Minecraft Forums

"What.

You're saying that there is not causality, because there is fiction.

Uh.

That's not how causality works. There are causes to effects, yes? Okay, good, there is causality, I'm done here. Now, no more."

No you did not understood at all there is no causality inside the dtg universe because the writer think so(I made an post where I said that the incarnate joint took damage for no reason and that it was possible since there was no causality and the twinbuilder said that the joint took damage so twinbuilder think the opposite of what you say)

but I said that since the story was written in our universe the story was causal(not what happens in the story) and that also since people posting in dtg are humans and that humans like stories with an appearance of causality in what happens in it they did posted like if there was causality but they also did worked without thinking that an event should always have an cause that have an cause and so on without loops because else it is not causal.

In the end what happens in the story is not causal but when you read the events locally it always have an causal look because it is boring to read stuff about things not causal looking.

Then it is also true that if something does not exist it have all the properties except the one of existing so since the dtg universe does not exists we can say it is not causal and causal(mathematics of the ensembles) but that is not an argument on any of the sides.

And again, i am absolutely horrified at what Twinbuilder did at Crusher.

I don't think i will be posting on somewhere DTG related after this game is over, and probably same thing applies to the entire Minecraft forum because i have no places to talk in here, and there's no good reason for staying because i will likely cause some trouble if i do.

Well you can know you will not be missing a lot of thing.(forum games are not so much interesting and you will have better stories with books and movies and better game-play with videogames)

But I think there is communities who are a lot better than the dtg community on minecraft forum games you know there is some kind of half closed community in dtg and it is hard being integrated(I am not integrated in this community part because I do not want to be kind with other people part because I am annoying as hell and part because I always argue against other no matter what they say) and so you can try other more interesting forum games who lived less long and so does not works like an sect(maybe if an forum games last enough it can always form an sect but most of the forum games end after an while and die)

Also since the gm somehow banned two players it make me less interested in dtg because banning two players either means that the gm is trigger happy or that this game attract way too much people.

Maybe I should leave forums games too since I am the most annoying and idiot noob on these forums.

We need someone to contact K4yne about the Rave.

Uhh... time to break out Wikipedia...

Causality (also referred to as causation[1][/sup]) is the relation between an event (the cause) and a second event (the effect), where the first event is understood to be responsible for the second.

In common usage, causality is also the relation between a set of factors (causes) and a phenomenon (the effect). Anything that affects an effect is a factor of that effect. A direct factor is a factor that affects an effect directly, that is, without any intervening factors. (Intervening factors are sometimes called "intermediate factors".) The connection between a cause(s) and an effect in this way can also be referred to as a causal nexus.[2][/sup]

I *think* I disagree with Nulitor, although its kinda hard to understand what he's saying. If you don't want people to misinterpret, then please be clear as to what you're saying. There is causality, even where time travel is involved. Causality is not the same thing as a linear time line. So the cause for something can be in the future. And the DTG universe does have a connection with the actual forum, so there is causality between you posting something saying the Incarnate takes damage for no reason and the Incarnate taking damage. The reason the Incarnate took damage is because you posted saying it takes damage.


To defend DTG: (Please take all this with a grain of salt because this is coming from me, Talist. A player who joined DTG ONE about 3 years ago back when it was on page 50 or something. I've been playing DTG2 since around page 300. I have a rather well respected side character. I volunteered to GM DTG3. I helped out a little with the DTG wiki. I spent about a month planning out a new character to use for the next DTG. So yeah, I'm going to be biased. Take that into consideration as you read all this.)

You don't have to join, Picten. I would say that you'll like it, but to be honest you probably won't if you go in with that mindset. Its hard to like anything when you go in having pre decided you're going to dislike it. As for Crusher, I'd say Twin's reaction is totally justified. Did you read what Crusher actually said leading up to that? He deliberately broke anti-loop hole rules regarding side characters (because without those rules, people with more side characters would have a clear advantage over those with few or none). Twin warned him about it, told him to stop, and then Crusher told Twin to quit GMing because of that. That, and also how Twin had changed respawn rules somewhat. Maybe I too would be "horrified" with the response if this was some other forum game. But this is DTG, the biggest and most complicated forum game out there. Its been 1,254 pages. That's 25,080 posts. And Twin has been GMing, drawing out scenes, planning stories and balancing stats for ALL of that, all 20 months. He's been updating almost every day, taking maybe 3 or 4 hours to finish. That's a total of about 1,250 hours spent on DTG. I don't think any of us, besides Twin of course, can imagine how heart breaking it is for someone to tell you to just give up on that because you're a terrible GM. If you say you can, I'd call your bluff. And to make matters worse, its Crusher, someone who HAS played through a lot of it and even most of DTG1. So, I think its justified, maybe even too light. If you randomly joined and told Twin he sucked, I doubt you'd get the same response because Twin didn't just randomly pick a name out of a hat and say "I'm going to lash out at... Crusher today!". There was build up of Crusher deliberately breaking rules, ignoring warnings, accusing Twin of whatever, and CONSTANTLY complaining as to why he wasn't one shotting massive end game bosses because his weapons are "designed to destroy plot armor". Can you imagine how annoying it would be to have to deal with that? I can't.


And now to defend it from Nulitor and explain why I've played DTG for so long.

Well, I like DTG. And I would say you'd be missing a lot, or rather are missing the potential of a lot. Probably not if you joined right now because this is the finale. But want to know why I keep playing DTG? It can be summed up in one word, creation. And that's the same reason I play Minecraft. I don't play either Minecraft or DTG for a challenge or anything, most of the time anyway. I play to create, to create a massive, several hour long map (that you should totally download =P ), to create absurd entity ideas and see how they fare in battle, to create my own plotline through Wilson (my side character who I do all my RP with), and even to create sidequests I run. And the reason why creation is so fun (for me at least) in DTG is specifically because the GM is human and liable to lash out. Sure, you'd get a "better" story line by watching Game of Thrones. Sure, you'd get "better" game play by playing Call of Duty or whatever (although all of this is relative and based on opinion). But neither of those can ever give the choice DTG does. Yes, we have rules, but those only limit the power of your ideas, not the ideas themselves. So, breaking them is just asking for trouble from everyone because that means you're trying to outshine and marginalize other people. And if there's one thing that annoys people, its being told, "oh yeah, that guy? He does everything you do. Only way better."

Rather than just watching whatever is happening up at the Wall or where ever as a 3rd party, you can make your own character and get into the action. You don't have to play as Edward Tuttle and you have an unlimited number of dialog choices and responses because unlike in a TellTale game or something, you're talking to a real person who can come up with more than 4 options that all generally lead to the same thing anyway. You don't have to be a pre chosen character living out pre chosen options, you choose your characters and options yourself.

And I actually prefer the game play of DTG over something like Call of Duty. Rather than playing as some blank faced soldier with a couple options of gear loadout, I can create my own soldier, make it a backstory and have an unlimited number of choices in what "loadout" to give it. I actually dislike commanding humanoids, so I choose to make all my soldiers beasts, mechanicals, or occasionally dragons and other stuff. Maybe I choose to give this one an AOE attack. Not satisfied with just that, I also choose to make using that AOE attack fill up a power meter. Then I choose to make it so that when the power meter is full, it can unleash a much more powerful attack based on what holiday is closest. I can even go completely over the top and give it a healing spell that can only activate every time monkeys are mentioned during the turn, makes the target's next attack hit in the future, and gives armor points based on a function involving the phase of the moon, stock price of Apple, the time since Nicolas Cage's last movie appearance, and conservation status of a random animal off Wikipedia. Although playing that would probably be more trouble than its worth. I can choose to add any absurd gimmick I can think of. I've done somewhere close to 20 entities and still haven't repeated myself. Much anyway. And because the GM is human, Twin doesn't need to have specifically seen that gimmick before to know how it should work. With video games, the only choices you have are ones the game developers programmed in. Sometimes the choices seem endless, like with Minecraft or Besiege, but if you want a new block you still have to mod the game. But you don't have to mod DTG to get a new weapon, and that's what I think is so great about it. Although right now, the focus isn't on this kind of creation as much because its, you know, the final end boss.

Yes, I'll admit. This isn't for everyone. I feel like you get the best experience out of DTG if you are at least somewhat respected by the community, which takes time and effort. You need to play by the rules, use understandable grammar (at least when it counts), and not go picking fights with Twin or anyone else. Not everyone is willing to put forward that time and effort, which is fine. And on the other side of the gradient, Twin gets really annoyed with people who deliberately break the rules because as a GM, that is frustrating. I'll tell you the best time I had with DTG. Well, there are two actually.

One was during the final battle of the Dreamscape sidequest, a sidequest I put together completely on my own and ran on my own. I essentially GMed my own little DTG inside DTG. That was awesome. I defined my own rules, my own challenges, my own storyline, my own tools for others to beat those challenges with, and on top of all that, I wrapped an actual Minecraft map into it. It was great.

The second was when Wilson was out on the field as the most complicated entity I ever summoned. He had a wheel of emotions and based on what happened, his current emotion would slide around the wheel. He also had a state bar and stress bar, all of which I had to balance in order to get the most damage out of him as possible. And people loved him, and that was really fun. Especially when I managed to line everything up just right and get Wilson to hit for 172 THOUSAND damage, an amount that can almost one shot standard entities. Those were good times...

Also, Twin didn't ban Crusher. But if you want to leave, that's something for you to decide. I can only give my own reasons why I think DTG is fun and cannot speak for you.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Typing all this has made me kinda sad... sad because the game is ending and because I'm probably not going to be the GM for DTG3.

Quote from nulitor»

"What.
You're saying that there is not causality, because there is fiction.

I never said that in the post you quoted not even indirectly.

Uh.
That's not how causality works. There are causes to effects, yes? Okay, good, there is causality, I'm done here. Now, no more."
No you did not understood at all there is no causality inside the dtg universe because the writer think so(I made an post where I said that the incarnate joint took damage for no reason and that it was possible since there was no causality and the twinbuilder said that the joint took damage so twinbuilder think the opposite of what you say) but I said that since the story was written in our universe the story was causal(not what happens in the story) and that also since people posting in dtg are humans and that humans like stories with an appearance of causality in what happens in it they did posted like if there was causality but they also did worked without thinking that an event should always have an cause that have an cause and so on without loops because else it is not causal. In the end what happens in the story is not causal but when you read the events locally it always have an causal look because it is boring to read stuff about things not causal looking. Then it is also true that if something does not exist it have all the properties except the one of existing so since the dtg universe does not exists we can say it is not causal and causal(mathematics of the ensembles) but that is not an argument on any of the sides.

No, the fact that you asserted noncausality was creative enough to do damage. Duh.





@Talist: You are pretty much the definite choice for 3, but Tazz is going to run 0 first, I think. It's weird, all our GMs have started with T. And appear to continue to be doing so.

*insert joke about 420 here*

Quote from Netpatham»

@Talist: You are pretty much the definite choice for 3, but Tazz is going to run 0 first, I think. It's weird, all our GMs have started with T. And appear to continue to be doing so.

That's not why I'm not going to be GM for 3. I don't think I'll be able to GM a year from now. If I can, something about my life has either gone incredibly wrong or incredibly right. So yeah, that's more reason why the whole debacle with the memo and what not is so depressing.
.
.
.
I still don't see why having 2 sessions would be so bad... Even if everyone chose only 1 to participate in AND half of other players are for some reason scarred away by there being two threads, that's still 8 people. Let me count the people who would probably play in at least one... I think at least 15 current players would probably play in a continuation, so 7 per game. Which is a lot more manageable than 33. And many of the more involved players (like myself) would probably do both.

Quote from Talist»

I still don't see why having 2 sessions would be so bad... Even if everyone chose only 1 to participate in AND half of other players are for some reason scarred away by there being two threads, that's still 8 people. Let me count the people who would probably play in at least one... I think at least 15 current players would probably play in a continuation, so 7 per game. Which is a lot more manageable than 33. And many of the more involved players (like myself) would probably do both.

Time to see if Quotes works for me...Probably not.

In defense of only having one each: I TRIED to do that and failed, badly. I really tried, and it was the TvTropes session. I admit, I left for many reasons, but one of them was that it was just HARD to post in both DTG2 and the TvTropes session, and that was literally an extra post to do both at the same time. Just ONE extra. And I simply was not able to. Some people struggle to post more than once as it stands, and there's other IRL factors that can interfere with posting. Plus, in all honesty, some people will be turned off by the new rules and leave as well. I've seen that before.

The other issue is, you seem to think that the playerbase will be dividing evenly. Now, that's a possibility, but speaking from a level of experience it is beyond unlikely. It's far more possible that at best there will be an imbalance favoring one game over the other (a noticeable one, like 10 posters to 5, let's say), and at worst one will outright wither and die, a DNF, at the expense of the other. I've seen both of these kinds of things before, more than you think, but I have never truly seen a true even division. One game is always favored, simply because, to some, it's just better. I'm speaking from experience-not GM experience but witness experience.

Do not forget the randomness and the snowball effect: some players joins randomly and others joins the forum game with the highest number of players.

Eh, I feel like having to play a double session(since I'm interested in doing both sessions) would be a bit taxing on me as a player, and while if the games were side by side and enough people were only leaning towards a specific side it might be fine, but I get the feeling that enough people would be playing both DTG0 and DTG3 (Not to mention DTG:TvT2) that it would just drag out the conflict on both ends, not to mention turn the double-sessioners to either succumb to Maniac-level creativity drain or be forced to favor a single side, which is something that'd be a big problem. Eh, just my opinion.

I tentatively support this. If one side is favoured more, well, there's probably going to be a good reason. If a game ends up haemorrhaging players, better for it to die than the entire series, which is probably what would happen if there was one game, and no one liked it for whatever reason. It might even give a sense of competition, making both GMs and games better. or maybe I've just been studying too much for my economics exam.

Anyways, as far as being unable to participate fully in both is concerned, yeah, that might be a problem, but no one has to do that. I don't know, maybe some sort of set up where people who do both games get one post which is worth as much as how many posts one game players get?

Yeah but that's like saying nobody has to have luxuries. Or anything besides food, water, air and most of their organs intact.

Hmm...

The only issue I can see is that some players might only have the time to post in a single session.

Which could prove to be problematic if their character is needed in the non-posted-in session.

Generic, if you continued reading, you would've seen I offered a possible solution. I'm all for finding a way to accommodate everyone who wants to participate in both games, but it's not the end of the world if a few people still can't.

First thing I think is limiting the number of posts to one per turn since three is just for making players look more active on the thread and disadvantaging players not doing promotion of the game if you want you can still do as many actions as with three posts but you can also do one action who have more effect(charging is yet another different thing). With this rule dming is also easier and people who suddenly have time instead of posting multiple times on one thread will post in each thread also there is smaller post amount inequality(since ultra fan players will do approx three time less post while occasional posters will feel only sightly the limit).

[fun idea in the theme of post inequality/]Then you can also do compensation mechanics if post equality is important you can decide that a player who did not posted for a long time can post multiple times in a turn by using point you get every X turns of afk(potentially x could increase with the number of point you already have)[/fun idea in the theme of post inequality]

...post inequality was a joke.

But on that note, I've never really understood why players aren't allowed to merge their posts together. I actually have to agree with nullitor here, it just seems like a way to artificially inflate activity, as well as punishing those who don't have as much time on their hands.

I understood it(this is why I was using fun tag it was because it was a joke)

Quote from Fseftr»

...post inequality was a joke.

But on that note, I've never really understood why players aren't allowed to merge their posts together. I actually have to agree with nullitor here, it just seems like a way to artificially inflate activity, as well as punishing those who don't have as much time on their hands.

I don't understand it either. However, I think this is just a problem out of anyone's hands, as it would be broken if we didn't limit actions somehow (hence the rule on effecitveness of muliptle actions per post) so people with insane amounts of time could do insane amounts of damage and do everything at once, get all the Spoils because they're basically killing bosses singlehandedly, and basically win the game by their lonesome with some 'support' from the others, which is absolutely out of the question and contrary to what I believe is a core theme of the game, Teamwork. Being left out of the action because you don't have all the time in the world is boring, and unfun.

At the same time, only doing one thing per turn...Is boring, and unfun. Another reason I found to leave TvTropes IMO, as it felt sluggish. If I could only do one thing per turn and nothing else, the game gets a bit more stale in my opinion. It's weird, but it's true. I mean, not everyone has time up their sleeves, but if you could only do one post anyways, it can't apply to you as you're basically being asked if 3 paragraphs in a single post or 3-posts with a paragraph each are better, as you can only do a single post with a single paragraph per turn, and that is something that nothing but IRL circumstances can fix. IRL circumstances are highly unlikely to include the GM at all. On top of this, adding a new post is slightly easier, and though it does seem like a way to artificially boost activity, it also increases the game flow and allows for easier comboing and on-the-spot reprioritization (IE, you're assured a target is dead so you target something else instead).

Honestly, the question comes off as slightly irrelevant.

Well, my suggestion wasn't to force people to only post once a turn, it was to give the option. You could post three times to allow for better teamwork and whatnot, but you could also post once and not feel like you're wasting potential because you don't have time.

Also, I'm not saying no limits on single posts... just double/triple the effects, depending on how many posts you'd normally get. Maybe with like a 20% penalty to damage, because, well, three posts is more effort and should be rewarded as such. That sounds much better than 67% penalties to both damage and charging we have now, solely due to the fact you don't have time to make more than one post. If anything, it'd let players with little time make more of an impact.