[corrupt on]

[ventricularPipefitter]

Speaking of Oozing Black Ichor, the first time I rolled Seer of Doom was the session right after a....hm. A viscerally nasty encounter with corruption.

As you may know, the vast majority of Doom's offensive, more elemental manifestations of the Aspect are visible to the user, but not to other players. It's usually described as 'poisonous gas,' but I found it more similar to, say...a living, bubbling, black-and-green substance, something that looked more solid than gaseous.

Ultimately, being able to see the Doom that swirled around players, objects, and how their choices affected its presence or absence, was a pretty effective visual feedback mechanism to help with guiding a session.

It also means that in a completely disgusting case of Tactician's Hubris, I mistook 'This player is going to cause so much Doom or is so Doomed they are probably a time-clone or a cancer patient' for 'this player has gone full-out babbling eldritch grimdark.'

Don't jump to conclusions, guys.

[timelyTurnabout]

Jun 3, 2012 10:32:14 GMT -5 tungstenTinkerer said:

<religious tolerance rant>

Seconding the gadzooks out of this post. Thanks for saying all that.

Especially because, if the ultimate reward ever DID work for some people, then those universes really WOULD have gods. I don't want to open that can of worms (that can be an even touchier subject than religion for some), but suffice to say that if it ever DID work for some, we would probably never know unless they decided to play SBURB again (which I sure wouldn't). Also, if Team Sage's version drift theory is true, if such a god played again, they wouldn't be from a human world, and thus probably wouldn't end up in our corner of paradox space.
GAH I promised myself I wouldn't go there sorry. All aboard the Tangent Train, woo WOOOH!

[tungstenTinkerer]

Actually that touches a rarther unknown argument, which is how spread the forum knowledge is with respect to our "spot" in the version drift mechanism.

There was a theory that became suddenly popular a couple years ago usually referred to as the "SQUEST argument" saying that we cannot a priori exclude that more than one "canon" aggregator versions of SBURB exists and that if a sufficiently different standard version called, say, "SQUEST" was out there we'd have a very low probabilty to know since version drift to and from such versions would be almost impossible for us (namely people knowing the fora).

There were a couple arguments that were raised against such a theory and its main supporter sadly died shortly after so it's not so popular anymore, but yeah there is still much we don't know about that. Quite honestly though these kind of statistics are usually taken care of from the guys from the Seers Collective, I don't want to steal their thunder.

Also wow, way to go off topic. Well, ok, you can go back to your regularly scheduled topic now, if someone wnats to talk to me about this I'm always up for it.

[chaoticVoyager]

Can I just say that if you kill a corrupt God Tiered player it counts as Just.

At least in my first session.

[specificNihilism]

chavoy
actually
you're right
that's true across the board
spenih has seen it happen twice herself
and heard many stories

killing a corrupt [g d tier] is always a [jus death]

[tungstenTinkerer]

Not always man. It does sometimes and usually corrupted players can end up doing villainous things that will qualify them for a just death, but the connection is not so straightforward. If you killed a corrupt player before he had a chance to do evils tuff that would still not be just.

I will concede that it usually doesn't happen that way.

[specificNihilism]

tuntin
spenih admits that she was generalizing and simplifying a bit
she should explain better

usually
and it's nice to do things this way
others should try to redeem or bring back a [co rupted player]
often times you can
and that should always be the first method of action

but
when they're beyond saving
and sometimes they are
you have to minimize damage to the
it becomes necessary to kill them instead
usually this point is well after they've already killed someone else
or otherwise fundamentally broken something
which qualifies them for a [ju t d ath]

you're right
it's not so straightforward
but
it sort of works out that way in the end

[iDea]

On the other hand
sometimes
you can save them.

And everybody's alive.
Everyone's okay.

And that's the best feeling in the world.

[specificNihilism]

archiveofourown.org/works/434295

spenih is starting to publish her [ orrup ion] guide
if you wanted to take a look at it
and discuss the better-organized points
other parts to follow as spenih has time to write them

[specificNihilism]

apologies for the double post
but spenih has written up the section for mechanics

archiveofourown.org/works/434295/chapters/741802

[ExtropianDreamer]

Nice work Spenih.

I should probably get off my arse and write some more of my own little FAQ.

Or, you know, at least finish the introduction.

[stanzicApparati]

[Rangoon warning]

KEeping aN eYe oN hOw yOur cO-pLayers' cOnsorts rEact tO tHem iS pRobably hElpful iN tErms oF gAuging wHether oR nOt tHey mIght bE gEtting cOrrupted oR sOmething iF yOu hAven't sEen tHem iN pErson iN a wHile.

BEcause iF oNe oF tHe tWo gRoups oF gAme cOnstructs tHat aRe pRogrammed tO lIke yOu iF yOu jUst aVoid fUcking uP tOo hArd aRe tErrified bY yOu, sOmething iS sEriously wRong nO mAtter wHat aNd iT iS pRobably a gOod iDea tO gO fInd tHem.

(Edited for Rangoon warning, after having eaten a weird bug)

[apianAnchorite]

Kind of a weird question, but does corruption persist after death? Apparently there were mid-and-post-scratch shenanigans, and we're trying to figure out how bad it's going to be when this group enters our session.

[specificNihilism]

usually not
spenih hasn't seen a time where death hasn't cured [c rruption]

[ExtropianDreamer]

Yes, as Spenih said, death is almost always a cure for corruption.

Don't worry about the almost. If that particular glitch had cropped up, you'd know it. It's not subtle, and you'd have bigger problems in that case.