It does defeat the spirit of the event though, and reduces moral choices to statistics pumping by means of a player who should be making his own calls. If you want to game what is a setup for formative role-playing and that player agrees, it's your choice.

You need to stop passive-aggressively attacking players for trying to make the most out of a situation we did not pick (inactive players dumped on boats).

The Stingray has a 40/60% dropout. They have TWO players rolling. And yet another ship where all 4 players rolled gets a NPC assisting them.

I've got a 20% drop.

Walrus has 40%

How is it fair that one ship can have NPC help and nobody else gets GM help? Just do the same choices for the ghosted pcs as you justified for the NPCZ

If you tell us that there will no negative ramifications for missing players or active player not be able to roll then I don't mind him not rolling.

But if there are then does'nt that cripple us unfairly?

I won't kill player characters via this event. I won't sink boats via this event. There might be material setbacks based on individual choices, less so on team score.



If this is a kind of event experience you don't cherish because of setbacks RL player absences impose I will bear it in mind and this event format and purpose won't be repeated.

Then that makes ghosted characters even more important when a NPC can do a huge roll to save the people

PCs won't be ghosted by the GMs for the Mother of All Storms event. They can be ghosted by other PCs from their crew upon agreeing to be ghosted, best signified by sharing their sheet with those who ghost.

This is also probably the last global event when one-size-fit-all approach is applied to all vessels.

Very unfair on ships like the stingray, but if that's the decision...

What about the NPC?

Suihime, I understand your frustrations, but please, calm down.

I admit, I'm a little frustrated, too, but I trust Kannon, and I'm here so we can all play together and have fun. Could we please see how things turn out?

Which ones? I don't plan to roll for Jama, Tsugiko, Suru or Yajinden. No more NPC rolling for the event. Like I mentioned before, if Sanjuro's rolls are perceived as a gross violation of fairness by captains of those boats which deem themselves to be at a disadvantage because of the above (mostly Stingray, I suppose), I will delete them and leave Yamato where it is without them.

And thank you, Tori, for showing some confidence in my ability to cook up a good story for you via this particular event despite setbacks imposed by unequal distribution of capabilities outside of my control.

Yes, it is a violation of fairness. But, being that it's also unfair to remove the points for the Yamato because of something caused by you by how you have done assignments, I'll just shrug and move on.

Then i will woman up this failure of judgement of mine.

There was no fair way to do assignments, especially as it was not strictly Kannon's decision; many players signed onto various ships of their own accord, without regard for a larger picture or tactical distribution, while the playerbase itself was shifting due to dropouts and MIA players whose status was not quite known at the time. Sanjuro was one patch to an issue with that imperfection, but fact of the matter is, crew distribution was never going to be fair, could never be fair, and that's okay. We can go forward with that. That's kind of the nature of splitting a couple dozen people with skill sets developed completely independently of one another and splitting them six ways, then having some of that drop out; things get weird.

Many of the players that the issue was created from were not chosen and didn't join, but were added due to them not having 'officially' left the game. They shouldn't have been on, and the same situation for Sanjuro (a NPC that is on the ship that could roll if the inactives didn't come back) could have been offered easily

Hindsight clarity and morning furniture quarterbacking aside, all we can do is move forward and make the best story out of the event that we can. So, let's do that.

For future fleet voyages, I'd recommend a "ghost" ship where afk, inactive or other characters in flux can be transferred to while allowing the remaining ships to shift and exchange crew members.

If I may humbly suggest an idea for handling the uneven allocation of active players:

* I think if the ship has paid duty points for a crew feature like "Crew: Boatswain", "Crew: Navigator", "Crew: Priest", etc., that ship should be entitled to have a character (whether PC or NPC) roll for skills that would be appropriate for the Boatswain, Navigator, Priest, etc. They paid the Duty Points, they should get some value from it.

* If a PC was appointed to one of those positions, someone on that crew should be able to ghost them for duties that are appropriate for that job.

* If no PC was appointed, maybe someone on that crew should be allowed to "ghost" an NPC with appropriate skills for that job. The NPC shouldn't be as good as a PC; maybe comparable to the Servant advantage (trait 2, skill 3).

Just an idea. Feel free to ignore it / modify it as you wish.

I love this idea

This is a GM Helpdesk. I see less and less questions and more and more opinions and discussions. The discussion is relevant, but please continue elsewhere in the OOC. I can transfer posts later on as I am on the phone now.

Re: the Tension! rules



So effectively we gain Glory/Infamy (for Kameyama Jima) by doing Tension! ?



So denizens of Kameyama Jima also get the VIP, Reputation/Infamy as everyone else does, but if they escalate Tension! they don't get blamed for it?

#1. By small increments. Reputation (aka gaijin Glory) if you ease, Notoriety (aka gaijin Infamy) if you escalate.

#2. It affects the score, but they don't bear wider and unquantified social consequences from their superiors/support groups. It may still anger Jama Gang.