Talk:Core Concepts

Theme The core concepts for the game were supposed to be:

1. Comic book superheroes genre game
2. Blended world (not one world as base or the other, but elements of all the relevant worlds blended together into a single unique whole resembling all)
   • Marvel
   • DC
   • Wildstorm
   • Others possibly

--BlondieWiki (talk) 19:35, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

---

I would say for this that we restrict it to only superhero comic themes as listed already, with a few others (Dark Horse possibly?). Within comics there should be themes we disallow also. For example, I would not want to see anything like GI Joe or Transformers in a comic world, even if they have comics. I could be okay with allowing some other themes on a case by case basis, and giving people the options to make their case for how it could work in the current them.

For example, if someone wanted to do a Mercy Thompson view of werewolves and werecritters, I could be convinced, but that would also further limit what's possible from other modern horror/fantasy settings once approved. We couldn't then also allow, for example, Anita Blake stuff because how werecritters and vampires are done is completely different in that world.

I also am willing to allow superheroic concepts from other media like books or movies, but only if the player can demonstrate it will work in theme. For example, Worm is an excellent superhero story, but the way powers work (that everyone has shards of power from an extradimensional being) is incompatible with Marvel/DC theme. Could they still do the character of Skitter? Sure; a girl who controls insects is a workable power, but she'd have to rewrite her background to fit theme.

I also think we should outright disallow any anime characters, as I feel they are just not workable because each anime world requires its own world rules, and because I don't want to see someone making OCs based on anime characters or their worlds.

--Metahistory (talk) 19:52, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

---

I'm not going to lie, I'd actually go more strict than Meta suggests. By that, I mean, I'd go with "only the comic themes we specify" and sit down as staff and choose those... and no to everything else.

I hate to be the bad guy here, but without a solid no, there will always be someone who thinks their (dumb) implementation of whatever it is will work, when it won't. And they will not accept no for an answer and they won't want to do the work to adjust it; or not accept it can't BE adjusted; or they will want us to adjust to fit them. All this is doing is setting theme and apps staff up for failure and stress in the long run, as well as giving more room for bad OC apps to be pitched.

Basically, coming from a long staffing career: you want to say "no" in +jobs as little as possible. It's better to say "no" in rules and theme upfront.

My suggestion:

• DC
• Marvel
• Wildstorm (excluding the Authority and the Four)
• BRPD (Hellboy)

Make me some suggestions if you think I've missed something WORKABLE, but I just don't see other comics properties fitting the theme overall. I think twisting a bunch of crazy properties (take Sex Criminals as an example) to "work with the theme" is more trouble that it's worth and just opens doors we will later want to close but can't because grandfathered in bullshit. Also, having a strict set to pick from makes actually blending the worlds more palatable and less stressful on the theme folks. --OwlCity (talk) 7/4/2020 10:35pm EDT

---

I can see the value of having a hard list, sure. The issue is also that there are some series under a particular publisher I'd be okay with and some that would be problematic. IDW or Dark Horse, for example. We can probably mitigate that with our banned list when we get to it though.--Metahistory (talk) 22:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

---

It's always easier to make a strict list upfront and add maybe one or two properties later than it is to be like "oh, x publisher is fine" and having to walk it back. Players do not like feeling like something has been taken away.

Further addition: I wouldn't even say "Marvel" or "DC". Some jackanape will take "Marvel" to think they can app Darth Vader, because technically Star Wars is a Marvel imprint.

I know I sound harsh here. But I'm trying to say trouble down the road. Banned lists are fine-- but if we only focus on banned lists, I feel like I'm going to be fighting for every thing placed on it because there will be some reason "it could be fun" or "it COULD work if someone makes it just like this". Staffing is HARD. Staffing a mixed theme is already a nightmare. Please make it easier on yourselves, because you are all nice people and you don't want to do this to yourselves.

--OwlCity (talk) 22:27, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

---

Should we take the step of requiring that people put in a request for a character then before we'll make the bit for them? So we have that last check on whether or not we want to allow the character or not? --Metahistory (talk) 23:06, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

---

I absolutely think so. But again, its a harsh extra step that I see as being one that eventually gets handwaved for the purpose of not being "a bad guy". --OwlCity (talk) 23:10, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

---

Damned if we do, damned if we don't though; a player won't be happy with us if they go through setting up a sheet for a character and submit then get told the concept itself isn't allowed. Or even where they've started statting the character.--Metahistory (talk) 23:16, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

---

Here is how I see it.

I agree with Metahistory's suggestion of strictness in what is allowed/not allowed.

I think for established characters we should not require them to clear a concept with us first, to create a charbit. In so doing, we SHOULD require a naming requirement so that duplicate persons aren't vying for the same bit. Generally, full name (first/last) seems to work really well.

OC characters SHOULD require a concept with a rough outline of powers prior to being able to apply, we can reason this being as, well, because we want to make sure you have a balanced concept that fits within the parameters of our world.

We NEED a banned list. Why? For the OC characters more than anything else so they don't give themselves phenomenal cosmic powers, even if they are in a teeny little living space. Also, so we don't have 35 Green Lanterns on grid at one time, or someone doesn't try to app something like Harold The Duck, people with active Phoenix Force, etc...

I do think we need to keep the banned list as short, and concise, as possible. We can always edit/add to it if someone tries to sneak in something we hadn't thought of or whatever.--DeadWeather (talk) 17:32, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

---

I'm not arguing against a ban list at all. I'm just saying my view of it will be a lot longer and more strict than I think you guys are wanting.

In fact, that's basically what I'm saying: make a limited allowed list; everything not allowed is by default banned; and then ban specific things within the allowed properties.

Example: Wildstorm is allowed. The Authority characters and the Four characters are banned. Jack Hawksmoore is banned. Century Babies only allowed under <insert specific rules>. OCs from Wildstorm must fit into Team 7 or GenX only. No WildCATS, Daemonite, or Kheran OCs.

Like thus.

--OwlCity (talk) 22:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

---

Honestly I'm fine with starting with the strict list and hearing the arguments for it. If we want to loosen it up after, that's better than having to tighten it after we've put one out. And I think it's good for us to have a limited list to start so we can have a solid idea of what we're allowing. Once we've seen how things go, if we have reason to loosen it up we can always do that later if we're comfortable. --Metahistory (talk) 04:40, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

---

So, I'm going to end up annoying the crud out of people. And I'm sorry for that. But I have been crushed under RL for quite a while, and just have not had the bandwidth to come back and continue these conversations. I'm trying to resolve to do better about that. But RL takes precedence, even if I wish it didn't.

I understand some people don't like them. But IMO, the WildC.A.T.s are perfectly allowable. Authority too; as far as I am concerned, none of them are more powerful than the most powerful allowable DC or Marvel FCs. Yes. Even Jack Hawksmoore.

If everyone else hates it, that's fine. But I'm not going to just say nothing.

Given the many possible variants of FCs, I think we are completely within our rights to have a concept app for ALL characters, FCs and OCs (thusly, we are not demanding more of an OC than we are of an FC).

Anyone who wants to view us as the bad guys and gals for coming back to them with needed changes and suggestions is welcome to do so. They want to badmouth us on WORA or whatever? I don't care. If I'm going to finally be part of putting a game out there on my own, rather than coming in once most of the work is already done to just help out, then it's going to be done right. I'll be the bad woman, if necessary.

--BlondieWiki (talk) 19:39, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

---

I feel like no one actually read what I wrote.

I said no... OCs.... of WildCATS or Kherans. Or whatever. I didn't say "No Cole Cash or Zannah".

I feel like there should be restrictions on what is appable as an OC. But... whatever.

--OwlCity (talk) 20:51, 14 August 2020 (UTC)