Door Game Meta Topic

[kyntha]

@Donald_Petersen

Yeah, I want to keep weapon upgrades as simple as possible. Whether that +10FP thing you found was a hood-mounted howitzer or a fancy spiff-and-shine package intended for an existing weapon, doesn’t matter. Add those 10FP to your stats, and make it any kind of cosmetic change you want. Like @kingannoy’s increasingly bristling Camaro, or just the same peashooter you’ve always carried as a hood ornament (only now it somehow puts out 90FP), the cosmetics are, in the end, however you want them to be. +10FP is +10FP, when it comes to combat.

Ah super, thank you. That clears up a lot for me

[Donald_Petersen]

We is rollin’ again, by the way.

[anon73629133]

Brew?
.

[gwwar]

@Donald_Petersen, @penguinchris, @JonasEggeater Could someone double-check the round 4 form? After choosing mission one, I also see the extra answer fields for mission 2. Let me know if I should just ignore this.

[SteampunkBanana]

You can have one in celebration afterwards, I understand Fleetwood has them brewing a nice amber ale up there.

[davide405]

@funruly

I’m super appreciative that the GMs are brave enough to take this risk, publicly, and also super appreciative that a good number of players are willing to roll with it and still also offer suggestions for improvement mid-stream.

^^^ This ^^^

[bizmail_public]

The Mission Four Repost is Fantastic

Fun narrative, clear exposition of choices, links to where to find more information.

Aces

Since we’re on the meta-thread, I would like to make suggestion for a slightly different way to handle the Mission 4 results that might both ease Donald’s workload and give players more scope for collaborative narrative. Or might not. your call.

Round 4 is a great set-up. Mission 1 is the BDW olympics, Mission 3 is BDW meets GTA, and Mission 2 give casual players a way to stay engaged. COOL.

My proposal is to harness this great set-up to our players creativity by splitting the results post into two posts separated in time :

• a “dice rolling” summary
• a delay, during which the players provide their own narrative-consistent stories
• a narrative heavy post that gets the plot moving forward again

The key idea is that there would be a long delay between the two posts during which players would could fill in their own stories, informed by their own mission outcome.

The fist post would be brief numerical summaries of the “dice rolling” results with perhaps a sentence fragment of description. This needs to be SHORT. A tweet, not a blog post.

• “shame about the .50 cal jamming”
• “Way to show your ass to that Raider. BOOM”
• "who knew there were still Zoot Suiters in East LA ? ".

Encourage players to create their own stories with something like “Reports are still coming in and it’s all very confusing. Post what you experienced.” This has the advantage getting the “Dice rolling” results posted quickly, , while buying time for Donald to construct the labor-intensive “narrative” posts that drive the game

Allow day or so for the Jack Burtons and Major’s and Channings and other highly engaged players to post their own narrative-compatible character story. Should be a hoot, and they might encourge some less engaged players to get more involved. I could certainly see myself PMing a less active player and posting co-ordinated stories. Later, the second post with the full write-up for the mission results only needs to “correct” elements of the driver’s stories that conflict with the overall narrative arc. No need for a full writeup for those characters. Where a driver’s stories conflicts with the overall narrative arc, the corrections should be easy – everyone knows it’s confusing out there, and Drivers can be such braggarts.

Splitting the results across two posts could potentially lighten Donald’s work load and drive a helluva lot of player interaction during what has been the “dead time” when Donald was doing the immense labor building the narrative results post.

Just a thought.

[Donald_Petersen]

@bizmail_public

Just a thought.

And another excellent one at that.

I’ve always been afraid of manhandling the narrative too much. Yeah, I came up with the scenario and the route and the goal, but this is our story. I always want you guys to drive the narrative at least as much as I do!

So I do believe I’m gonna adopt this policy, and see how it comes out. Thanks for the suggestion!

[anon73629133]

@bizmail_public

a delay, during which the players provide their own narrative-consistent stories

heh. I might have pre-scripted my “performance” in the “audience chamber” because I wanted to do just that. I might have engaged in a bit of foreshadowing.

Yes, this type of structure of {GM roll} → {Players React} - > {GM Continues Narrative} appeals to my sensibility.

[anon73629133]

Yes, this happened to me and I also filled out a bug report. I couldn’t proceed without picking options, which resulted in a nasty electric shock.

[gwwar]

Apparently I’m a “picker.”

@Donald_Petersen there may need to be some edits to the form in case some mechanics get spoiled.

[daneel]

So I didn’t see anywhere on the form to talk about repairs…are you just going to pull info direct from the mechanics and the repair thread? Ditto for the auction?

[peregrinus_bis]

Char, yes?

[webiii1976]

@davide405 and I have been waiting to make sure all repair reports have been submitted.

We have authorized each other to spend each others RP, so the repair thread for round 4 will be resolved before mission time.

[penguinchris]

I did indeed make an error in the form logic that sent anyone signing up for mission 1 to the mission 2 hacking questions. It’s fixed now and if you chose mission 1 and continued through the hacking options, you got to see something you wouldn’t have but the possible effects won’t apply to you.

I would of course appreciate nobody discussing anything they may learn from the form until everyone has a chance to do it!

[penguinchris]

Yeah, we’re going to take everything regarding upgrades and repairs from the threads this round. I should mention that on the form.

[webiii1976]

Me thinks it’s already too late…

[penguinchris]

Whoops, cat’s outta the bag I guess. My fault. But there’s more to the puzzle yet…

[davide405]

@webiii1976

We have authorized each other to spend each others RP, so the repair thread for round 4 will be resolved before mission time.

I fully support this as a stopgap for this round. We know how much damage is out there, we know how many RP our mechanics have amongst them, we know that some of the damage (points above 75% HP on foreign cars) can not be repaired at all, and that only one specific mechanic can repair domestics to 100%

Optimizing a puzzle like that is a task ill-suited to a committee, and this particular committee is communicating by email and BBS posts.

My suggestion: Let the GMs decide this round, and pick up with lessons learned for the next.

EDIT: words in italics are changed from original post to correct outright error and improve clarity.

[peregrinus_bis]

I think I know what we’ve been eating:

Military pizza prototype lasts three years without spoiling