New lounge RP

[Kid_Cortet]

Yes. So here is a list of the rules as I understand them so far. Correct me on anything I have wrong/missed.

-GM and a side GM with the time and effort to keep things running. Who they are is yet to be determined

-fights are allowed, but only fights that would be feasible in a place as public as this. This means no guns or running to space and dogfighting. Also be aware that fights will not last long due to security reasons, so if you want a big, long fight, this RP is not the place to do it.

-It will take place in a supercomplex. Maps of this place would be nice by anyone motivated to draw them. (I would, but I hardly know what a supercomplex consists of)

-3 PCs per person. It's still undecided whether or not canon characters are NPC or not.

-As of right now, it should have little connection to the LLH. This is to avoid alienating new people and to take measures against having this fall into what was making the Hotel such a problem to everyone.

Sound about right?

I think out of a curtasy to most players....that if you have to leave for work or go to bed....role play it...that way....if you just suddenly leave....it does not leave the one you are role playing with...at a stand still..and unable to use that characters cause they are "frozen" with the lost character.

And 3 characters huh....what of the possibilty of if you have three...taking out one of your characters....if you want to bring in a new one to test out or such (modify if you will)

[Fluxy]

-3 PCs per person.

3 active ones, with the ability to switch out on the sides; Well, that is what we did discuss and seemed everyone was okay with.

-As of right now, it should have little connection to the LLH. This is to avoid alienating new people and to take measures against having this fall into what was making the Hotel such a problem to everyone.

Eh, alright. So long as things that have already been made canonized remain as such.

[Milkyway64]

I think out of a curtasy to most players....that if you have to leave for work or go to bed....role play it...that way....if you just suddenly leave....it does not leave the one you are role playing with...at a stand still..and unable to use that characters cause they are "frozen" with the lost character.

And 3 characters huh....what of the possibilty of if you have three...taking out one of your characters....if you want to bring in a new one to test out or such (modify if you will)

That first paragraph should be optional. Having to contantly micromanage everything your character does in a casual RP defeats the purpose. If you want to, feel free, otherwise just make do.

And yes, that is allowed. I forgot that in the summary. 3 PCs at a TIME. Feel free to have any of the three leave/die and introduce another, just don't exceed the limit for the amount of character running around at one time and you should be good.

Eh, alright. So long as things that have already been made canonized remain as such.

See, that's the thing. Not everyone might want the Hotel to be canon to their character. A fresh start is the easiest solution, but cameo relationships are allowed as long as the two-three involved all agree. (Example, two friends might recognize eachother as long as their past relationship doesn't take into acount the other people they knew. Keep it small, it'd be nice to form new relationships and factions for a breath of fresh air and to keep it from being a sequal to the hotel.)

[Kursed]

3 active ones, with the ability to switch out on the sides; Well, that is what we did discuss and seemed everyone was okay with.

Eh, alright. So long as things that have already been made canonized remain as such.

I still dissagree with any character limit.

[Fluxy]

See, that's the thing. Not everyone might want the Hotel to be canon to their character. A fresh start is the easiest solution, but cameo relationships are allowed as long as the two-three involved all agree. (Example, two friends might recognize eachother as long as their past relationship doesn't take into acount the other people they knew. Keep it small, it'd be nice to form new relationships and factions for a breath of fresh air and to keep it from being a sequal to the hotel.)

I mean as in things that were made Canon WAAAAAAYYYY before issues started up as in Zeke and Ryn being a couple and engaged. small stuff that only was between two players, involving only one character on both sides. Not stuff like say, Flux knowing people and such, or any of the employees ever working there. The small stuff that doesn't affect anyone really.

[Milkyway64]

Then explain why. I'm always open for listening to suggestions. There are reasons they are there in the first place, namely to avoid clutter and confusion for the players and especially the GM(s). If you have a reason that makes said clutter worth it, then show it to us and we'll discuss.

I mean as in things that were made Canon WAAAAAAYYYY before issues started up as in Zeke and Ryn being a couple and engaged. small stuff that only was between two players, involving only one character on both sides. Not stuff like say, Flux knowing people and such, or any of the employees ever working there. The small stuff that doesn't affect anyone really.

This sounds totally fine. This is what we call "backstory" and is by no means outlawed.

[Kursed]

The character limit should be  a 'unspoken/Unwritten' rule.

[Fluxy]

This sounds totally fine. This is what we call "backstory" and is by no means outlawed.

Cool, just wanted to make that stuff out in the open so it got out, and was okay with everyone.

[Milkyway64]

The character limit should be  a 'unspoken/Unwritten' rule.

So now you agree it should be in place? Well, it still needs to be written to avoid clutter. You already know the stance on it.

[Fluxy]

So now you agree it should be in place? Well, it still needs to be written to avoid clutter. You already know the stance on it.

Just a thought here, but if in the end there is so much debating that we can't agree on this subject, we can allow no character limit, and see how it is handled. And if it does seem to become a problem [Which will be easy to spot out] then we can start making rules on it.

But as I see it, I am perfectly fine with a 3 active character limit, with the ability to do some switching in and out.

[Milkyway64]

Just a thought here, but if in the end there is so much debating that we can't agree on this subject, we can allow no character limit, and see how it is handled. And if it does seem to become a problem [Which will be easy to spot out] then we can start making rules on it.

But as I see it, I am perfectly fine with a 3 active character limit, with the ability to do some switching in and out.

Yeah, but it shouldn't come to that point. The majority of us is fine as it is, and Kursed has yet to state her why she disagrees.

[Fluxy]

Yeah, but it shouldn't come to that point. The majority of us is fine as it is, and Kursed has yet to state her why she disagrees.

Yup. Just stating a last line measure.

[Kursed]

Just a thought here, but if in the end there is so much debating that we can't agree on this subject, we can allow no character limit, and see how it is handled. And if it does seem to become a problem [Which will be easy to spot out] then we can start making rules on it.

But as I see it, I am perfectly fine with a 3 active character limit, with the ability to do some switching in and out.

I think we should go with that  first option.

Milky himeself talks about having  Faith in our roleplayers so let us have  faith enough in them to not smash a crapload of their characters in.

and if you want a reason why I don't like it?  Well  it feels like it's  a Alienating thing.  The more rules we pile onto this the more  alienating it will be

[CrypticQuery]

I think we should go with that  first option.

Any particular reason you're against the 3 simultaneous character limit Kursed?

[Kid_Cortet]

I think a limit is acceptable....and grow from there.....kind of like following DZ's example or the RP room limits

[Kursed]

Any particular reason you're against the 3 simultaneous character limit Kursed?

^ check my edit.

If we are to have  faith in our roleplayers then  we should have faith in them keeping a reasonable amount of  Characters.

[Milkyway64]

I think a limit is acceptable....and grow from there.....kind of like following DZ's example or the RP room limits

That's a good way to put it. It's not alienating, you can have as many characters as you want, you just have to rotate them in and out. The way it sounds, you seem to have a problem because you have a metric ton of characters. If you monopolize the RP by owning half the cast, is that not alienating as well?

Allow me to clarify. 3 is more than enough for most people. No one player needs more than that at a time. If you feel you do, then you might be monopolizing things and shutting out/pressuring the players who only have one or 2.

[Kursed]

That's a good way to put it. It's not alienating, you can have as many characters as you want, you just have to rotate them in and out. The way it sounds, you seem to have a problem because you have a metric ton of characters. If you monopolize the RP by owning half the cast, is that not alienating as well?

Allow me to clarify. 3 is more than enough for most people. No one player needs more than that at a time. If you feel you do, then you might be monopolizing things and shutting out/pressuring the players who only have one or 2.

Anything  we do will alienate someone.

[CrypticQuery]

Anything  we do will alienate someone.

Kursed, 3 characters being able to be switched out is more than enough for most.  It clears potential clutter and makes things easier for others to comprehend. 

[Fluxy]

Okay, so I say we just go with Cortet's idea. Start with three, and if things go well, and we feel the place can handle a bit more, we can work up from there. It can't hurt to do this, rather than take a chance with it clogging up, and having to come back and make a new rule.

[Kid_Cortet]

Kursed, 3 characters being able to be switched out is more than enough for most.  It clears potential clutter and makes things easier for others to comprehend. 

not only that, new players, will be able to follow a little bit easier. If they see someone playing 10 characters at a time, they might not know whom to respond to.....thus making them unwilling to continue. We have to agree that we are wanting MORE people to eventually join, and by throwing all we got into the mix, will only confuse things for new recruits.

[Milkyway64]

And so if we do, we'll work around it. Which is why I'm still patiently waiting on your reasoning. As is it looks like you are disagreeing just to do it. Everyone else agrees that this is the best course of action for the sake of a better RP experience, so please make your stance a bit clearer?

Okay, so I say we just go with Cortet's idea. Start with three, and if things go well, and we feel the place can handle a bit more, we can work up from there. It can't hurt to do this, rather than take a chance with it clogging up, and having to come back and make a new rule.

Yes, we can do this. We can add more if we can handle them. Cortet just nicely summed up again the reason for the limit in the first place.

[Kursed]

not only that, new players, will be able to follow a little bit easier. If they see someone playing 10 characters at a time, they might not know whom to respond to.....thus making them unwilling to continue. We have to agree that we are wanting MORE people to eventually join, and by throwing all we got into the mix, will only confuse things for new recruits.

Fine but the more rules we throw onto this the less will join.

[CrypticQuery]

Fine but the more rules we throw onto this the less will join.

Not really no, certain rules need to be implemented to have a smooth RP'ing experience.  What EXACTLY don't you like about ANY of the current thought up rules/partial character limit?

[Xortberg]

Fine but the more rules we throw onto this the less will join.

I disagree. I, of course, can't speak for everybody, but the reason I didn't feel like joining the Hotel was because of the utter lack of structure. Of course, too many rules will bog down the experience, but we're nowhere near that point right now. If we are, then rules can be amended. Or would you rather we have another incident where DZ gets pissed and starts locking more topics?