This flaw, known as OHSS by the creatures community, is the One Hour Stupidity Syndrome, which would inevitably effect the majority of the norn population within a game. Basically, with no other way to say it, a norn afflicted with the syndrome would be stupid. It would no longer listen to commands, stop attempting to learn words, would eat at odd intervals, attempt to breed with any norn that came within reach, and would be unable to navigate beyond it's current location, which would usually be the nursery it was born in.

So, after a few of these OHSS norns were born, they would just keep breeding with each other (since they all remained in the same nursery) and producing more OHSS norns, until there was nothing but stupid norns that couldn't be lead to explore the world, effectively ending the game.

OHSS was found to be caused by a defective genome, which increased the size of the concept lobe and strengthened the dendrites between the concept lobe and the decision lobe. This made it so that chemicals responsible for pleasure and pain increased in production and did not decay fast enough, building up in the brain.

A Norn with OHSS, if rewarded for performing an action or learning a word, would not have the pleasure chemical decay fast enough, so that any subsequent actions the norn would take (no matter what they were) would be equally rewarded. After being mentally rewarded by more pleasure chemicals, the next action would likewise seem to be rewarded, ad infinitum until the norn's brain literally turned to mush within an hour.

When a norn is rewarded for doing anything, and anything it did was rewarded, its decisions no longer carried any weight, so it made them randomly.

Let me repeat that.

When a norn is rewarded for doing anything, and anything it did was rewarded, its decisions no longer carried any weight, so it made them randomly.

The norns with OHSS would usually end up slamming into walls, over and over again, because the usual pain chemical that you would expect would be overrided by an abundance of pleasure chemicals. Being the fastest action that released chemicals in the brain, any OHSS norn that still had enough wits to actually find a wall would inevitably starve to death after repeatedly slamming into it over the course of several hours.

Thankfully, players are not norns with OHSS. But, the idea that "the DM's job is to entertain the players" may turn them into them.

If a DM does nothing but reward his players and encourage them for any action they perform, they are more likely to lose their sense of what is a generally a "good" play-style and end up detracting from the game by doing whatever first comes to mind.

Conversely, if a DM randomly punishes their players, the players will grow to fear taking action, since any action has an equal chance of resulting in punishment. Experiments with rats that were given shocks at random intervals left the rats unwilling to move, for fear of punishment.

The power of reward and punishment largely falls into the hands of the DM, and is largely their responsibility. However, it is also the player's responsibility to accept punishments when they deserve them (such as taking damage from an obvious trap) and to also understand when rewards are deserved (not complaining about finding no gold on a child beggar they killed, for instance)

These are not new ideas, and you can find many of them already written down in your guidebooks and DM's Guides. I just hoped that using comparatively simple (but still rather complex) creatures as an example would help illustrate these points and to give you something to think about.

>>17049398

Sounds like guys who've spent the last ten years on weed.

This sounds like a bug worthy of ToadyOne.

In regards to your question, OP: if I saw that sort of thing in my players I would give them some kind of hint that they're just banging their head against a wall.

You failed me, OP. I thought you had bred sentient Norns.

Monitoring this thread

i..... this fuckin game my god searching for cd now failing that a torrent nostalgia goggles activated

To stretch the analogy in an obvious direction, you could say that the equivalent of slamming into a wall iis often killing an NPC.

>thread about Creatures

Oh god the nostalgia, it burns

God.
This thread is... You have opened my eyes.
So, how much time until this gets introduced on Dwarf Fortress?
Or any breeding game, for that matter? Like Black and White? It's pure freaking genious.

Bravo! That was a good read and a sound lesson :-). Copypasta, or did you write that up yourself OP?

Thankfully I've never come across OHSS in the games I DM (if anything I am harsh, although I hope fairly), but I have heard of a similar kind of thing from other games. Too permissive DMs often end up with players who derail constantly and end up destroying the game in a frenzy of stupidity. Whilst this is fun to begin with, it quickly tires and results in a poor playing experience.

OHSS thread anyone?

Mother of god.....

I'm not the only kid who had this game....

I always wondered what ended up happening to my norns after playing too long.

Speaking of old computer games, who played that old Small Soldiers RTS?

>>17049463
>Kill an NPC
>Receive gold and experience
>Find a town
>IT IS FILLED WITH NPCs

Player logic, explained.

>>17049503
Holy dicks, another Creatures Player!

Saving this copypasta for futre generations, OP! Also, look up classcial (Skinnerian) conditioning. Behaviourism in didnt completely crack the nut on understanding a human brain, but it is good on building deterrence for undesirable actions

OH FUCK THE NOSTALGIA
>Creatures 3
>most animals in Jungle would die out due to poor design
>I would create an elaborate Noah's Ark of animals that by all rights should go extinct, preserving them for all eternity
>also weeks spent injecting random shit into Norns and seeing what happens

Yup, I noticed this in a game my friend was running. No matter what I did, the dice rolls made me succeed, and he didn't want to kill my character because he was too awesome and appropriate to the setting. Some players would not succeed at all, I succeeded at pretty much everything all the time, and I began to think less and less and just sort of react to situations in whatever way seemed most 'awesome.' Since returns on constant awesome are diminishing, my 'awesome' actions grew progressively less intelligent and well thought out. Now that I think about it, my character was doing things that were border-line retarded near the end of the game, and I hardly cared what I was doing or saying in or out of character.

TLDR if you are That Guy DM, you will turn otherwise rational players into That Fucking Guy players.

>>17049554
I had it. It all seemed so great, there was lots of potential, all these glimpses of stuff to go and see.
Then my Norns didn't do anything. A little bit disappointing, I just thought I was bad at it

GODFUCKING DAMNIT!!!!!

When I was younger, I used to play the SHIT out of Creatures 2. I would start, watch my creatures become stupid, and then restart, thinking I did something wrong. The internet wasn't anything like it is now, so I had no way of finding out what I was doing wrong, so I just kept trying different things, hoping it would work out. I even started monitoring their chemical levels and injecting them with different ones in an attempt to solve the problem. Eventually, after who knows how many tries, I just gave up.

YOU MEAN TO TELL ME THERE WAS A GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING FLAW IN THEIR GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING GENOME?!?

I THOUGHT IT WAS BECAUSE I DIDN'T LOVE THEM ENOUGH.

I fucking loved creatures. I can't remember which one I had though. Creatures 3 I think.

I'll have to download that now.

I never really encountered the OHSS problem; after finding the genetic splicer, I decided to create a better norn by splicing them with a grendel.

The initial results didn't fare well; twisted, broken creatures that hobbled around on mismatched limbs. These were quickly discarded to the lower levels, where they usually fought each other until they starved to death or died of heavy metal poisoning.

However, when the population limit was reached, I had to find a new method to dispose of the rejects. The cyanide injection was too slow to administer to the droves of creatures coming out of the machine, so instead I took to placing them all in the airlock and flooding it.

Which worked very well, until I discovered a strain apparently capable of surviving underwater. And obviously my super norn had to have that trait. Similarly, some of the descendants of those banished to the depths had gained the ability to resist the metal poisoning (apparently due to the lack of certain vital organs).

More splicing, and a forced breeding program later, I had my mutant capable of surviving any hostile environment. The internal biology was all over the place, but they were tough, long-lived and could at least be taught self-sufficiency.

So you see, the ends do justify the means sometimes.

>Lead norn to water
>Have norn fall into the water
>Pick up drowing norn
>Carry the norn to explore the entire world, finding all the kits and discoveries in the first ten minutes of the game

What are you going to do about it, Game?

>>17049694
our ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

wait they made a third one???

I learned about OHSS in Creatures 2 this year.

I realized why I never got far when I had the game back in the day.

To all you chucklefucks that are ALSO nostalgic for Creatures, it's only six bucks.

http://www.gog.com/en/catalogue#all_genres/search/creatures/

>>17049694
My campaign has a new villain.

My villain comes with his own minions.

>>17050829
Making BBEG's out of other fa/tg/uys? We should've done this earlier.

Somehow this thread only vindicates my belief that portions of humanity's code is bugged in the same way, somehow.

>fucking creatures

Creatures 1, 2, and 3 were my childhood pc games.

That and Black and White.

>>17051363
Of course it is.

How else do you explain retards and *insert name of opposing political faction here*

>>17051411
Loved Black and White 2. I got all the way to the the final island when the game glitched, corrupting my save.

And then I didn't play it again.

>>17049694
For such a childish game, that is UTTERLY DEMENTED.

>>17051480
Like a large amount of "Childish Games" out there, it had a sweet and simple shell but a deep and complex center. The only reason norms are adorable is for the empathy factor.

I vaguely remember this.

Where can I redownload?

I never knew about OHSS and thought I was the only one who played Creatures. I am now sad since I put them all down in the end. Wherever you are now little ones I am sorry and daddy still loves you. :'(

>>17051411
Black and White a childhood game you say? You make me feel REALLY old. But damn that game was tits.

>>17051480
Creatures 2 wasn't marketed as a game. It was supposed to be a artificial life simulator, and there was nothing childish about its complexity. You just had to look after the kiddie Norns in their infant stages before there were older Norns to look after them for you. Hence all the talk of nursery and such.

Creatures 3 was marketed as more of a game though. And personally I preferred the layout. But 2 had the better content I believe.

>>17051519

I have been a kind anon in the past, and I have the opportunity to do so again now it seems. Any interest in me digging out my Creatures 2 and 3 CDs and making a torrent?

>>17051619
No need; located one for myself, I believe.

Your charity is adored, however. I'd pay for it, but chances are the developers are probably under.

>>17049694

You can't evolve resistance to ATP Decoupler though.

That shit is DEADLY AS FUCK. Two seconds and you have an ex-Norn on your hand.

Speaking of deadly things, in the first game I got super paranoid after the first thing my baby Norn did was make a beeline to the deadly mushrooms, ate it and died. I kept those fuckers on a really short leash after that, and by "short" I mean "Those assholes didn't leave the house.

Creatures 3 was a fun game but had its problems. Like those fucking Ettins (good thing you could get an Agent to shut them off).

And the chemical system. Seriously, why make you click through 100+ chemicals (some of which have no name) every time. No dropdown menu or search? Damn.

SO THATS WHY THAT FUCKER JUST STAYED IN THE NURSARY LICKING THE WALLS AND FUCKING GOD DAMMIT

I literally had to create an alternate enviroment on the surface to protect my breeding pair of clever norns from the stupid fuckers below.

But judging from what OP says, I was pretty unlucky to get an OHSS norn in the first batch of eggs surely?

Also was one of the genes wanderlust? Because I got this one norn who just left, just straight up wandered off, and I lost her for ages, and she turned up pregnant afterwards. Was weird....

Re-installing

>>17051611
>But damn that game was tits
For the first few hours, yes. Then you had seen everything the creatures had to offer and there wasn't much of a game beyond that.

>>17051619
Unless they all went under I think there's still torrents of it out there.

>>17051632
>http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/creatures_exodus

Creatures 3 and Docking Station. Cheap. Or since its GOG and has no DRM, probably already torrentable.

I had been hoping for something like, a way to introduce OHSS into my NPCs, or a Creatures RPG, or something like that.

I'm kinda disappointed.

Thanks teegee. I never knew such game existed, but always had keen interest in evolution simulations.
I will check it out.

That is waht happens in real life with majority of population of developed countries. With all this wellfare.

Oh man, Creatures, I remember that. Oh hey look here comes a Grendel, I wonder if I can rewire it to be friendlALL OF YOUR NORNS HAVE TERMINAL HEPATITIS.

FUCK YOU YOU SCALY LIZARDBUG COCKBAG.

Don't forget splicing. Shit was cash.

>>17049383
The first time one of my creatures died in that game I cried.. no homo.

this is an excellent thread, and i will take OP's posts into consideration when sculpting my next campaign

>They will never make new game like this

>>17049694
>>17049694
>>17049694
re-quoting this because jesus fucking christ

that is some evil shit

>>17054230
Bad english ,yeah.
You should read Creatures wiki - for example like there were made special kin of norns, bred from various agressive kind of norns mixed notable grendel-hunting strains developed by other players and mixed them with couple of infamous serial killer norns ( those who systematcaly kileld other norns for no apparent reason) and made breed that was relatively friendly to each other, simple norns and ettins ( considering their agressivenes) but completely agressive towards grendel. And when they matured they develop wanderlust and go to hunt and kill grendels.
Late some other guy made strain of grendels to track down, fight and kill those norn warriors. Fast, relentless amphibious creatures that never stop until they run out of enemies or die from old age.

>>17054201
Well, I believe those games were mostly a science project.
So no, they won't. Whoever "They" are.

>>17054276
realmenofgenius.jpg

Today, we salute you, Dr. Mengel, Creature-Mangler!

>>17054262
good sweet god

oh teeg..

>>17054287
The possibilities!
I, sure creatord didnt have this in mind, when they made game.

>>17049403
This sounds exactly like the issue of today's gaming culture.
Many games are a lot more fun when cracking up the difficulty - Because then there's actually a risk involved.

OP... Now I'm raging at the creators of Spore. What you are describing sounds like something Spore should've had.

>>17054304

This reminds me of that short story, Microcosmic God.

For those interested, there is a Creatures 3 torrent on /t/

>>17054319
Well they are providing OHSS entertainment. Heh. Sounds cool.
OHSS gaming, OHSS movies.

When my players do retarded shit, they usually get punished. Kick in a random door? Meet Bubba the troll, sporting trainers, a stained wifebeater, and a double barreled trashcan gauge shotgun. He's angry, because they just kicked in his door.

>>17054357
This.

You have to be consistent when defining stupid behavior.

Trying on stuff before identifying BUC? Bad idea.
Scoping out a room before launching attack plan? Good idea.
Quaffing unidentified potions? Bad idea.
Check for traps before entering a new area? Good idea.
Not bothering to learn Elven when traveling in elf lands? Bad idea.

It's amazing how little common sense the average player has.

>>17049694
>>17054262
Damn. Terrible inhumane experiments to make ubermench, breeding natural born killers, breeding , monsters who should kill those killers.
I wonder what players would do, if it game werent werent deliberately made in such childlike, friendly and cute manner, trying to avoid many gritty and realistic things.

>>17054473
While goal was to create wise, peaceful and kind creature so many people have teken different route.

>Slave was the first norn to be put up for download on AntiNorn's Tortured Norns. She had been taught to call the hand "God", and had a genetic alcohol problem. She also has a high level of glycotoxin in her bloodstream on import, which can only be combatted by injecting her with a large amount of glycogen and monitoring her glycogen levels. Slave, everyone's favorite little drunken Norn. The first tortured Norn ever put online(afaik). Beaten sensless and abused by Grendels. The Norn just about every Norn lover out there has imported into thier world(s) and unwittingly mated to create abnormally drunk children. Wow, I bet they're proud of the fact that they've basically tortured generations of newborns this way. On the original site, you could listen to her being slapped to death.

>>17049383
reminds me of dwarf fortress

>>17054201
Creatures 4 (also known as
Creatures 2011), is a new official creatures game currently in development by Fishing Cactus, licensed by Gameware Development. It is slated for release in early 2012.

>>17054632
>Creatures 2011
>Released in 2012

>>17054632
Judging by description it would be siplified compared to predecessors. Just like with all other modern games.

>>17054632
retard mode spore clone i presume.

>>17054645
Its also a free to play game with mircotransactions.


The one saving grace though it that the physical copies will include the original creature games with bones content

>>17054645
>MFW no ettins or grendels in plans.

OP has the OHSS.

RPGs are about having fun, not training players to 'do well' via reward and punishment. Typing stuff like "player's responsibility to accept punishments when they deserve them" just makes you sound like some sort of goddamned bondage merchant.

If you'r going to have sections of the game where player decisions lead to success or failure, then yes, failure has to be an option. Trail of Cthulhu tried to solve the problem of a missed Spot Hidden check derailing the whole adventure with a patronising system where you get a pat on the head and the clue handed to you just for having the highest appropriate skill in the party.

The real solution to that problem was to come up with an interesting result for a failed check; you still find the clue, but the cultists heard you were snooping around and come for you in the night. It's a bad thing, the players are in danger, but it's not a punishment. People don't play games to be punished; they play them for fun, which includes challenge and danger. A good, engaging battle is as much a reward as finding the treasure; probably more so.

>>17054679
Looks like you completely missed point of OP post.

>>17054587

And this is why these games should be illegal. We're a long way from real AI yet, but can we just nip this sort of shit in the bud, please? I'd rather not have to have this debate after we reach the "Lifecycle of Software Objects" stage.

>>17054679
Not punishment for failing rolls or having bad luck, but punishment for acting like idiots.

>>17054679
Didnt read hard enough.

He is talking about players ACTIONS

Not the outcome of their rolls.

>>17054704
But they arnt real AI.

stop falling for the slippery slope fallacy.

Its the same as thinking that liking loli leads to child molestation.

This is a page from Dragonroar, a shitty D&D ripoff from 1984. It illustrates where the 'reward/punishment' attitude to GMing eventually leads.

As you can see the writers have added a sort of GM's assistant role so the GM no longer has to argue with unruly players. The Arbiter takes all that shit for the GM, receives no reward, and is punished in a petty manner for entirely subjective 'mistakes'.

It's also, creepily, recommended twice that the Arbiter be a girl, as they are 'more objective'. More like easier for the GM (sorry, 'Fatemaster') to bully, amirite?

The voting system and the honour system suggest a fundamental conflation of different types of 'bad' behaviour: Disruptive OOC behaviour (a real problem) is confused with in-game acts of evil, which in turn are confused with actions such as getting drunk or being reckless - which may well be good roleplaying, depending on the character. The underlying assumption is that there's one 'good' (or 'honourable') way to play, and the GM alone knows what it is.

Why isn't Pokemon more like Creatures ;_;

>>17054710

You are correct, that is an important distinction.

I feel the same conclusion holds true; poor strategy shouldn't lead to the game being miserable any more than poor die rolls; it should, however, hamper the players and complicate things for them. But complication isn't punishment, and thinking of it as punishment is dangerous to the game.

Now going back to Dragonroar and the conflation of different types of idiocy; strategic idiocy need not be punished; I have several wonderful players who cannot make a tactical decision to save their lives, but are nonetheless an asset to the campaign. Their mistakes will lead to complication and defeat, but not punishment.

Then there is disruptive idiocy; players who go on random killing sprees, fight at the gaming table, try to incorporate their sexual fetishes into a game inappropriately, you name it. That sort of idiocy doesn't need punishment either; you just tell them to knock it the fuck off. A good campaign is a collaborative, social effort and requires that the players like and trust one another. A lot of advice about dealing with 'that guy' seems to ignore the fact that you should be playing with people you consider friends in the first place.

Never heard of this game
Thats pretty amazing.

>>17054750

Having one player who can only vote in the event of a tie is actually pretty interesting.

But I really wonder how well the arbiter system would actually work. It seems far too "meta" of a way to decide things.

>>17054740

They are real, actually. They have an approximation of a 'brain', reward mechanisms and so on. What they aren't is very complex, but it's entirely possible that 'true AI' will emerge out of steadily advancing complexity of simulations.

If nothing else, we can simulate brains on the molecular level and create consciousness via brute force. It's already been done with rat brains.

Fucking hell, this thread blindsided me. My copy of creatures 3 is just to my left, actually. On a shelf. I'm sorely tempted to reinstall it, but I know I suck at the game. (Read: I can barely keep my norns alive, let alone get to the "play with stuff" stage)

It should be worth noting that sometimes a player SHOULD be rewarded for stupid shit. A chaotic evil character killing a child beggar for looking at him funny is in character. A lawful good paladin? Not so much. RP helps here, though it really more applies to players who can't.

>>17054902
>a player SHOULD be rewarded for stupid shit. A chaotic evil character killing a child beggar
How? This beggar had was poor. And as starving child he wasnt a challenge. So it want harder than to spit on the floor.

Part of the problem is defining what 'reward' means in terms of gaming. For some people, that's solely in terms of XP, for others it's in terms of achievement, for others, it's rewarding if something interesting happens in the game.

You don't need an extra XP bonus for stabbing some random child even if it's in keeping with your wicked wickedness. For some players, the GM describing in detail how they stab the child and it slowly collapses to the ground bleeding and everyone stares at them in horror IS a reward, whereas the GM rolling eyes and going "Yeah, whatever" isn't.

If stabbing a child sets the city guard against you and makes it a heck of a lot more difficult to reach the mayor and negotiate the thing you were trying to do to start with, for some players, that's a punishment because it set them back in their goals, and for others it's a reward because it showed the game world reacting to their actions. (And to some, it's a reward because the city guard are worth more XP when you kill them and take their stuff.)

>>17054795

It's a horrible idea. You're really just designating a player whose opinion is only worth 1/2 of a vote (i.e, if the group is split down the middle, whichever side the arbiter is really on loses). Then making him/her the DMs bitch. Then making him/her engage in a discussion qualitatively judging other players (and deciding which ones were bad) while the rest of the group watches silently.

>>17055335
>while the rest of the group watches silently.

...and seethes.

It really is a bit fucking psychotic. I thought the game was charming with its old school aesthetic, war hedgehogs, killer penguins and included audio tape until I started reading that shit.

>>17055125

Glad I finished reading the thread. I would have said something like this, but you said it better.

Same with the warnings about "reward/punishment" based play. Simple "roleplaying" xp awards can get just as bad just as quickly if approached with the wrong atttitude.

>>17055365

And the picture of the cute, shy-looking girl. And the assurances that if a girl ever tries to play with you you should make her your arbiter.

>>17055440
I suppose the lesson to take from this thread is just to make the world as 'real' as your players would enjoy it to be.
If your players are lighthearted, then let things like 'ontological inertia' go in favor of their happy-go-lucky attitude.
If they enjoy being disk-ass-thieves, then go all out on them, and challenge them with new things to steal/pillage/rape while only increasing the level of ingenuity required to escape the new sticky mess they've gotten themselves in.
>Dick-ass players steal crown jewel, bounty on head
>Dick ass-players steal bounty, kingdom on head
>Dick-ass players steal kingdom, riches on head
>Dick-ass players continue this trend of one-upping the world until they roll unlucky and shit goes down.
>Full party kill from rampaging gods due to stealing heavenly goods, handshakes all around for good campaign.
>Begin planning CoC campaign, turn dick-ass theivery against the players
>Enjoy the insanity as they attempt to one-up Nyarlathotep in a contest of magical dickery and insanity.
It would need a special DM to be able to let things go like this though.

There are a lot of ways for players to feel that their decisions don't carry any weight. I think the most common is when they never become engaged in the narrative in the first place, or when they know they're being brutally railroaded.

But, yes, it can also happen when the DM makes it so that the PCs actions never seem to have undesirable consequences, no matter what.
Baring what >>17055125 said in mind, yes, "reward" and "punishment" are very relative. But it's not about there being some ultimate answer to whether something is "reward" or "punishment", it's simply about making the game a landscape for players to navigate. They can make their own minds up about what they want, as long as there are varied outcomes, and their actions matter.

The problem is when that 'landscape' is all flat, and moving in any direction is the same as any other.

This is a good thread.

>>17055530
Images of IRL tits disgust me. Without the rest of the body they look like cthonic flesh-horrors (i.e Catherine game), and even with the body the stillness of the image makes every single imperfection and vein stick out (i.e. that one girl who looked pretty until you saw her facebook photos).

>>17055502

You know the part where the dastardly protagonists work together towards shared goals and don't dissolve into petty infighting or cripple themselves with chaotic stupid "badguy" shenangians? That's the part most games never reach.

You don't need an exceptional DM. Evil PCs are actually incredibly easy to motivate and much more predictable. What you really need is a great group of players.

>>17055544

It's actually animated, if that helps. Only the thumbnail is still.

>>17055565
Yeah, I saw that.
Still, it's just the tits. See the part about cthonic horrors.

I don't get turned on by females just because they are female; I get turned on by their level of physical and personal femininity. DEM CURVES AND HIPS, DAT SUBMISSIVE SUPPORT.

I dislike the idea that a DM should offer rewards or punishments. He should be a neutral arbiter of the game world, sparingly steering the game right if the rules unreasonably dictate too harsh consequences for some actions, but not basing this on a carrot and stick approach as OP implies.

In that regard, I find the analogy to OPs norns poor in its premise, although correct in its conclusion that constant positive outcomes produce uncaring and bored players.

(As usual, all disclaimers of my fun/your fun, my game preferences/your game preferences apply here. Goddammit I hate that I have to say that every time.)

>>17055502
This dick-ass player seems like this OHSS stuff. Because he wins no matter what odds are pitted against him.
Now i understan this thing about all those stories on /tg/ when players are conquering their kingdoms and all. I thought that players are realy creative with their tactics and into powergaming, being able to put all tricky schemes in motion to gain power and control over entire nations.
But it looks like guy says - I come and kick local count in the balls and rule this land in his place, because he us pussy and i am awesome and coold. nd then DM says - ok.

>>17055610
>But it looks like guy says - I come and kick local count in the balls and rule this land in his place, because he us pussy and i am awesome and coold. nd then DM says - ok.
Yup, and unless you happen to be a 'simply for fun' player than that sort of GM'ing induces OHSS without some sort of consequence.

Consequence is non-judgmental. The consequence for assisting that waylaid priest on the road is that you just gained a favor with the local Church officials. The consequence for stealing from the chapel just earned you a small bounty on your head.
It works both ways.

>>17055602
I think you're misinterpreting the idea of "reward" and "punishment".

A reward doesn't have to be something like "Oh, you followed the plot, your character's randomly discover a pile of gold." A reward is basically any beneficial thing that happens to the players, even something as simple as "You search for the town, you find the town."

Punishment is similar. It's not a hand coming down from out of the sky and slapping the players whenever they do something "wrong," it's providing negative consequences for actions that would result in them. If the players sleep with sleazy, cheap harlots, they risk the chance of getting punished with crabs. In a way, it's the players who are punish themselves.

>>17055602
>I dislike the idea that a DM should offer rewards or punishments. He should be a neutral arbiter of the game world
That is what OP said. Because often DM babysit playes so hard, that no matter how retarded, ignorant or random their actions are they still succeed and advance plot in positive manner.
Player wont even thing about some creative actions, because NO MATTER what they do, they still would win in the end. So they do stupid random shit. And later they would lose interest in game, becasue it leaves no sense of accomplishment. Or they turn into ADHD kids who need instant gratification for any action.

>>17055629
Actualy i dobt that DM could have fun in such situation. In game everyone should have fun. DM aint just lowly servant to PC. So if he carefuly made world, NPC and other stuff he iant gonna be happy if players treat his wold in such manner and then bitch about results.
Taste for 'different' kinds of fun can be gained, and if you constanly reward players for being asshole they would like it, because it is most simple way of having fun by being ignorant selfish dick, but aint good one.

>>17055634
>A reward doesn't have to be something like "Oh, you followed the plot, your character's randomly discover a pile of gold." A reward is basically any beneficial thing that happens to the players, even something as simple as "You search for the town, you find the town."

I did mean to mention that initially and forgot after I had typed all that out. It may just be a question of semantics and OP was really saying the same thing I was.

>>17054587
Hmm...
>looks up a webarchive of the site for more info

Let's see... trained to only self-refer as "Slave", forced into submission with fear and physical punishment, unable/unwilling to attempt self-defense, afraid to run away, chemically addicted, trained to eat trash, and refers to their master as a figure of worship...

Damn, if this was an elf instead of some weird-ass rabbit-monkey thing, /tg/ would love her.

>>17049383

i need to find this game now.

i got all three on one disk when Ames went out of buisness, and i have no idea where it is now.

>>17055670
>Taste for 'different' kinds of fun can be gained, and if you constanly reward players for being asshole they would like it, because it is most simple way of having fun by being ignorant selfish dick, but aint good one.
True, which is why I meantioned it would take a particular kind of DM to be able to handle playing with such guys without it becoming a 'That Guy' horror-fest.
It has to be a DM who handles his world impartially, and sees the player/DM relationship as one of a sort of sportsman's rivalry, punching back for every low blow and dirty trick the players do due to not having the DM's godly power, but it also has to be a DM whose tastes are such that he won't be so disgusted by the player's actions that he can't willingly keep focus and maintain some measure of control on the campaign.

>>17055690
>without it becoming a 'That Guy' horror-fest
But it IS That Guy horror fest. And such groups should be destroyed without mercy, as they could lure unaware new players and infect them with That Guysm virus, to spread infection even further.

>>17055687
If creatures were any more humanoid than they are game would cause shitstorm and millions of lawsuits bu angry people who arent even gamers due >>17054262
and
>>17049694
Types of players.

>>17055763
which is why they aren't

>>17055808
But I still bet "Slave" has inspired someone out there to craft a new NPC.

>>17049383
>>17049393
>>17049398
what? I mean WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT??????

SO YOU ARE TELLING ME THAT EVERYTHING CAME FROM A BUG THAT THE DEVS OVERLOOKED THAT INEVITABLY TURNED EVERY NORN COLONY INTO A SWARM OF... of... of... BRAIN DEAD SELF DESTRUCTING BIOMASS?

That one little error in the system was guaranteed to ruin absolutely everything?

Because it sure did, and I awayas thought I was being an idiot for not being able to play...

fuck... I... I have no face right now.

>>17055594
You don't like tits? You gay.
No need to make up excuse on the internet, we won't judge you.
I bet a lot of us would let you suck their dicks or even fuck you.

>>17055868

Yes, because that's the only thing a woman is. A floating pair of tits.

>>17055854
Well, defective genome could be a doom for aentire species if you allow those defective creatures to reproduce. So as player you was part of natural selection and had to isolate defective creatures and prevent them from mating other and so producing more misfits.

course it's tricky when you didn't realize they had that defective gene, but I digress we now know how to combat the damn thing. Though I can see a use for that defect breed it into things that produce food and suddenly you have docile bags of protoplasm.

>>17055902

In a wild species the retards would just die. If they didn't die, but were still obviously defective, then no one would want to mate with them anyway; selectiveness in mating is a species' safeguard against this sort of thing.

Though, granted, neither of these things are necessarily true for domesticated species (including homo sapien).

>>17055738

"That guy" is a disruptive player. What is "disruptive" is relative to each game. The guy who plays your party's paladin and is a total bro? If you put him in a Guild of Scoundrels game (like we're describing), and he plays a paladin anyway, he becomes "that guy".

Chronic "that guy"s are people who always play disruptive characters or do disruptive things, no matter the context.

If you take four good players and a good DM and tell them all to be total bastards, and they do, and it works, then no one at the table is "that guy".

>>17055928
But they arent in wild. They start in hatchery, in safe isolated enviorment. And for same reason there was abudance of mating partners.
Tough there are games, when point is raising 'feral' norns - trowing them out in the wild with some basic knowledge and injections and letting them solve all troubles by themselves. Im sure retards would die out in such conditions, due eating poisionus stuff for fun, or wandering from areas with mating partners, or being victim to the grendel. Etc. etc.

>>17055969
But that clearly isnt case that was adressed by >>17055738
post.

>>17055969
I remember when That Guy meant something.

>>17055808
I would love such game. Just to breed some super-mutant tribes with different specialitie and throwing them to live in harsh conditions and brutally fight for survival, indulging in wars, murder and cannibalism to see what race is strongest and most ataptable.

While Creatures kind of capable of such entertainment they still lack enough hazardous areas and models of behavior, graphics and feeding habbits to sucsessfuly emulate such scenarios.

>>17055982

I think it is, actually. If you follow the posts back you'll note that the discussion is descended from >>17055502 , with various anons jumping in to presume that those players must be assholes or OHSS-sufferers or what have you (even though that's not at all what that anon described).

But maybe I've just misread the discussion. I just wanted to reiterate that good players can play bad characters, and the results can be awesome.

>>17056023

>>17056002

"THAT GUY" has always meant "disruptive player".

What did YOU think it meant?

>>17056002
That Guy has always meant that.

>>17056055
Chain of discussion leads there
>and if you constanly reward players for being asshole they would like it, because it is most simple way of having fun by being ignorant selfish dick
Selfish ignorant players, not selfisish ignoirat characters ( tough if character is ignorant he shouldnt survive for long either)

>>17056090
Wait, is this thread proposing a DM deliberately inflicts OHSS to turn his group into monsters?

>>17056101
Kind of. If DM revards ANY kind of action (in such context lack of punishment for bad decision, as sucsess of any action in roleplaying is reward ) palyer just loses drive and abilityto make effective actions and starts doing stupid and crazy shit.
Judging by comlaints ( or even bragging) about many game sessions on /tg/ such GM's and players arenr unique.

>>17056090
Read the post before that, then the post before that, then the post before that.
The anon with the bad english who talked about "ignorant selfish dicks" was unfairly characterizing the sorts of players described by >>17055502

>>17055815
Actually, lemme rephrase that - I DARE someone to take the description of "Slave" here >>17055687 and make an NPC out of it, then see how their players react.

>>17056139
I disagree. All discussion from beggining to the end was about players attitude, not about character alignment or something like that.

>>17056043
>>17055982
As the writer of that Post I was thinking somethigng along these lines:
>Players want to rape
>DM: Roll stealth and grapple checks, please.
>Players succeed
>Dm: Nicely done, you not only caught the bar maid off guard, but manage to stifle her screams and bind her arms as you start to rip off your clothing.
>Players get boner
>DM: But, uh... you DO realize you are inside the tavern right? Populated by other adventurers?
>Players don't seemt o care much
>DM: You've got to either rape or fight, or fiigure something else out. Seriously, <NPC name here> is sitting int he corner, and he will rape your shit.
>Players, faced with challenge, think hard, then roll Charisma and Bluff checks proclaiming it to be modern art.
>They partially succeed
>DM: Everyone is shocked at the display, but that guy in the corner looks at you guys with an expression of loathing. What are you gonna do to deal with this?
>Players try to leave with the barmaid, roleplaying some sort of excuse.
>DM: The man gets up and declares, "STOP RIGHT THERE! thought you fuckers said this was supposed to be modern art?!",a dn another man from the bar declares, "Yeah! What's the point of art if there's no audience?"
>Players ask WTF
>DM: You one last chance guys. I showed you the char sheet I have for that guy, and you saw his alignment. Figure something out.
Eventually over a campaign of DM'ing like this, the players remain dick-asses, but SMART dick-asses, which makes all the difference in the world.

>>17056148

Most people only take dares for things that they secretly want to do anyway. They just want an excuse (so that if someone asks them why, they can say "because he dared me", instead of "because I have some really creepy fetishes that I wanted to inflict on my game table").

>>17056148
Im sure there is shitton of such NPC in freaky ero games.

>>17056023
Oh, and when they would evolve enough and completely adapt, they should develop different ideologies and continue to fight not for survival, but just because other guys live by 'wrong' rules.

>>17054750
Oh god. THis is so terrible. I have no words.

>>17056178

"Player wants to rape" is very different from "player wants to acquire wealth and power". The latter is pretty standard stuff for evil campaigns. The former is classic OHSS ("No investment in game world, no in-game goals or desires, amuse self by playing out transgressive power fantasies").

I mean, I won't say that that can NEVER work, or that a good player in a good group would never ever do it in any genre. But I think it's a lot more likely that he's just a bad player who can't think of anything better to do.

>>17056237
Right, which is why I picked a classic symptom of OHSS, and showed how a good, carfeully sociopathic DM could make a That Guy nightmare group into a collective of good players and wean them off of artificially induced OHSS.

>>17056201
I'd arbite-her in co-operative play, if you know what I mean.

>>17056180
>>17056189
>creepy fetish
>ero games

Ah, but that's where things like this are expected. I dare someone to slip such a character into a regular game and see if they can get away with it... or rather, see if the players do anything about it - do they try to help and/or free "Slave" (who may be too "damaged" to live on her own and thus be a burden), do they leave her at her master's mercies (which are clearly lacking and may result in her demise), or do they take advantage of the broken doll for their own use (and she just sees it as a trade of one master for several, exchanging them for him)?

Think of it as a measuring-stick to see what kind of "heroes" your players can be when the outcome isn't as clearly definable as "kill dragon, save princess".

>>17056258
Is this what they refer to as an IRL 'delicious flat chest'? Or do I have the wrong archetype?

>>17056237
>player wants to acquire wealth and power
If he does it in thoughtfull maner, then it is ok. But if he does it in some most retarded and impossible to pull way but sucseeds it is OHSS DMing.

>>17056268

Oh look, more of fa/tg/uys trying to talk each other into believing their creepy fetish-fuel has a place in non-euro games.

> then see how their players react.

They will adopt her and take her on picnics to the seaside, same thing that always happens when fa/tg/uys find something cute, helpless and profoundly damaged.

>>17056302
> non-euro games
I know that's a typo but I think you have a point. European's don't have the social stigma about sexuality the States do, so your statement is respectable and makes perfect sense.

>>17056251

I suppose, if you feel like narrating some guy's boredom-fueled rape fantasy on screen.
(I don't.)

>>17056272
Keira Knightley is DFC IRL.

>>17056272
>IRL
>A drawing
Seek help, son.

>>17056268
It is a good way to ruin your reputation as DM, unless party is made of good characters and their mission is reform this Slave into normal self-respecting being. Or a plot device to indicate how terrible BBGE is and that he must be punished for such atrocities. Eutehr way interaction with 'flawed' side of a Slve should be minimal, again, as it is a good way to ruin your reputation as DM.

>>17056322
Which is why I took care to mention a necessary level of sociopathy for such a DM.

>>17056330
Pardon me, but do you not fap to pornography? Is not pornography merely an photo, which is again nothing more than an extremely detailed drawing?

Please excuse yourself from this room or acquit your words, good sir, before I unleash my full temper against your online persona.

>>17056337
Funnily enough, the guy who ran the Norn torture website was a professional animal carer:

> AN was in reality a wildlife rehabber who specialized in wolves. His real goal was indeed to teach people to take care of the helpless and that was why the website was created.

>>17056347
I give no fucks if he jerks it to drawn things, I'm just pointing out that calling a drawing 'IRL' is pretty bad.

>>17056350
>His real goal was indeed to teach people to take care of the helpless and that was why the website was created.

Yeah, I'm really sure that was his real goal.

>>17056358
I see.
My position, sir, is that when the drawing accurately imitates a real person's frame, build, and appearance well enough to a human in reality that it is an apt comparison to IRL.

>>17056302
No fetish at all, just a rather delicate dilemma set-up.

If they simply free her, she might not be able to survive on her own, and will likely become a burden to whomever has to care for her.

If they leave her alone, her master, who we already know is cruel and abusive based on her current state, may eventually kill her.

If they bring her along, she may just consider them as new masters, and the temptaion will exist to take advantage of having their own servant (no, not necessarily with rape, you dolts) and nothing has changed.

None of the outcomes are solidly black-and-white, but each various greys.

>>17056371
Why wouldn't it be? The creator of the game specifically praised it for bringing about a large number of pro-Norn websites and encouraging the perception of passive things that could be hurt as 'living' or deserving of care.

>>17056316

It was a slip. The first few times I saw that phrase, for some reason I actually did think they were talking about European RPGs, and implying that they are always full of sex.

Erotic RP is a perfectly valid genre if that's what people are actually looking for. But I think when most of us set off to play D&D, we aren't looking for what amounts to face-to-face-phone-sex with other neckbeards. Pretty sure that's just as true over there.

>>17056350
Thats ironic too. Once pack wolves whas one of wrost things that could happen to humans - tehy would slaughter livestock, kill llone people or even samll groups. They could bring hunger and death to entire willages, with their population becoming larger and more aggressive it times of woe. And now humans need to care for wolves or other humans would make them extinct.

>>17056381

Imagine that, he's still waxing poetically about the RP potential of his fap-fuel.

Next you can show them your elf barbarian princess NPC with the four-foot dick. Your players will be thrilled to take part as she struggles with her gender identity and place in society.

>>17056433
>fapfuel

Have I mentioned any sexual aspects so far, other than perhaps advising that "taking advantage of" the slave did NOT have to mean "rape the bitch"?

Seems youre the one with the fetishism, not me.

>>17056381
Still, i wont be able to pull such stuff I Rp'd many cruel characters with sadistic tendecies, GMed grim and gritty games. But i still feel uncomfortable as i imagine how would i describe Slave's pathetic state of mind, actions, and inability to understand that she is in such pathetis state, like perfect willing victim.

>>17056432
Alright, which one of you vicious bastards hit this man over the head?

>>17056492
Sexual fetishes often do not include actual sex act, her obvious submissive behaviour, especialy when it describen nd Slave's manner is fetish of itself withou any kind of sex included.

>>17056432
What the fuck am I reading?

>>17056432

>>17056553
Regardless, I do not see this in any sort of sexual/fetishistic manner, nor had I any intention to make it seem as if I did; I merely saw her situation, and the possible ways of dealing with it, as an interesting moral/ethical exercise with no firmly-defined "correct" answer.

>>17056505
You do make a good point - it would be rather difficult for most to have the fortitude to describe such a mental state and play it properly such that it would be a suitable "puzzle" for the average player to "solve" without risking an uncomfortable situation for all involved. I suppose, rather than a dare (a choice of words I initially used only in humor) it should rather be seen as a challenge for the suitable GM and party to use, so long as one is sure the players have the maturity to tackle such a dilemma responsibly.

>>17056538
i am foreginer and also doing fthree other things at same time, while writing on /tg/, so i write in a hurry and do not check stuff that i have written.

>>17056630
Don't post like a retard and we won't let you know that you post like a retard. No need to explain it to us.

>>17056660
Well, i suck at multitasking.

>>17056670

Then do one thing at a time, and you'll never have to.

Last I heard, the guy behind the original Creatures- Steve Grand- was working on a new project. Only this time he wanted to give 'em imagination.

Coupled with the prospect of a C4 (They claim they're trying to keep the original complexity whilst opening it up a little), am not sure wat do.

Thread archived for decent discussion before everything became fetishism.