about what the yo yo look like, or the exact aesthetic specifics of the transformation, which are things when I'm writing that move I'm actually going to care about. I'm not going to note, and probably neither is my opponent, that I conjure a yo yo that is one foot in diameter and shoot it twelve feet at my opponent. 

Certain numerical details are nice -- I appreciate range, sometimes, especially since as the system currently sits it affects proficiencies that I have to buy -- but overall I think these numerical values are unimportant, and have clearly taken a precedence in my creation of moves that, in my opinion, I'd rather attach to narrative or aesthetic qualities that will help someone actually write these things. I'd much rather talk about how they're a "pair of blue yo-yo with stainless steel, metallic teeth encircling them and a Monsters, Inc logo emblazoned in blue on the side" that I can "fling at the opponent as fast as a normal whip" than say I can "fling them at six feet per second." 

Maybe that's my bad, for skimping on details I care about because I'm distracted by the minutiae, but to me it just is a concept that reinforces the idea that these numbers mean something quantifiable in relation to writing, and I just don't think they do. Like I said in the other thread, I've never seen any fight actually use the damage counter outside of Dante's Abyss and Graveyardverse, and I don't see any reason why over-specificity doesn't absolutely reinforce the idea that creating a numerically-sound move is more important than creating a narratively-sound one. 

This isn't to say I don't think specificity is important -- just to say that I think the particular specificity being focused on comes at the sacrifice of other, in my opinion cooler, specificity. And if people want to write their moves with all these exact numbers, I think they should absolutely be free to; I just think some of us can get the same message across without having to sit and crunch numbers. Everyone understands that "as fast as a whip" is probably the same as "travels six feet in one second." They're just different styles of saying something, and right now it feels like one style is being required and for some players, it's just flat out less fun and not as useful and definitely more daunting. 

Also, mildly unrelated, I'm going to quote a question I put into the other thread, because it's less of a question and more of a constructive feedback. To summarize in a tl;dr way, right now there's a certain level of what I view as lack of incentive to incorporate canon character assists into your story narratively, because literally it's cost me about the same -- and a little more -- to include Simba as a character than it costs me to buy a Tier 3 Super Move, and he's much less powerful. (1000 OM and 1 SP for use in combat for a T3 SM vs 1000 OM, 1 NPC point for Simba, plus 1 SP every time he's used in combat, plus 900 OM for his moves since he obviously can't use Mickey's, narratively). 

On that note, and this is sort of a personal gripe, what’s the logic in having to pay NPC points for an assist to exist outside their combat capacity? They already cost more OM than almost anything else and it doesn’t always make sense to roleplay them as Shiva-style assists that just pop up and shoot ice (which, once again, feels like something that could even be rationalized as a move instead of an assist). If they show up for long periods of time (like my Simba and Retane’s Arith) should people like me who choose to integrate these canon characters into our story really need to use up one to three NPC points in addition to 1000+ OM? I can imagine a compromise on this that we should pay something if they’re A-listers, but it seems silly to drop OM and NPC points (and, for that matter, SP) on someone like Bambi. Especially when you also have to spend at least 300 OM (usually more) to make them even relatively useful bc it usually it doesn’t make narrative sense for them to use your moves? Like what us Simba without claws and teeth? He can’t exactly wield a keyblade.

Most of my gripes lie in these posts

[Bandit With No Name]

I would also like to quantify what "powerful" means. Everyone keeps saying that and there doesn't even seem to be a consensus on what "powerful" means.

In my mind: Power means that it either opens up narrative opportunity for you or cuts down on narrative opportunity for the opponent.

[Sans]

From what I can tell, a large portion of the issues people have with the Move System is that is seems to encourage, accidentally or not, overly specific requirements and needless details that, ultimately, aren't really used in a narrative outside a few specific circumstances, and as a by-product of that, discourages moves that can serve a narrative or character-driven purpose. I say it "encourages" this because, even if said details aren't actually needed, they occur so frequently because people are convinced that that's what gets moves approved, which is likely a result of a sort of PVPification of the move system where every little thing matters in how a fight is decided, even if it only feels like that and isn't how it actually is.

Basically, the Move System is clashing with the actual writing in order to check-box the more "gamey" mechanics of the site.

I'm more than certain there is a way to better balance the creativity and generalization of writing and the more specific rules-focused systems we have than what we currently have.

Correct me if I'm wrong, of course. I haven't been on the site nearly as long as everyone else here.

[Jade Harley]

QUESTION #2: What do you consider to be absolutely necessary information when writing moves?

REMINDER: Remain respectful of what our admins both past and present have worked to create, please. Don't hurt each other. Thank you.

[The Vision]

I think if I wanted to play M&M, I’d play that instead. One of the things that drew me to this site was the freedom it gave. I have not felt that freedom in Move Approval recently.

By trying to standardize Move Approval so strictly, we risk losing a sense of interpretation that makes art enjoyable. I dunno if I’d REALLY say we’re producing literature on that scale but we are writing and that’s an art. Right now, to me, this is a conflict less about Moves and more about whether we want this site to be a place where writers create interesting fight scenes or a video game-style thing where we can play out badass fights.

I dunno if I’ve managed to phrase that in a neutral way, but I DO know where I stand. I want this to be a place where things aren’t just numbers flying around. That bores me. I feel this is a writing community above all else and we should live by that.

[PepsiYuuka]

@Yuuka: I think that's somewhat incorrect. Because...

>The majority of members definitely don't make moves like that. At least not noticeably. Usually, juggling drawbacks only comes into play when someone's trying to balance a more complicated move, and I try my best to help them out with that. I'm sure some members definitely try to get the most they can for as little, primarily to avoid charge times, I guess. But I was under the impression they were a minority. Then again, I can't read minds.

>The moves system hasn't really been going anywhere. The last time the move rules were substantially changed was long before I joined the OV, but it was smoothed along with an update some time last year to make some parts easier.

>I might be wrong on this part, but at least to me, isn't the whole "best character" debate all a big fun fudge? Do people actually take it seriously? TEC is still best stat. Realism should always play some part in fights. And, if someone would find it hard to hit someone else, then they've gotta think of a creative way to do it or just get a lucky shot. 5 TEC only blocks *most* stuff from unskilled fighters, no all.

> Just because they are not the majority, does not mean that it is not an issue that should be addressed if it is something that is relevant- even just in the form of a single sentence added to the first post of move approval or whatever. Much like how most people are going to pick a character that they're really committed to and want to take many places, but that doesn't mean we don't have a little warning about not just following a hype train for those that won't.

> Even if the rules themselves have not changed, that does not mean that the culture around pushing the envelope on them has not. I'm sure there's no single, solitary cause that can be pinpointed for this- but moves have changed recently. You've said as much yourself about "unbalanced older moves" and even I agree there. There have been good things added through the addition of specifics and some harsher judging, honestly a lot of good things. But at the same time there has certainly also been a more sneaking trend of people who have been getting extremely "gamey" with their moves- a sin that I myself was guilty of when I joined, but I quickly learned was only restrictive of my writing.

> To some of us, of course it's a joke. But from the point of view of say, a new person looking in from the outside, will they necessarily pick up on that?

[Bandit With No Name]

I think if I wanted to play M&M, I’d play that instead. One of the things that drew me to this site was the freedom it gave. I have not felt that freedom in Move Approval recently.

By trying to standardize Move Approval so strictly, we risk losing a sense of interpretation that makes art enjoyable. I dunno if I’d REALLY say we’re producing literature on that scale but we are writing and that’s an art. Right now, to me, this is a conflict less about Moves and more about whether we want this site to be a place where writers create interesting fight scenes or a video game-style thing where we can play out badass fights.

I dunno if I’ve managed to phrase that in a neutral way, but I DO know where I stand. I want this to be a place where things aren’t just numbers flying around. That bores me. I feel this is a writing community above all else and we should live by that.

I agree with this sentiment. If I was going to model a system that was MORE like M&M would pull all of the numbers and ranks out and jsut use the conceptual templates so that people could mix and match with a little bit more of a backbone to guide them. Ideally people would still ahve the moves and etc they have now, with a little guide that would help streamline the production of future moves.

That said, I'm still not in full favor of that style of system. I don't think it strikes at the heart of what Moves are meant to do.

I would say that it's +300 OM for every MAJOR Narrative opportunity created for you OR narrative agency restricted in an opponent, with -300 OM for every major flaw in the move that RESTRICTS your own narrative agency when using the move. That's pretty close to what we have now, and it also cuts out all of the little stuff.

[Mickey Mouse]

I think if I wanted to play M&M, I’d play that instead. One of the things that drew me to this site was the freedom it gave. I have not felt that freedom in Move Approval recently.

By trying to standardize Move Approval so strictly, we risk losing a sense of interpretation that makes art enjoyable. I dunno if I’d REALLY say we’re producing literature on that scale but we are writing and that’s an art. Right now, to me, this is a conflict less about Moves and more about whether we want this site to be a place where writers create interesting fight scenes or a video game-style thing where we can play out badass fights.

I dunno if I’ve managed to phrase that in a neutral way, but I DO know where I stand. I want this to be a place where things aren’t just numbers flying around. That bores me. I feel this is a writing community above all else and we should live by that.

I generally agree with this, but once again would like to emphasize that I know sometimes the certain numerical specificities do help some people, and so personally I'd love to see the system just open up where we can create creative, specific moves without having to necessarily describe them in such an exact way that doesn't necessarily lend itself to everyone's style.

If I want to say my character has an assault rifle that can fire up to 60 bullets a clip at a rate of six bullets per second that travel at 10mph and requires a five second reload time, great. If I want to say that my character carries a beatup M16 they got from their mother that can fire a hailstorm of bullets over the course of a few seconds akin to a normal semi-automatic rifle that cause some basic piercing damage if not successfully blocked that also makes them emotionally tired for a few seconds because they remember dear old ma, I'd love to be able to describe it that way too. And have both be approved.

[Dane Regan]

"I don't really see how attributing a couple of numbers to a gun is really a big inconvenience. "

It's a big enough inconvenience that it's not only driving away potential players from the site, but also making people who have been writing here for a long time NOT want to participate in the mechanics, so it's clearly and irrefutably a problem big enough to address and make changes for. Trying to say, "this isn't a problem" when there are large swaths of current and potential players who refuse to engage in the site because of it is really dismissive and not good game dev.

I doubt anyone didn't join because they didn't want to say "my gun has X bullets". Maybe being intimidated by the idea of having to add or balance charge times. That said, I wouldn't be too surprised if someone didn't because they were under the impression they were expected to try and keep track of those X bullets. I think a lot of the problem is people overestimated what's required of them when making moves. If you say what you're wanting to do, I will help. Or someone else will.

I would also like to quantify what "powerful" means. Everyone keeps saying that and there doesn't even seem to be a consensus on what "powerful" means.

If an attack is powerful, then it's going to hit harder than their usual attacks.

In my mind: Power means that it either opens up narrative opportunity for you or cuts down on narrative opportunity for the opponent.

I'd describe that as "hey, this move is pretty cool" - probably. Or maybe that it's powerful OOC. But, usually, if someone says their mega punch is powerful, that means it's powerful in character.