Relax moderation of discussion forums

[Odeen]

Enrage/Pacify: purely cosmetic and for flavor purposes only, imparts in-game effects by changing sprite appearance.

 

It's not like influence. Having an enraged Aegis doesn't help you in any way. It's not beneficial. It's a costume change. And yet, because it's a costume change, it can affect breeding. Some would argue that that makes it a consequential BSA, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a functionally useless RP dress-up mechanic. Sounds pretty blurry to me.

 

ETA: I am aware that enrage is not a BSA suggestion, but its existence shows that there can be a grey area.

Edited December 5, 2016 by Odeen

[Fuzzbucket]

A grey area there, in a way, I guess - but not one that will ever be discussed in Suggestions or BSAs, I think. Not least because the whole thing is up to the owner of an individual dragon. There will always be someone who will breed you the kind you want; you are always able to enrage or pacify your own - it affects no-one else. I have never enraged one; I don't mine who else does - but that is all about me, and only about me.

 

"Can we accept just part of a trade" and such issues are FAR more game changing, and affect us all who trade.

[cyradis4]

Enrage/Pacify: purely cosmetic and for flavor purposes only, imparts in-game effects by changing sprite appearance.

 

It's not like influence. Having an enraged Aegis doesn't help you in any way. It's not beneficial. It's a costume change. And yet, because it's a costume change, it can affect breeding. Some would argue that that makes it a consequential BSA, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a functionally useless RP dress-up mechanic. Sounds pretty blurry to me.

 

ETA: I am aware that enrage is not a BSA suggestion, but its existence shows that there can be a grey area.

Enrage is clearly a game-changing BSA: it changes how the lineage view is for *everyone*. Therefore, even though its "cosmetic", its game changing.

 

The line, to me at least, is crystal clear.

 

But yes, we really need to be able to show support for well-thought-out BSAs.

 

Especially since TJ is on record as saying that if you want a suggestion, it needs to be kept active.

 

But because people can't post "support" for a good BSA suggestion, it can never stay active and therefore never gets attention!

 

The current "posting just support is spam" makes it virtually impossible for a good, solid BSA to be put into play.

 

Cheers!

C4.

[Fuzzbucket]

I am MUCH more concerned about how changes to existing BSAs - especially ones that DO NOT CHANGE THE BSA ITSELF (yes I am shouting !) vanish into the mud.

 

And Enrage is not a BSA. It is no more a BSA than kill - which can damage a lineage HUGELY much more than seeing a dragon in your line change colour. The only way to avoid lineage damage with either one is only to build your own lines, or build them with people you KNOW you can trust.

Edited December 5, 2016 by fuzzbucket

[Odeen]

I am MUCH more concerned about how changes to existing BSAs - especially ones that DO NOT CHANGE THE BSA ITSELF (yes I am shouting !) vanish into the mud.

 

And Enrage is not a BSA. It is no more a BSA than kill - which can damage a lineage HUGELY much more than seeing a dragon in your line change colour. The only way to avoid lineage damage with either one is only to build your own lines, or build them with people you KNOW you can trust.

FTR, just because you don't like a BSA or its effects does not, in fact, make it not-a-BSA.

[Sundew]

BSA: breed specific action

Enrage: an action specific to one breed.

yeah, it's a BSA.

 

support for loosening moderation. I haven't been very strongly affected but I've seen moderation which I thought was unfair here, and in no case should a member be afraid to make a post, like many here are saying they are. don't have much else to add, everyone's said it already.

[Fuzzbucket]

FTR, just because you don't like a BSA or its effects does not, in fact, make it not-a-BSA.

I don't dislike it - but it isn't a game-wide game changer.

 

Unless kill is also seen as a game changer.

[Paradisiske]

pretty sure kill is a game changer because of zombies

[olympe]

Kill is not a BSA, but a game-changer. Seriously, this discussion is getting stupid.

 

If it belongs to a specific breed or a limited number of specific breeds, it's a Breed Specific Action (BSA). If you can perform it from the actions page, it's not a BSA. Simple as that.

Edited December 6, 2016 by olympe

[Fiona]

If you can perform it from the actions page, it's not a BSA. Simple as that.

Uh, all BSAs are preformed from the Actions page...

 

Just wanted to point that out.

 

 

I'd say the definition of a BSA is that only one breed gets it. (Or two possibly at some point, but right now as far as I can remember no BSA is assigned to two breeds.) So Enrage is totally a BSA, it just only has one breed it can be applied to.

 

Wasn't this a discussion about whether posting simple "I support" posts on suggested BSAs and changes to BSAs should be allowed? When did it devolve into a discussion about what actions are BSAs, what actions are not, and whether they're game changers? Why does that matter to the discussion?

 

For my part, I don't see any harm in allowing simple "I support" posts in a discussion about proposed BSAs or changes to BSAs.

[Fuzzbucket]

In my mind, BSAs are things done TO one dragon BY another dragon. Which I think was what olympe meant. Incubate, influence, EQ, expunge are done to one (or more, in the case of EQ) dragon by another and are BSAs.

 

Kill, enrage, corporealise, abandon, release - all done from the dragon's own action page - are NOT BSAs as such, in my view. They are one dragon taking a decision about itself, kinda.

 

Splash is just - weird, but achieves nothing so doesn't matter.

Edited December 6, 2016 by fuzzbucket

[cyradis4]

In my mind, BSAs are things done TO one dragon BY another dragon. Which I think was what olympe meant. Incubate, influence, EQ, expunge are done to one (or more, in the case of EQ) dragon by another and are BSAs.

 

Kill, enrage, corporealise, abandon, release - all done from the dragon's own action page - are NOT BSAs as such, in my view. They are one dragon taking a decision about itself, kinda.

 

Splash is just - weird, but achieves nothing so doesn't matter.

Enrage and corporealise are indeed Breed Specific Actions, but like almost all BSAs, have a specific (very specific in their case) target.

 

Having said that, it has wandered afield. Just posting "I support!" needs to be allowed. I have two suggestions, which those who posted comments all liked BUT had tweaks. They ended up wtih only a couple of pages, because they were well thought out and well rounded, and really fit the breed's known information. In short, they were all ready to go except for the coding.... And it looks like no one wants them.... because no one is commenting, because there's nothing to comment on except "I support!" Whereas the not-good topics get a LOT of play.

 

So yea I'm a big proponent of being able to post "support" in the BSA sub-forum. Really, there aren't that many finished game-changing BSAs. You could probably form a list of completed BSA suggestions, and it'd only have a dozen or so on it! Most of the suggestions currently have major, fatal flaws, and between them and the fluffs, its hiding the completed suggestions that don't have any clear flaws.

 

Cheers!

C4.

[diaveborn]

Regarding the BSA forum - Is the rule that we have to, along with our support, give constructive criticism/feedback about something we think should be different / flesh out the concept more?

 

I'm wondering if saying "I support, because I have use for this BSA" or "I support, I like X aspect of this" would be okay. That way we could support stuff that's fully fleshed out without just saying "I support" by itself.

 

Was in the Flight Rising suggestion forum and that's how they do it - you can't just say support or no support, but have to give some reason why / detail etc. Wondering if that's how it works here or if if it isn't that way, if it could be changed to be that way (assuming it won't be changed to be allowed to say support/no support by itself).

Edited December 21, 2016 by diaveborn

[Obscure_Trash]

Regarding the BSA forum - Is the rule that we have to, along with our support, give constructive criticism/feedback about something we think should be different / flesh out the concept more?

 

I'm wondering if saying "I support, because I have use for this BSA" or "I support, I like X aspect of this" would be okay. That way we could support stuff that's fully fleshed out without just saying "I support" by itself. 

 

Was in the Flight Rising suggestion forum and that's how they do it - you can't just say support or no support, but have to give some reason why / detail etc.  Wondering if that's how it works here or if if it isn't that way, if it could be changed to be that way (assuming it won't be changed to be allowed to say support/no support by itself).

It doesn't have to be criticism; it can be like your examples. "I like this because it will make x part of game easier" or "I don't do x a lot because there's no easy way to do it, but this would mean I could do x". Probably just saying "I have use for this" is about the same as "I support this" but "this would make x aspect more useful" would be a little more descriptive of why you support the BSA.

 

Do not post just to say "I like this idea"

The goal of this section is to develop ideas for Breed-specific Actions. You're free to comment on how a specific BSA will affect the balance of the game or what you feel is wrong with an idea, but just posting "WANT" is spam and will earn you a warning. However, we encourage the use of polls. You can either do "New Poll" when creating your topic or use the "Attach New Poll" black text button above the edit and quote buttons on your first post.

 

^^

Edited December 21, 2016 by SockPuppet Strangler