Bad OOG Ritual Flaws/Backlashes

Darkcrescent

Knight
Chicago Staff
Marshal
After Ritual marshalling at least 40 rituals since launch I've noticed that 2.0 scrolls mostly have one if not both of the below flaws/backlashes on them:

1) Target becomes depressed for the remainder of the event.
2) Targets mood changes to pessimistic for the remainder of the event.

Now, there are flaws that you can take "Doom" from healing spells, or double from lightning, which is rough IG, but not bad OOG. The above 2 flaws can significantly ruin a players weekend OOG, especially if they have conditions related to the above IRL.

We've removed Love from the game. Wouldn't it make sense to remove the above 2 flaws from the game as well? It can easily be replaced by a number of other generated flaws. Out of the rituals I've marshalled, I have never made a person take that flaw if they've rolled it. The outcome remained the same(success or failure) but I've rolled a 2nd flaw. Letting the PC choose: 1) Don't take the original flaw. 2) Take the original result, but new flaw.

Anyone else do something similar? Anything we can do to potentially remove these particular flaws? Or am I in the minority on this one?
 

Feldor

Scholar
Marshal
Specific flaws are a local chapter thing. So your chapter can absolutely remove them. With that said, I think this is a very good thing to be bringing up to the general community because its a very valid point.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
.....I am not going to lie, I understand why some people would definitely not have fun with those flaws, but I would overact them so hard that they would be comedic.
 

Gandian Ravenscroft

Knight
Chicago Staff
Marshal
Specific flaws are a local chapter thing. So your chapter can absolutely remove them. With that said, I think this is a very good thing to be bringing up to the general community because its a very valid point.
Specific flaws may indeed be edited to be a chapter- or ever scroll- specific, but that doesn't change the fact that these bad flaws are "standard" with the ritual database and are going to appear in every chapter without being specifically edited out. Unless we as a national initiative remove them, they will be out there for people to get as a flaw.

I struggle with depression issues and it's not difficult for me to get myself into a bad headspace if I'm not careful, and I've specifically asked my Marshall (usually Ryan) prior to ritual castings if I am able to reroll these flaws if I get them from my ritual. A game effect that forces me to act in these mindsets would definitely be an issue, even if I did my best to do it as in-game as possible. I come to LARP events to have fun - if I wanted to be depressed or pessimistic, I'd stay home and do that on my own time for free while slumped on my couch eating fruit snacks and telling myself to do something.

.....I am not going to lie, I understand why some people would definitely not have fun with those flaws, but I would overact them so hard that they would be comedic.
A lot of folks felt/feel similarly about the Love effect, which we all agree was a bad effect. Even if some people can do it fine, having a toxic effect in the game overall ain't cool.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
A lot of folks felt/feel similarly about the Love effect, which we all agree was a bad effect. Even if some people can do it fine, having a toxic effect in the game overall ain't cool.
That's fair.

I feel like all the personality changing flaws should be treated like mental abilities RP, optional.
Also fair. Rather than remove them, I would like to recommend that they be opt-in? As in, a player is informed that "personality changes to X, do you accept?" and if not, the Marshal can assign a different flaw. We can even create a basic list of pre-approved flaws (or each chapter can do that).

Or we can remove them entirely. I'm not so invested in it that I'd be disappointed if this effect went away.
 

Alkalin3

Administrator
Chief Technology Officer
South Michigan Staff
Marshal
This is probably not something you're going to easily get done in the near term, nor is it something you're going to get scrolls reprinted over.

Right now the CMA does magic items but, scrolls, reagents, and catalyst are done through an old access database. As we start to make our way towards swapping out, we've got a good chance to change some of this stuff. (like over the next year)

Flaws haven't really been touched in a while besides some quick language updating.

However, the absolute best way to affect change is to have your owner submit a proposal, and for that proposal to be robust. i.e. They, or you and them, or someone, has gone through all the flaws and has an exact list to remove/modify/add. It's a lot of work. But affecting change in the game always is.
 

Gandian Ravenscroft

Knight
Chicago Staff
Marshal
This is probably not something you're going to easily get done in the near term, nor is it something you're going to get scrolls reprinted over.
That's fine, as long as chapters are reasonably accommodating for players if these flaws pop up and are problematic.

However, the absolute best way to affect change is to have your owner submit a proposal, and for that proposal to be robust. i.e. They, or you and them, or someone, has gone through all the flaws and has an exact list to remove/modify/add. It's a lot of work. But affecting change in the game always is.
Eh, it's really not a lot of work. Heck, consider it done in the next day or two depending on my post-work workload. Plus, it gives me the chance to remove other problematic flaws, such as those that reference the Destroy effect or Acid damage (both of which having been removed in 2.0).
 

Alkalin3

Administrator
Chief Technology Officer
South Michigan Staff
Marshal
Eh, it's really not a lot of work. Heck, consider it done in the next day or two depending on my post-work workload. Plus, it gives me the chance to remove other problematic flaws, such as those that reference the Destroy effect or Acid damage (both of which having been removed in 2.0).
The gap from suggestions on the forum to proposal is usually something most people are unwilling to do. I'm glad you're willing to get at it.
 

Gandian Ravenscroft

Knight
Chicago Staff
Marshal
Believe me, I'm no stranger to the tedious backend logistical type of work that people don't typically remember is a part of the LARP running experience. :)
 

Durnic

Squire
Owner
Oregon Staff
Marshal
.....I am not going to lie, I understand why some people would definitely not have fun with those flaws, but I would overact them so hard that they would be comedic.
This is exactly what I did when I flawed a ritual to become pessimistic for the rest of the event. It didn't help that I was also feeling hot all of the time, on what was an IRL cold event.
 

MaxIrons

Squire
Oregon Staff
Marshal
I think it's important to use this clause responsibly in cases where a flaw/backlash would be a forced RP situation, (as opposed to an IG mechanic based one). I have and will continue to modify such flaws as a ritual marshal if it will ruin a player's RP experience. The flaw/backlash will still be negative, but may be more mechanically negative rather than RP based.

"Local chapters also have the discretion to generate a unique plot effect or encounter based on a ritual gone awry that may not be specified on the ritual scroll."
 

Kevar

Fighter
Seattle Staff
Marshal
I think an official proposal is a great way to get this going, and when we are in a place to reprint a lot of scrolls or move over our scroll printing out of the Access Database we do so. It also doesn't require a full reprinting of ritual scrolls if we have a guideline created, or all the chapters have agreed the secondary flaw effect (beyond fail/succeed) may be rerolled if it lands on the ones talked about.

I don't see a real issue with personality shifting flaws as a whole. However, I totally can see how these could cause OOG problems and I agree we should work as a greater community to remove them.
 

Muir

Fighter
I feel like all the personality changing flaws should be treated like mental abilities RP, optional.
I like this as a solution, if removing them from the DB isn't a possibility.
 

Kevar

Fighter
Seattle Staff
Marshal
I like this as a solution, if removing them from the DB isn't a possibility.
I think the only hold up that I have is that the flaws should actually be something that has to be dealt with - be it a positive or negative flaw. I don't like that there would be a category of flaws that you could just ignore if you like. That is why I like the either rewrite or reroll idea more.
 

Tantarus

Squire
I think the only hold up that I have is that the flaws should actually be something that has to be dealt with - be it a positive or negative flaw. I don't like that there would be a category of flaws that you could just ignore if you like. That is why I like the either rewrite or reroll idea more.
If nothing else, this saves us from reprinting all formal scrolls yet again.
 

Gandian Ravenscroft

Knight
Chicago Staff
Marshal
My intention would be a "going forward" solution - no reprinting and none of the hassle that goes with that. Newly-generated scrolls going forward simply wouldn't have the bad flaws, and if you rolled one of them on an older scroll, there would be a common, accepted protocol in place for having you take a different flaw instead. You'd never be avoiding taking a flaw altogether; you're just taking a different flaw from one that makes you out-of-game uncomfortable.
 

Muir

Fighter
I think the only hold up that I have is that the flaws should actually be something that has to be dealt with - be it a positive or negative flaw. I don't like that there would be a category of flaws that you could just ignore if you like. That is why I like the either rewrite or reroll idea more.
Yeah, I agree, Brent. I'm mostly just suggesting it's a workaround to avoid another batch of reprints. :)
 
I wouldn't feel great about a flaw being totally negated, but I strongly agree that flaws that could exacerbate a player's real life neurological or psychological issues should very much be negotiable. I would recommend that ritual marshals that see these flaws on the scroll offer a potentially affected player the option to swap the depression or pessimism for a different RP downside. "Fearful of gold" or "believes themselves to be a goblin", as examples, should be reasonably far outside the boundaries of real world psychiatric disorders and still allow for either comedic or thought-provoking interactions, depending on what your personal flavor is.
 
Top