Announcements

Watch this space for important information on planned twitch streams, updates and more

Supergroup Mechanics in a 3-Axis world

22 posts / 0 new
Last post
Planet10
Planet10's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 days 14 hours ago
Joined: 03/23/2016 - 17:21
Supergroup Mechanics in a 3-Axis world

I would like to wrap my head around how a supergroup will function in CoT.
There is no 'Heroes' side. There is no 'Villains' side. Everyone will play on one server. Everyone will have a sliding scale on the three axis system (Law | Violence | Honor).

I assume you won't have to register your SG with a carnival sign that says "You must be this tall to ride the ride" (x number of points in Law/Violence/Honor) to get inside the door. You might ask that only certain types gain admittance, but there won't be a hard coded evaluation of your 3-Axis that denies you, will there?

How do the Devs anticipate the public will manage their supergroups?
What does MWM think the average size of a SG will be once the game settles in a bit?
What kind of turnover do they anticipate will occur in a SG over the lifespan of the game?
Will the SG itself develop a 3-Axis reputation of its own? Essentially could the optics of a character's 3-Axis get augmented by the lens of the SG's overarching 3-Axis?

How about situations where SG leadership runs as one thing for a while then flips to another
Let's say a bunch of Batman types form a SG and invite in other like minded Law & Order types. Then the 'batmen' leadership core starts leaning towards running Punisher content where everyone dies. There will be plenty of people that will play true to their 3-axis alignment no matter what. That could be an opportunity for RP and feather into a backstory for changing your secondary powerset (Specialization).
Will MWM care how the drama plays out? What about an EVE Online style long con where the SG leader flips? Will it be chalked up to part of the "Heroes Journey" to experience the gamut of possibilities?

How about the situation where you have a SG for IRL friends and you bring all of your characters into the fold
How does MWM see players running content when you have your friend's kid who plays all Darth Vadery and you are pure as the driven snow? I can suffer the consequences and just run with them to help out. Or I can leave them twisting in the wind. Or I can level an alt that matches their play style. Is that dynamic accounted for? This situation could generate a lot of hassle & angst.

Ref: Question for the Devs: Sides vs Alignment Matrix

Cyclops
Cyclops's picture
Offline
Last seen: 30 min 59 sec ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/10/2015 - 17:24
Hmmmm. What if I play a

Hmmmm. What if I play a xenophobic hero and kill all the aliens/non humans? But the humans i arrest?

what if My SG holds a fish fry after defeating the Fishmen?

Amerikatt
Amerikatt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/27/2013 - 08:54
Cyclops wrote:
Cyclops wrote:

Hmmmm. What if I play a xenophobic hero and kill all the aliens/non humans? But the humans i arrest?
what if My SG holds a fish fry after defeating the Fishmen?

If any kitties are hurt/maimed/killed in the making of your SG, I can personally guarantee that The Long Paw of the Law will be applied quite liberally to your bummy!

You *HAVE* been warned!

*sage nod*

BTW. I take my fish stix with a triple portion of Boysenberry Sauce!

Just a cat from another star!
Cyclops
Cyclops's picture
Offline
Last seen: 30 min 59 sec ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/10/2015 - 17:24
Oh no, kitty are too cute. we

Oh no, kitties are too cute. we give them fishmen and call it 'tuna.'

Amerikatt
Amerikatt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/27/2013 - 08:54
That is very reassuring.

That is very reassuring. Thanks!

I would have strongly disliked if you had to have a midnight visit from Green Pointy Stick and told "you have failed this kitty"!

Just a cat from another star!
Kiyori Anoyui
Kiyori Anoyui's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/10/2013 - 11:03
This is actually a pretty

This is actually a pretty intriguing question. If you go on a TF with your SG against a villain boss, would "Villain" PC's be able to fight along side "Heroes" or only be able to join missions/TF's that match their alignment?

I feel like it can be everything goes. As seen in many shows/movies, common threats can make allies of various alignments, take for example Daredevil and The Punisher(Netflix Marvel Version). They have very different beliefs but for a moment they worked together(or at least as well as they could). They didn't have to but they did, which goes the same for PC's in the game. Each character makes their own story, choosing whether to fight alongside the opposite alignment allows for an interesting variety of change within the alignment scale itself. And needless to say it makes the process a whole lot easier for the Dev's xD

The Carnival of Light in the Phoenix Rising
"We never lose our demons, we only learn to live above them." - The Ancient One

Avatar by lilshironeko

Kid Rad
Offline
Last seen: 3 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 04/16/2017 - 12:52
I would venture to say that

I would venture to say that this whole system should be abandoned in the short term, for the sake of a manageable launch date. Otherwise, it's hard to see this project ever getting off the ground. I love the concept, but the level of complexity it adds seems to be nearly insurmountable, and explains why it has had so many delays. Why not just launch heroes, and a year or two after launch start to introduce the alignment system? I hate to be a doom and gloomer, but I think this system was a serious overcommitment. I would definitely like to see it happen, but keep in mind that CoH didn't introduce Cov until a year and a half after release of CoH, and that was without any alignment system, just a binary. Some form of grey areas wasn't released till half a decade later with going rogue. So it is a tall order what is being proposed here.

That said, in terms of how it will actually work, I think that folks should be free to associate freely with who they choose, with the understanding that some people will have a purity test (in either direction of alignment) and that having mixed associations with complicate access to missions. If you are a notoriously ruthless person, you may not be given access to the mission to save the mayor's daughter, because you won't be trusted by those giving the mission. And if you are a do gooder through and through, the crime syndicate isn't gonna ask you to transport illicit drugs. That would be a very foolhardy move on their part. For missions that require a live witness to complete, no one is going to ask the blast happy super. So overall, I think people will largely self segregate into the groups that allow them to collaborate the most with their group members. There may be some odd couple relationships here and there, but if you can't run missions with someone, then there is little reason to be in a SG with them, and I'd personally question the integrity and motives of such an individual, personally.

Grimfox
Grimfox's picture
Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 6 min ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/05/2014 - 10:17
To me the alignment would go

To me the alignment would go to the mission owner. So if during the mission the team lead opts to save the mayor's daughter then the team lead gets the associated tri-axis bonus. If the SG is doing the mission, IE the mission was selected from the SG mission contact, then the tri-axis bonus goes to the SG.

Or perhaps TFs are much more linear without the alignment choices. The player acknowledges that going into the TF they are going to save civilians or murder some fishmen.

(at)Roxanna - Little Sister - Plutonium Bloom - MilkShakes
Triumph
Guardian
Virtue

Dev Tracker: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/fixing-dev-digest
Dev Comments: https://cityoftitans.com/forum/dev-comments

Amerikatt
Amerikatt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/27/2013 - 08:54
Hero(in)es do *NOT* murder

Hero(in)es do *NOT* murder fishmen. We def ... eat them! Um ... defeat them!

*removes plastic bag with fish stix from a secret pouch in her utility cape*

*noms fish stix with Boysenberry sauce*

Just a cat from another star!
Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 2 hours ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
There's no telling which axis

There's no telling which axis the Legion of Catgirls will be playing on each day, but it's sure to be fantastic fun!

Be Well!
Fireheart

Amerikatt
Amerikatt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/27/2013 - 08:54
Agreed!

Agreed!

Just a cat from another star!
blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 7 min ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
Kid Rad wrote:
Kid Rad wrote:

I would venture to say that this whole system should be abandoned in the short term, for the sake of a manageable launch date. Otherwise, it's hard to see this project ever getting off the ground. I love the concept, but the level of complexity it adds seems to be nearly insurmountable, and explains why it has had so many delays. Why not just launch heroes, and a year or two after launch start to introduce the alignment system? I hate to be a doom and gloomer, but I think this system was a serious overcommitment. I would definitely like to see it happen, but keep in mind that CoH didn't introduce Cov until a year and a half after release of CoH, and that was without any alignment system, just a binary. Some form of grey areas wasn't released till half a decade later with going rogue. So it is a tall order what is being proposed here.

I think you are overestimating the complexity of this system since my impression is that it's just an aggregate total of all your "alignment choices" and it wont have any real impact on your game play possibilities and what content you can and can't access. Having 3 (or even 6) counters with a "tri-axis display" and a fairly simple routine that just increments/decrements these counters is not that complex in terms of engineering, the bigger part of the work is in the content creation when "placing" the triggers (when making specific choices or doing specific actions). On the technical/engineering level it's not that complex and system itself can be fairly easily done for initial launch. Sure the utilization of it can be made insurmountably complex but it sounds like that won't be the case. Even if they "gate" some content behind it the underlying system doesn't really need to be that much more complex than the equivalent of a level check or checking at what stage you are in an arc.
However the bigger issue here would be "hero content" since we have the full gamut from Superman to Punisher (maybe someone can come up with heroes that are even further "away" from each other) to choose from when it comes to heroes and choices we make for them would still be part of the proposed alignment system.

From my understanding the one single biggest thing that added delays was the switch from UE3 to UE4 which added about 1 year to their dev time, though they have said that the switch was well worth it due to the expanded capabilities that came with it. There are also a lot of other things that caused delays and blaming it all on the alignment system is just unfair.

Personally though I would not want to have to wait a year or two before I could play a non-traditional hero-type character (not necessarily a villain) since only playing heroes would be kinda boring. Just because CoH did it does not mean that it was a good choice. If we really think about it they don't really need the alignment system itself to actually release "villain content", it just needs to be there to make any such choices meaningful in the long run.

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Online
Last seen: 9 min 49 sec ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
I think this is a good
Quote:

I would like to wrap my head around how a supergroup will function in CoT.
There is no 'Heroes' side. There is no 'Villains' side. Everyone will play on one server. Everyone will have a sliding scale on the three axis system (Law | Violence | Honor).

I assume you won't have to register your SG with a carnival sign that says "You must be this tall to ride the ride" (x number of points in Law/Violence/Honor) to get inside the door. You might ask that only certain types gain admittance, but there won't be a hard coded evaluation of your 3-Axis that denies you, will there?

How do the Devs anticipate the public will manage their supergroups?
What does MWM think the average size of a SG will be once the game settles in a bit?
What kind of turnover do they anticipate will occur in a SG over the lifespan of the game?
Will the SG itself develop a 3-Axis reputation of its own? Essentially could the optics of a character's 3-Axis get augmented by the lens of the SG's overarching 3-Axis?

I think this is a good question.

My preference would be to leave it up to the group leadership to police their own members how they see fit.

Therefore I would hope that group leadership would be able to see the alignments of their members so they can provide 'counseling' if one of their members strays too far from their ideal or falls below some established threshold.

MWM seems to want to give the players the freedom to define for themselves what is or is not heroic. From what I have heard so far, I think MWM will be reluctant to let anyone else see a character's alignment scores. I hope they will allow group leaders this visibility, however, for the reasons you provide.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Kid Rad
Offline
Last seen: 3 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 04/16/2017 - 12:52
blacke4dawn wrote:
blacke4dawn wrote:

Kid Rad wrote:
I would venture to say that this whole system should be abandoned in the short term, for the sake of a manageable launch date. Otherwise, it's hard to see this project ever getting off the ground. I love the concept, but the level of complexity it adds seems to be nearly insurmountable, and explains why it has had so many delays. Why not just launch heroes, and a year or two after launch start to introduce the alignment system? I hate to be a doom and gloomer, but I think this system was a serious overcommitment. I would definitely like to see it happen, but keep in mind that CoH didn't introduce Cov until a year and a half after release of CoH, and that was without any alignment system, just a binary. Some form of grey areas wasn't released till half a decade later with going rogue. So it is a tall order what is being proposed here.
I think you are overestimating the complexity of this system since my impression is that it's just an aggregate total of all your "alignment choices" and it wont have any real impact on your game play possibilities and what content you can and can't access. Having 3 (or even 6) counters with a "tri-axis display" and a fairly simple routine that just increments/decrements these counters is not that complex in terms of engineering, the bigger part of the work is in the content creation when "placing" the triggers (when making specific choices or doing specific actions). On the technical/engineering level it's not that complex and system itself can be fairly easily done for initial launch. Sure the utilization of it can be made insurmountably complex but it sounds like that won't be the case. Even if they "gate" some content behind it the underlying system doesn't really need to be that much more complex than the equivalent of a level check or checking at what stage you are in an arc.
However the bigger issue here would be "hero content" since we have the full gamut from Superman to Punisher (maybe someone can come up with heroes that are even further "away" from each other) to choose from when it comes to heroes and choices we make for them would still be part of the proposed alignment system.
From my understanding the one single biggest thing that added delays was the switch from UE3 to UE4 which added about 1 year to their dev time, though they have said that the switch was well worth it due to the expanded capabilities that came with it. There are also a lot of other things that caused delays and blaming it all on the alignment system is just unfair.
Personally though I would not want to have to wait a year or two before I could play a non-traditional hero-type character (not necessarily a villain) since only playing heroes would be kinda boring. Just because CoH did it does not mean that it was a good choice. If we really think about it they don't really need the alignment system itself to actually release "villain content", it just needs to be there to make any such choices meaningful in the long run.

I'm certainly not saying that the alignment system is entirely to blame for the delays - the engine update was a significant but understandable factor - but I do think it is a very large over commitment. I don't foresee issues with the implementation of it, but the development time that such complexity adds is massive. Let's use the tutorial level they showed in their latest twitch stream. If it was a regular singular dimension alignment, where you're a hero, it would be super simple. You go in, talk to the bank teller, find out where the bad guys are, stop the bad guys, and hooray, you saved the day. Lvl completed.

Now with the alignment system, you can tell the bank teller you're robbing the joint, which means a whole new set up to the level. No more bad guys to fight, now it's the bank guards. So you get in, fight the bank guards, jack the loot, and get out.

Add in the vigilante/scoundrel aspect, and you can either kill everyone, or talk your way through the whole situation (both as a hero or as a villain). So this adds a whole series of dialogue that wouldn't have been written otherwise.

So basically, every mission is being designed twice, plus adding in dialogue, just in case someone wants to be peaceful. So it does indeed add a lot of time to the content development process. I am not saying it is a bad thing overall, but it is really unnecessary for launching the game. A single dimension game with just heroes would be fine for an alpha testing run, just to get the actual combat and powers mechanics working well enough, then add in some dimensions of alignment during beta, and finally the full alignment system for the actual release. I definitely like it as a system and want it in the game, but not at the expense of actually ever releasing it.

Scott Jackson
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/20/2013 - 20:13
I think the tutorial bank

I think the tutorial bank mission is meant to demonstrate the diversity of what the 3-axis system can handle and solidly initialize the character's position on the axes, and is thus not a typical mission - it seems unlikely that the bulk of designed missions would involve anything beyond small increments/decrements, containing a small number of choices or affecting just one axis. Some missions may involve no choice at all beyond "do you accept mission [Y/N]".

However, if MWM realizes that any particular aspect of development is causing serious delays, I think it would be entirely appropriate for them to ask us for input on how to handle that case. Other successor projects have done so recently, and their communities have offered constructive shortcuts and accepted compromises.

Personally, I think they've already found some shortcuts to make the 3-axis system, SGs, and associated mission design only require a minor increase in development time compared to the simpler Hero-Villain axis. There are several techniques I can imagine using if I were in their shoes. Mostly, I'd be letting the players decide what deeper meanings they assign to the actions and setting no limits on who they befriend / team / SG invite. Then, the game doesn't need to impose a lot of hardcoded logic beyond what blacke4dawn mentioned. Combine that with the fact that at release we don't need every mission to offer a decision, and most of those that do offer decisions can be simple (a bit of dialogue, a few spawn point adjustments, and flags to allow the player to act as they chose). After release, existing missions can be expanded with more choices, and new issues' missions can be made in complete, complex form where desired.

Interdictor
Interdictor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 35 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/22/2013 - 05:26
Scott Jackson wrote:
Scott Jackson wrote:

Mostly, I'd be letting the players decide what deeper meanings they assign to the actions and setting no limits on who they befriend / team / SG invite.

This is probably the best way to go, all considered. One only has to look at various super-teams in comics to see that there can be deep differences between members. Take the X-Men for instance; Cyclops the "boyscout", Wolverine the violent feral, Gambit the thief, though all are honourable each in their own way I suppose. Even some of their rogues gallery have joined up at certain points (even if only temporarily in most cases). Some potential good super-group RP fodder in there too.

SisterSilicon
SisterSilicon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 4 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 07/17/2014 - 20:14
I think having mission chains

Just spitballing while I have alignment ideas in my head. Pay me no mind if I'm analyzing solved problems...

I think having mission chains, or even individual contacts, react to any one axis of the alignment would be enough when it's spread across the whole game. The Law axis factors in depending on whether your contact is a cop or an anarchist. Violence? Are you hiring yourself out to an assassin or helping a local priest? Honor means more to the Black Rose than, say, the Unforgiven.

That said, friend lists and supergroups are player constructs, while a team is a game construct. So alignment should absolutely affect how teams interact with NPCs.

I see it as a function of the team leader's alignment relative to the overall alignment of the team. Take the "helping a priest" Violence check, for example. The team leader may be low-violence enough to get to talk to the priest, but the team's alignment will change the dialog. "Looks like you've rounded up a fine group of heroes there." vs. "I hope you're helping these ruffians see the error of their ways on this errand." Or if the team's Violence score is in the Bloodbath range, "I'd like to handle this situation with grace, but I don't see how that will happen with the company you're keeping," and you get turned down for the mission. Keeping rejection close to the ends of the scale while changing dialog for those iffy cases prevents some of the nonsense that comes from SWTOR's "voting + RNG" system. The only potential disadvantage to this system is that "power-aligning" is more difficult if you can't let a leader at one end of the axis drag an entire team at the other end through a mission chain to shift their alignment.

I think we can apply that to supergroups. Law of averages says that most social, well-rounded SGs will average out close enough to True Neutral that they'll never fall in the "I won't work with your kind" option. (And if there's a math wiz on staff who can come up with a formula to scale alignment scores with recent activity and hours played per character to prevent alt-itis from skewing the numbers, even better.) Only RP or alignment-focused SGs will face rejections, but that's going to be written into the charter anyway, right? The Honorless Edgelord Vigilantes shouldn't expect to get jobs from the cops.

Twitter: @SisterSilicon

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 7 min ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
Kid Rad wrote:
Kid Rad wrote:

So basically, every mission is being designed twice, plus adding in dialogue, just in case someone wants to be peaceful. So it does indeed add a lot of time to the content development process. I am not saying it is a bad thing overall, but it is really unnecessary for launching the game. A single dimension game with just heroes would be fine for an alpha testing run, just to get the actual combat and powers mechanics working well enough, then add in some dimensions of alignment during beta, and finally the full alignment system for the actual release. I definitely like it as a system and want it in the game, but not at the expense of actually ever releasing it.

Isn't that what I said, that the content is the bigger part of the work than the system?
The statement I replied to implied that you didn't want MWM to even put the system in the game until 1-2 years after live release, but now you say it's fine to have not just the system but also content at live release?

Personally I think it is necessary to have at live release since not having "villain side" or any long term meaning behind the choices there would be if any at all would make the game very dull. To me it would most likely feel unfinished when compared to having it fully in place. It just changes too much about how you play and interact with the game world that leaving it out would be, frankly, an injustice.

Honestly putting in a solid system won't make you have to design two (or more) different versions of a mission as a whole, just the parts that really matter for alignment options. Take an item retrieval mission, putting in a second NPC who you can hand it in at for a dishonorable choice won't make you have touch any other part of that mission. That NPC could also be shared by many such missions and potentially even be used as a quest giver for the more shady kind of retrieval missions or some such.

As Scott said, not every missions needs that kind of wide range of choices on the design level. Heck, one of the criteria for the violence scale could be if you just go in smashing everything or stealth through it only taking down those that you absolutely must do to complete it. For that criteria the most I can see them needing to do is having two (or more) entry points, one "main" point and one "stealth" point.

Impulse King
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 57 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 18:55
Pretty sure Tannim222 already

Pretty sure Tannim222 already said in the PvP phase thread no player will be able to see another player's tri axis alignment. But to address the spirit of the question I'm not worried about alignments in terms of Super Teams.

Allow me to put some context on that. In CoH I led many SGs and acquired well over a dozen or 2 through abandonment. In my experience long term SGs had a simple theme that was more likely to be expressed in game terms than in rp terms. Something like "We want to be in the top 100 list", or "We want to be effective at PvP", or the Taxibots helping folks get places. Those groups just tended to last longer in my experience. I should note that I wasn't on Virtue, the unofficial RP server, that much in an SG context.

Also when asking about alignments with Super Teams it will help to know the size of the Super Team you are shooting for. It stands to reason if you want a specific alignment, or even a narrow range, you are by definition limiting your recruitment pool and your ability to rapidly advance your Super Team. Role Players may be ok with this, but it makes it a harder sell to the general populace.

For myself I was glad to learn the alignment system would not impede the Super Team and League (CoT term for coalition.) recruitment I've been doing for over 3 years now. The RL theme we have will result in the full alignment spectrum being
predictably represented. I don't feel any need to interfere with that and appreciate that I won't have to.

Li'l Thunder
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 1 week ago
Joined: 11/25/2013 - 16:55
blacke4dawn wrote:
blacke4dawn wrote:

Kid Rad wrote:
So basically, every mission is being designed twice, plus adding in dialogue, just in case someone wants to be peaceful. So it does indeed add a lot of time to the content development process. I am not saying it is a bad thing overall, but it is really unnecessary for launching the game. A single dimension game with just heroes would be fine for an alpha testing run, just to get the actual combat and powers mechanics working well enough, then add in some dimensions of alignment during beta, and finally the full alignment system for the actual release. I definitely like it as a system and want it in the game, but not at the expense of actually ever releasing it.
Isn't that what I said, that the content is the bigger part of the work than the system?
The statement I replied to implied that you didn't want MWM to even put the system in the game until 1-2 years after live release, but now you say it's fine to have not just the system but also content at live release?
Personally I think it is necessary to have at live release since not having "villain side" or any long term meaning behind the choices there would be if any at all would make the game very dull. To me it would most likely feel unfinished when compared to having it fully in place. It just changes too much about how you play and interact with the game world that leaving it out would be, frankly, an injustice.
Honestly putting in a solid system won't make you have to design two (or more) different versions of a mission as a whole, just the parts that really matter for alignment options. Take an item retrieval mission, putting in a second NPC who you can hand it in at for a dishonorable choice won't make you have touch any other part of that mission. That NPC could also be shared by many such missions and potentially even be used as a quest giver for the more shady kind of retrieval missions or some such.
As Scott said, not every missions needs that kind of wide range of choices on the design level. Heck, one of the criteria for the violence scale could be if you just go in smashing everything or stealth through it only taking down those that you absolutely must do to complete it. For that criteria the most I can see them needing to do is having two (or more) entry points, one "main" point and one "stealth" point.

Really you wouldn't need multiple entry points. Just groups of enemies that can be bypassed by stealth inside the mission, and a counter keeping track of how many enemies you defeat. If counter < X when you complete the mission, you get your alignment moved towards the peaceful end of the scale, else you get it moved towards the violent end of the scale.

RottenLuck
RottenLuck's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 12 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 12/05/2012 - 20:32
Amerikatt wrote:
Amerikatt wrote:

Cyclops wrote:
Hmmmm. What if I play a xenophobic hero and kill all the aliens/non humans? But the humans i arrest?
what if My SG holds a fish fry after defeating the Fishmen?
If any kitties are hurt/maimed/killed in the making of your SG, I can personally guarantee that The Long Paw of the Law will be applied quite liberally to your bummy!
You *HAVE* been warned!
*sage nod*
BTW. I take my fish stix with a triple portion of Boysenberry Sauce!

Take her warning! Many times I woke up screaming as my toes got attack by kittens during the night.

--------------------------------------------------------
Personal rules of good roleplay
1.) Nothing goes as planned.
2.) If it goes as planned it's not good RP

Amerikatt
Amerikatt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/27/2013 - 08:54
The night is dark and full of

The night is dark and full of kittens!

Just a cat from another star!