My games usually have at least one female player at the table, so there's usually at least one female character in the party. Because of this I generally design things to include both genders when possible to prevent the "you need to all play male (or female) chars for this next campaign," and upset those in GM's groups who dislike opposite gender rping. (Or make an amazing mess out of it.)
Go to Comment
As for the female quarters being inviolate, a GM could add in robotic guards patrolling the corridors separating the male/female blocks, or simply intermingle it more with a "prison life's tough you had best be tougher" approach. (much like the prisons in Chronicles of Riddick and other sci-fi games are.) Glad you like it, I'd love to see a copy of your notes and the changes you make to turn DJL into a fantasy prison. (Seeing it up as a sub would be very neat.)
Go to Comment
Haven't had the chance to try it as a campaign yet, (I came up with it all yesterday over the course of 12 or so hours) but I hope to get a chance to use it sometime. I can see it working well as a one use location for a Shadowrun adventure, but short of starting a new campaign there's not many places this facility would fit in my current games. Anyone else that uses the prison in their game, please drop me a line of post back here and let me know how it went :)
Just about perfect in every way. I would love to use this prison one day. The only thing that bothers me is the fact that this is a co-ed prison -- I'd assume that only the most dangerous prisoners would be sent down to Davy Jone's Lockdown, so I would question the ability of the prison guards to keep the female prisoners' quarters inviolate. Still, this is for a fantasy game, so it doesn't have to be entirely believable.
Really, truly well done! 5/5
Very nice article. It certainly makes a lot of sense, is logical, and an easy read. I doubt it will change the way I vote much (Though I find it already creeping up on my as I vote on this one). My voting practices, like much of what I do, are nowhere near as coherent as this. I applaud and thank you for being able to write this and for taking the time to write this. Good work.
Good, and concise. Written with what feels like a minimal amount of personal emotional involvement. This would get a thumbtack from me, to keep it up front, or when someone starts going on about misspelling words or what is the most appropriate way to vote.
Nice effort, and I would like to add that people vote as people will.
This one fact has caused untold amounts of anguish here at the citadel.
I have experienced my true 5.0 subs, voted that high by a number of my peers, been torn from its lofty perch by a 3.0 vote, and worse. It has even been by people who openly dislike me.
I know how emotionally entangled we get with our subs, and with the votes we receive, but I wish to echo valadaar: "Be thankful for a vote. Be thankful for a comment. Dance with joy for both, for many subs receive little, or no, attention.
I have myself been hammered in the past. Accused of voting subs low with spite and malice (and against people I adore even). This was one of the main reasons I stopped being an active citadel member. This is also the reason why I am so harsh and unpalatable in my reaction to "vote whining". Yes, yes, I have myself, on multiple occassions been the primary whiner. :)
Not my intent to hijack the comment thread of a well written sub with very helpful advice on voting patterns. I just want to point out that we need to give leeway to the less than stellar critics we receive as well, even when the criticism is delivered by people we despise, or who might despise us.
Go to Comment
They only have one vote you know. Multiple user accounts are usually detected.
the rating system described above evaluates subs based on their ability to add fresh material to genre items and their usefulness in relation to the game.
Thus the literal message of this sub is that a sub that expands the gaming universe of the reader is a good sub. Yet this sub does not do this, it dives right into the meta content of this website.
For a post that is all about the author, it lacks self awareness. A self aware aside sometimes distracts from posts that are pieces of fiction or ones that are trying to make a point, but this post is all about you. It doesn't even have an argument or a purpose. It is already self aware, no need to cut corners.
Perhaps Pieh was commenting on when said it may be effecting his vote. Maybe this is so apparent to everyone that pointing it out just seemed banal, but if so I didn't catch an intended irony in anyones' response.