next »

[RileyDeacon]

ffffff

[Lex]

I'm not sure if that can be done or not. (although I imagine it could, if the Founder really wanted it to be done).  I'm curious though, if you could indulge me, why do you not like the 'time' stamp so much (aside from it being, possibly, not your time zone).

[Salasar]

I am also curious, though I don't suppose you have to reveal it.

I would vote, if it were up for such nonsense, to keep the timestamp. If anything, I feel like it helps me, especially as a Story Crafter. I can see what times people generally post, which makes it easy to figure when to count on them posting.

Also, if It seems like it has been awhile since I have heard anything from someone, I can easily look at the time stamps and see if It's real or my mind is being fickle.

~shrugs~ There are other reasons I could add, but I think you get the Idea. It's not a great tool, but it can be useful, and as I said I'm curious as to why someone would consider it a bane.

[Toby]

Is there any way to remove the time people post?  I don't mind the date, but I'd rather not have the time revealed.  I'm sure that many other storytellers will echo my concern.

Okay... now I am thuroughly confused. I have always found the time stamp to be completly unnoticable unless I'm actually looking for it(in which case it is actually quite useful). Though, people like to call me stupid, so I really shouldn't demand that you explain yourself, I would just really really like to know.

[castlemage]

[RileyDeacon]

[Alhaja]

I don't mind the timestamps, though I would certainly like it if they could be set to a particular timezone. I find dates to be pretty vital for reminding me how long it's been since someone posted.

Of course, I'm online erratically enough that I can post as the StoryCrafter and then post with a secret NPC a while later if I wanted to do so.

Incidentally, be careful about making incognito NPCs with the same StoryCrafter ID as your StoryCrafter character. The message system defaults to one of the StoryCrafter's characters when a player sends a message to them. (I don't know off-hand if it's the oldest character, the most recent one, or one in some sort of alphabetic order.)

[argyle2001]

I've never understood what SCs hope to gain by concealing themselves behind NPCs, pretending they're someone else.

If the players act differently towards an NPC than to a fake 'player' then you've got lousy players.  None of these characters are real, so WHO plays them shouldn't matter.

The only benefit I can see is that the SC gets to laugh up his sleeve, that he's pulled one over on his players.  Which is probably why the players always seem so annoyed when they find out.  And that's something you ought to consider.

[castlemage]

[RileyDeacon]

I agree with castlemage, and coincidentally, when I was considering argyle's post, castlemage's example was the one that came to mind.

It's not about "tricking" the PCs, it's about giving the PCs a good time.  Yes, it's great if a person can write around a plot twist that they already know, but people don't post here just to flex their writing muscle, they want to be a part of the story, viewing it from a first person rather than an omnicient perspective.

Most people aren't here for a truly neutral collaborative experience.  People WANT the GM/player style relationship between the storyteller and the cast members.  We have a collaborative section for those who desire true equality in their storytelling.

[Scattercat]

That said, there is something to be said for having players who are willing to participate more as writers than gamers. The format of online RP gives the freedom to work it either way. It's much easier to conceal information from the PCs via clever manipulation, but likewise text-based post/forum RP lends itself much better to collaboration than to competition. (Partly because it takes much longer to resolve things like die rolls for combat and so on.)

So, really, it depends on if you WANT a game or a collaborative story, and, if you're a GM, what your PLAYERS want.