Existing players used to logging in with their character name and moo password must signup for a website account.
- Slyter 2m
- Veleth 25s
- cata 2s
- Dale 9m
- xXShadowSlayerXx 1s
- BubbleKangaroo 5m
- spungkbubble 13s
- JanekSembilan 27m
- meero619 1m
- SmokePotion 1m Right or wrong, I'm getting high.
- Rillem 1m Make it personal.
- LadyLogic 13m
- Vanashis 4h
- Sivartas 12m
- zxq 14s Blackcastle was no ordinary prison.
- NightHollow 8m
And 28 more hiding and/or disguised
Connect to Sindome @ moo.sindome.org:5555 or just Play Now

No Selling, a Discussion
Discussion on No Selling, what we can do about it, etc

A suggested topic from the Winter 2025 town hall that I have broken out into a discussion for the BGBB.

The original post read:

"No-selling. This isn't a prolific issue, but when it occurs… or more specifically, when a player does something like @quit in the middle of RP, or just boredly yawn in the middle of what is supposed to be a tense scene, it is a huge mood killer, and one that sets a tone for your interactions with that character from that point forward. Furthermore, it sets an expectation for any newer players coming into the game when they see this sort of behavior.

There's no stopping it. People are going to do what they want to do. What I'd hope to see is an actual discussion so that some sort of an understanding between parties of their perspectives, and how or why they react in the way they do to that sort of interaction. Nothing is done without reason. It's just a matter of determining whether that reason is... reasonable for the collective group. "

To start things off with a wet towel: I don't believe no-selling exists as an abstract concept at all let alone a problem to be solved, and situations where I've known foul to be cried over it I felt it amounted to players not getting the roleplay they wanted but there was not any question to me that there was anything exploitative happening.

It is my view that the only outcomes players are outright entitled to are what coded mechanics produce and otherwise players can roleplay however they feel is valid for them. The reality is that some players can just be the wrong choice for eliciting certain outcomes and while it's valid to use IC methods and pressures to shape the outcomes someone may want, it's overboard to look for staff intervention or microregulation.

I think we could use some workshops or offer some resources to help people figure out how their character would act in life-threatening situations. Or maybe a tip-line message that reminds people from time to time that sometimes their character might end up in dire straits and encourage them to take some time to think about how their character would act.

A lot of times I feel like what’s seen as no selling might be more due to people just freezing up and not knowing how their character would react to such things. And sure you can look at resources for writers for how to depict a character reacting to a traumatic event, or ask chat gpt for ideas, but that often can’t be done in the moment when a character is being held at gunpoint.

TLDR I think it may be more of an issue of lack of preparation than people not wanting to portray their character as weak/afraid.

I wrote a LONG AS FUCK post then deleted it. I guess that gist of it is that this is rarely one sided in my opinion. If it's a possible rule break, give it to staff. If not, you have to accept that different players play different ways. Try not to get so set on how things should go or be that you are getting irritated.

I also think that, while our PCs might be in conflict, we can work as a team as players. Not in a meta plan IC things out OOCly way. That's against the rules. But the way you do when playing a board game with friends and family. Everyone tries to win but everyone tries to remember that they are there to have fun together.