A one-time D&D Phalla has been approved and is up to increase interest in the world of Phallaing.
One time D&D phalla? D&D regularly had phallas until no one was ready to step up to bat like a year or so ago. I thought they were allowed with breaks in between as long as there was interest.
A one-time D&D Phalla has been approved and is up to increase interest in the world of Phallaing.
One time D&D phalla? D&D regularly had phallas until no one was ready to step up to bat like a year or so ago. I thought they were allowed with breaks in between as long as there was interest.
A one-time D&D Phalla has been approved and is up to increase interest in the world of Phallaing.
One time D&D phalla? D&D regularly had phallas until no one was ready to step up to bat like a year or so ago. I thought they were allowed with breaks in between as long as there was interest.
El Jeffe indicated that was not the case.
Well here is the D&D games thread which last had activity about a year ago. 2 weeks break was one of the scheduling rules that used to be there.
I thought it was awful weird when you said that because I've run two phallas in D&D before.
Savant on
0
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
A one-time D&D Phalla has been approved and is up to increase interest in the world of Phallaing.
One time D&D phalla? D&D regularly had phallas until no one was ready to step up to bat like a year or so ago. I thought they were allowed with breaks in between as long as there was interest.
El Jeffe indicated that was not the case.
Unless a D&D Phalla ban was quietly formulated, news to me.
A one-time D&D Phalla has been approved and is up to increase interest in the world of Phallaing.
One time D&D phalla? D&D regularly had phallas until no one was ready to step up to bat like a year or so ago. I thought they were allowed with breaks in between as long as there was interest.
El Jeffe indicated that was not the case.
Unless a D&D Phalla ban was quietly formulated, news to me.
Since Dunadan019 will be unable to run his game, and Zellpher and Rawkking Goodguy are fairly locked in to their currently scheduled slots, lonelyahava has graciously agreed to run a small, basic main game to fill the period before Zellpher's game. Signups should supposedly be up within the next two days. Thanks for your patience.
Bandwagon on
0
Options
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
Since Dunadan019 will be unable to run his game, and Zellpher and Rawkking Goodguy are fairly locked in to their currently scheduled slots, lonelyahava has graciously agreed to run a small, basic main game to fill the period before Zellpher's game. Signups should supposedly be up within the next two days. Thanks for your patience.
to clarify, the reason I'm not running my game is because I'm done with phalla. 2.25 years is enough.
sorry again for the scheduling, I expected to run it as my final hurrah but couldn't.
Since Dunadan019 will be unable to run his game, and Zellpher and Rawkking Goodguy are fairly locked in to their currently scheduled slots, lonelyahava has graciously agreed to run a small, basic main game to fill the period before Zellpher's game. Signups should supposedly be up within the next two days. Thanks for your patience.
to clarify, the reason I'm not running my game is because I'm done with phalla. 2.25 years is enough.
sorry again for the scheduling, I expected to run it as my final hurrah but couldn't.
Well, the forum change is actually going to mess with some things in the way the game is played.
To avoid potentially game-breaking mistakes, I'll be writing a quick "here's what you need to know" aimed at phalla players, after the forum settles down feature wise and we see what we're left with.
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
In hindsight, this is your fault that I'm running this game. And were you to have not quit, I will possibly have to grudge you forever. Now, just know that I am plotting your iminent phalla death for all times.
Infy, I'll be more than happy to help you with that document when we get the chance.
38th doe pointed out the links to old threads are now broken in the OPs. To fix it, you just need to find/replace "showthread.php?t=" with "discussion/"
Thanks for the notice, most of the links have been fixed. They were working before, right after the changeover, but I suppose the management changed the compatibility of the old links as they've been increasing the new boards' functionality. There are a few links that still do not work, the ones that link to specific posts. I'll get to them later. EDIT: and by later, I mean now.
Thanks for the notice, most of the links have been fixed. They were working before, right after the changeover, but I suppose the management changed the compatibility of the old links as they've been increasing the new boards' functionality. There are a few links that still do not work, the ones that link to specific posts. I'll get to them later. EDIT: and by later, I mean now.
Dunno if you're still working on this or if you missed this one, but the link to the "do not speak in code" thread / edict in the Basic Rules section of the OP still needs to be updated.
Also, is Thanatos still the person that needs to be notified if a game wants to use more than one thread? Because I've been away for a while, and it appears to me that he's no longer a mod, but he's still listed in the OP.
Good points. I missed that there were links in the first post that needed to be corrected. As for mod contacts, I believe Echo was one of the subforum mods before the changeover? Someone should correct me if I've been mistaken.
In other news, PAX is a month away, so if you're going to be in Seattle then you should coordinate with us! We hang out, check out the convention together, have some drinks and games at the hotel, etc.
Click the PhallAX link in my sig if you'll be there.
I haven't compiled an exhaustive list of things to look out for yet, but this one should probably get out of the way asap:
New rule: Do not add-to-conversation using the PM system.
This is related to the verifiable rules. Normally there was no way to completely verify that a PM was actually sent, through the forums and chat and whatever forms. This is a necessity for the way Phalla is played, just such as using host materials or PMs or screenshots is not allowed. The screenshot rule is very clearly a simple "don't verify shit because you're not supposed to" rule.
With the new forums, PMs are not PMs at all. They're private threads, and you can invite others to it at any time after the initial message. When you do this, the new person can see all the posts made in this "thread". Unlike where quoting a PM from someone else could not be verified, this now can be. You could share a PM conversation with another by just inviting them and that's just as against the spirit of the game as screenshotting your PM box or proboards would be.
This system can also accidentally reveal information you didn't intend to, as happened in the first game after this change, by either player or host. It is not an intuitive system to begin with, and right now it's foreign to pretty much all the players in how exactly it works.
So I will lay this out now effectively immediately: Unless a game states otherwise, you must not Add To Conversation anyone. Start a new "PM" discussion if you wish to talk with other people.
The upside of the new system is that doing a PM network is much easier now. Just keep in mind that if you wish to bring others in, you should start a new discussion.
Interestingly you could potentially as a host demand to be added into all PM conversations, just like most hosts demand to be added to all proboards created.
I'm somewhat tempted to do this as I'm planning a game where certain roles may be able to subvert certain (but not all) dead player mechanics and thus there is a possibility for people cheating by talking to who they're not allowed to talk to, but I'm ultimately not going to be such a stickler (or alternatively: not willing to read through that many PMs).
Yeah, that won't help in that they still can cheat without your knowledge, so it's not really worth it for that.
Being able to follow PM conversations would be kinda awesome though, as a host I know that is one part where it's like "oh man I know these two are scheming up a win for the village and I wish I could follow along."
Yeah, that won't help in that they still can cheat without your knowledge, so it's not really worth it for that.
Being able to follow PM conversations would be kinda awesome though, as a host I know that is one part where it's like "oh man I know these two are scheming up a win for the village and I wish I could follow along."
I'm always sad when I go to look back on old games, and most of the game took place in PM as opposed to proboards. It's much more informative when you can go back and see the intermediate thought processes
Just to be clear, the rules are not that we cannot have multiple people in a pm, just that a new pm must be made each time a new person is brought in?
Correct. When you start a PM, it can be multiple people, and everyone talks like it's a private thread. Those involved can be seen by all on the right hand side.
What is not allowed is using the "Add people to this conversation" bit. What it does is allow any of the involved parties to allow others to see private discussion without consent of the others, and is 100% verified by the forums so is not deniable.
You may continue to quote what someone said in PM as usual, so long as it remains unable to be confirmed by the forum software.
Posts
One time D&D phalla? D&D regularly had phallas until no one was ready to step up to bat like a year or so ago. I thought they were allowed with breaks in between as long as there was interest.
El Jeffe indicated that was not the case.
Well here is the D&D games thread which last had activity about a year ago. 2 weeks break was one of the scheduling rules that used to be there.
I thought it was awful weird when you said that because I've run two phallas in D&D before.
Unless a D&D Phalla ban was quietly formulated, news to me.
Signups are now open.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
to clarify, the reason I'm not running my game is because I'm done with phalla. 2.25 years is enough.
sorry again for the scheduling, I expected to run it as my final hurrah but couldn't.
Also, 38th's and my mini is done. Village victory!
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Pfft, we're going on, what, five now? :P
But you'll be missed.
To avoid potentially game-breaking mistakes, I'll be writing a quick "here's what you need to know" aimed at phalla players, after the forum settles down feature wise and we see what we're left with.
Also note that invisible mode is no more.
Not what people are doing, no, but the last active field will show who's around and not posting
Infy, I'll be more than happy to help you with that document when we get the chance.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
Go Go Science!
Also, is Thanatos still the person that needs to be notified if a game wants to use more than one thread? Because I've been away for a while, and it appears to me that he's no longer a mod, but he's still listed in the OP.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/145592/phalla-house-of-leaves#Item_14
In other news, PAX is a month away, so if you're going to be in Seattle then you should coordinate with us! We hang out, check out the convention together, have some drinks and games at the hotel, etc.
Click the PhallAX link in my sig if you'll be there.
Be careful with "PMs." Mostly just don't add people to conversations.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
New rule: Do not add-to-conversation using the PM system.
This is related to the verifiable rules. Normally there was no way to completely verify that a PM was actually sent, through the forums and chat and whatever forms. This is a necessity for the way Phalla is played, just such as using host materials or PMs or screenshots is not allowed. The screenshot rule is very clearly a simple "don't verify shit because you're not supposed to" rule.
With the new forums, PMs are not PMs at all. They're private threads, and you can invite others to it at any time after the initial message. When you do this, the new person can see all the posts made in this "thread". Unlike where quoting a PM from someone else could not be verified, this now can be. You could share a PM conversation with another by just inviting them and that's just as against the spirit of the game as screenshotting your PM box or proboards would be.
This system can also accidentally reveal information you didn't intend to, as happened in the first game after this change, by either player or host. It is not an intuitive system to begin with, and right now it's foreign to pretty much all the players in how exactly it works.
So I will lay this out now effectively immediately: Unless a game states otherwise, you must not Add To Conversation anyone. Start a new "PM" discussion if you wish to talk with other people.
The upside of the new system is that doing a PM network is much easier now. Just keep in mind that if you wish to bring others in, you should start a new discussion.
I'm somewhat tempted to do this as I'm planning a game where certain roles may be able to subvert certain (but not all) dead player mechanics and thus there is a possibility for people cheating by talking to who they're not allowed to talk to, but I'm ultimately not going to be such a stickler (or alternatively: not willing to read through that many PMs).
Being able to follow PM conversations would be kinda awesome though, as a host I know that is one part where it's like "oh man I know these two are scheming up a win for the village and I wish I could follow along."
Correct. When you start a PM, it can be multiple people, and everyone talks like it's a private thread. Those involved can be seen by all on the right hand side.
What is not allowed is using the "Add people to this conversation" bit. What it does is allow any of the involved parties to allow others to see private discussion without consent of the others, and is 100% verified by the forums so is not deniable.
You may continue to quote what someone said in PM as usual, so long as it remains unable to be confirmed by the forum software.
Up to the host imo, but multiway PMs were always a thing, just a lot less convenient, and they were not host-privy.
Tentative theme: The Great Gatsby, but with necromancers.