SWU 2014 Application Reveal/ Member Q & A

[Dutch]

For the first time in many years, us staffers of SWU have updated the character application.

The goal for this version of the app was to make it as simple and user friendly as possible. Gone are the numbered stats and constantly having to describe what a 6 means, or how 10's are just for reference. Instead of each section having their own application, we are going to have two universal apps: One for Force Users of ANY kind, and a master application to cover all others.

But before we unleash the new application, we want to get your thoughts on them. Thoughts/Questions/Criticisms/Ideas, whatever you have we wanna hear it. Just remember, the theme is keeping it simple.

So without further ado, the updated SWU character applications:

---

Force User Application

Name: Please keep in mind racial cultural naming norms!
Race: Almost all sentient races on Wookiepedia are allowed, at the mods discretion. Please be sure to check the banned aspects list, of you have any questions let the mod know.
Age:
Birthplace: Planet, Space, etc

Allegiance: Republic? Sith? Mandalorian? Hutt Empire? Themselves?
Status: Standing in the galaxy: Sith Lord, Jedi Knight, Senator, Naval Officer, etc
Rank: Standing in their faction: Inner Sanctum Member, Jedi Guardian, Representative of Naboo, Admiral, etc

Appearance: A written description of your character, picture optional

Personality: Detail their personality, likes, dislikes, quirks, temperament

Ships/Vehicles: Does your character have a ship or a precious bike? Please list all transportation your character owns!

Equipment: List any weapons, tools, or special armor your character uses

Stats: (Feeble, Below Average, Average, Above Average, Superior, Legendary)

Strength -
Agility -
Intelligence -
Charisma -

Force Stats: (Unskilled, Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, Expert, Master)

Telekinetic-
Telepathic-
Body-
Sense-
Protection-
Healing:–
Destruction–


Combat Training: List their learned fighting styles: Ex- Vibroblade, Blasters, Echani Martial Arts, etc- (Unskilled, Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, Expert, Master)

Force Training: List their learned skills with the Force. Common abilities exempt. Ex- Push, Pull, Speed, etc-(Unskilled, Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, Expert, Master)

Other Training: List what else they are skilled in: Ex- Slicing, Piloting, Kloo Horn Playing, etc- (Unskilled, Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, Expert, Master)

Lightsaber Training: (Untrained, Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, Expert, Master, *Specialist)

Shii-Cho-
Makashi-
Soresu-
Ataru-
Shien/Djem So-
>>Sub-form Backhanded-
Niman-
>>Sub-form Jar-kai-
Juyo-
Double Bladed Combat-

*Specialist denotes a style mastered and preferred by the Force user, can only specialize in a single form. All Force users must be at least a journeyman in Shii-Cho to master or specialize in another form. In order to have any points in Juyo, a Force user needs to have mastered three other forms. Shii-Cho has to be one of these forms.

Biography: A description of your character's past, namely important events in their life

Roleplay Sample: Give us an example of what posting with this character would be like. Something in regards to their current state, not past or future please.

[b]Name:[/b]
[b]Race:[/b]
[b]Age:[/b]
[b]Birthplace:[/b]

[b]Allegiance:[/b]
[b]Status:[/b]
[b]Rank:[/b]

[b]Appearance:[/b]

[b]Personality:[/b]

[b]Ships/Vehicles:[/b]

[b]Equipment:[/b]

[b]Stats:[/b]

Strength -
Agility -
Intelligence -
Charisma -

[b]Force Stats: [/b]

Telekinetic-
Telepathic-
Body-
Sense-
Protection-
Healing:–
Destruction–


[b]Combat Training:[/b]

[b]Force Training:[/b]

[b]Other Training:[/b]

[b]Lightsaber Training:[/b]

Shii-Cho-
Makashi-
Soresu-
Ataru-
Shien/Djem So-
>>Sub-form Backhanded-
Niman-
>>Sub-form Jar-kai-
Juyo-
Double Bladed Combat-


[b]Biography: [/b]

[b]Roleplay Sample: [/b].

---

Master Application

Name: Please keep in mind racial cultural naming norms!
Race: Almost all sentient races on Wookiepedia are allowed, at the mods discretion. Please be sure to check the banned aspects list, of you have any questions let the mod know.
Age:
Birthplace: Planet, Space, etc

Allegiance: Republic? Sith? Mandalorian? Hutt Empire? Themselves?
Status: Standing in the galaxy: Sith Lord, Jedi Knight, Senator, Naval Officer, etc
Rank: Standing in their faction: Inner Sanctum Member, Jedi Guardian, Representative of Naboo, Admiral, etc

Appearance: A written description of your character, picture optional

Personality: Detail their personality, likes, dislikes, quirks, temperament

Ships/Vehicles: Does your character have a ship or a precious bike? Please list all transportation your character owns!

Equipment: List any weapons, tools, or special armor your character uses

Stats: (Feeble, Below Average, Average, Above Average, Superior, Legendary)

Strength -
Agility -
Intelligence -
Charisma -

Combat Training: List their learned fighting styles: Ex- Vibroblade, Blasters, Echani Martial Arts, etc- (Unskilled, Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, Expert, Master)

Other Training: List what else they are skilled in: Ex- Slicing, Piloting, Kloo Horn Playing, etc- (Unskilled, Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, Expert, Master)

Biography: A description of your character's past, namely important events in their life

Roleplay Sample: Give us an example of what posting with this character would be like. Something in regards to their current state, not past or future please.

[b]Name:[/b]
[b]Race:[/b]
[b]Age:[/b]
[b]Birthplace:[/b]

[b]Allegiance:[/b]
[b]Status:[/b]
[b]Rank:[/b]

[b]Appearance:[/b]

[b]Personality:[/b]

[b]Ships/Vehicles:[/b]

[b]Equipment:[/b]

[b]Stats:[/b]

Strength -
Agility -
Intelligence -
Charisma -

[b]Combat Training:[/b]

[b]Other Training:[/b]

[b]Biography: [/b]

[b]Roleplay Sample: [/b]

---

These have already gone through the gamut of a staffer comb over, and as of right now are what you’ll see in the upcoming update example applications several of us are doing to help ya’ll as you traverse this new territory.

However these applications are not set in stone. If any of ya’ll suggest something the staff likes, we’re gonna go ahead and update to include the new suggestion(s). We want this to be as much a member created app as a staff assigned one, for the continuing goal of making SWU more accessible for newbies and veterans alike.

We hope you get as excited over this change as we have been, please give us your two cents below!

[sparrow]

My suggestion would be for the stat levels to be part of the template, so instead of:

[b]Stats:[/b]
It would be:

[b]Stats:[/b] (Feeble, Below Average, Average, Above Average, Superior, Legendary)

This way you don't have to re-open the guide page if you forget stuff like whether journeyman comes before or after apprentice.

[Mara]

I have a couple of comments/suggestions:

-- If you truly want to make the application process simpler... why not just have one universal template, with everything included? And if you don't have a Force user, then you just don't use that section?

Just a thought.


-- Also... I personally don't see how the written descriptions/non-binary stats are any easier/clearer than the current numbered system. I get that a few people weren't sure on the difference between a 5 and 6, etc. but I foresee having the same issue with the difference between novice and apprentice, etc. I know I am rather confused looking at them. To me, being a visual person, it's much easier for me to go "Oh, 6; that's higher than 5." But now, it's like... "Journeyman? Is that higher than apprentice? Or lower?" If I'm just skimming someone's app/character and don't have any notes/stats explanation open.


-- One more question -- will current characters be GFC'd in, or will we all have to change over to the new template?

[Apillis]

I really like Sparra's suggestion. It makes sense, it's clear cut, and fits with the kinda' historical motiff that Star Wars actually is (remember, it's all a long, long time ago...).

[Dutch]

Oct 9, 2014 3:21:50 GMT -5 sparrow said:

My suggestion would be for the stat levels to be part of the template, so instead of:

[b]Stats:[/b]
It would be:

[b]Stats:[/b] (Feeble, Below Average, Average, Above Average, Superior, Legendary)

This way you don't have to re-open the guide page if you forget stuff like whether journeyman comes before or after apprentice.

The funny thing here is just before we posted this thread up, we were considering having that part of the template but decided against it xD

If ya'll think it'll help to put that back in, consider it done.

Oct 9, 2014 11:52:22 GMT -5 Mara said:

I have a couple of comments/suggestions:

-- If you truly want to make the application process simpler... why not just have one universal template, with everything included? And if you don't have a Force user, then you just don't use that section?

Just a thought.

Toyed with this as well actually. But speaking from experience, it was a huge time consuming pain in the butt to go through the Force User App (FA) and delete each and every category that didn't apply for the Master App (MA). The dual app system was made for ease of character creation, can just c/p and go over sitting and editing the FA.

Also if you'll look, the MA is the exact same as the FA minus all the Jedi jank. We just did the work for you

Oct 9, 2014 11:52:22 GMT -5 Mara said:

-- Also... I personally don't see how the written descriptions/non-binary stats are any easier/clearer than the current numbered system. I get that a few people weren't sure on the difference between a 5 and 6, etc. but I foresee having the same issue with the difference between novice and apprentice, etc. I know I am rather confused looking at them. To me, being a visual person, it's much easier for me to go "Oh, 6; that's higher than 5." But now, it's like... "Journeyman? Is that higher than apprentice? Or lower?" If I'm just skimming someone's app/character and don't have any notes/stats explanation open.

Ah, the great debate of words over numbers. We've chosen words for the fact that if someone is unclear what that degree means, they can scroll on over to their preferred web browser, type in the word, and a lovely description/ definition will pop up detailing what that level of knowledge entails. For example: A novice means a person new to or inexperienced in a field or situation. An apprentice means a person who is learning a trade from a skilled employer. In this case the trade is being a Jedi and the employer a master. Common sense dictates that the trainee would know more than the newbie, no?

Oct 9, 2014 11:52:22 GMT -5 Mara said:

-- One more question -- will current characters be GFC'd in, or will we all have to change over to the new template?

Another thing we touched upon, since it is a rather big deal. GFC will still apply in regards to powers, races, etc. Stats will have to change to reflect the new scale though, so everything is copacetic. I will make it known now though that if there is a current character that is just ridiculously and pointlessly overpowered, that the owner will receive a PM from staff to work at bringing that character back to more the site standard while still keeping the character as strong as the writer desires (if that makes sense).

[Mara]

Oct 9, 2014 12:25:44 GMT -5 Dutch said:

Oct 9, 2014 11:52:22 GMT -5 Mara said:

-- Also... I personally don't see how the written descriptions/non-binary stats are any easier/clearer than the current numbered system. I get that a few people weren't sure on the difference between a 5 and 6, etc. but I foresee having the same issue with the difference between novice and apprentice, etc. I know I am rather confused looking at them. To me, being a visual person, it's much easier for me to go "Oh, 6; that's higher than 5." But now, it's like... "Journeyman? Is that higher than apprentice? Or lower?" If I'm just skimming someone's app/character and don't have any notes/stats explanation open.

Ah, the great debate of words over numbers. We've chosen words for the fact that if someone is unclear what that degree means, they can scroll on over to their preferred web browser, type in the word, and a lovely description/ definition will pop up detailing what that level of knowledge entails. For example: A novice means a person new to or inexperienced in a field or situation. An apprentice means a person who is learning a trade from a skilled employer. In this case the trade is being a Jedi and the employer a master. Common sense dictates that the trainee would know more than the newbie, no?

So, instead of automatically knowing that 6 is higher than 5, you want us all to Google stuff in order to know what they mean?

Yeah, that sounds way easier.


I'm just pointing this out, because no one else has seemed to consider that the prose stat designations will be rife with the same problems as the numbers currently do, and thusly, changing them will change nothing. Because there will always been a few people who aren't sure what things mean or what they are doing with the stats. (Not everyone has common sense.) And I personally think this just makes it more confusing. Numbers are cut and dry/black and white; these descriptions are more vague/gray.


So....

Crazy out-of-the-blue idea: Why even have stats? Why not just remove them altogether? I mean, keep skills and stuff, but the stats? You've already down-graded them into less categories anyway.
Besides, I've heard more than once from staff members that stats really don't count; they're the least important category on the application template. So why have them?

Oct 9, 2014 12:25:44 GMT -5 Dutch said:

Oct 9, 2014 11:52:22 GMT -5 Mara said:

-- One more question -- will current characters be GFC'd in, or will we all have to change over to the new template?

Another thing we touched upon, since it is a rather big deal. GFC will still apply in regards to powers, races, etc. Stats will have to change to reflect the new scale though, so everything is copacetic. I will make it known now though that if there is a current character that is just ridiculously and pointlessly overpowered, that the owner will receive a PM from staff to work at bringing that character back to more the site standard while still keeping the character as strong as the writer desires (if that makes sense).

No problem for me... I was asked to change my only "overpowered" character a couple years ago. Because this was already put into motion back then, when the rules/GFC was added to the rules.

So then if we change from the numbers to these descriptions, and only that is changed, it will not effect the GFC status? (Assuming there is no OP stats.)

[Neology]

You had to google average, unskilled, expert, etc.?

This has been up for discussion in the staff sections since early August. It would have been helpful to get your feedback at some point before now.

[Apillis]

Oct 9, 2014 15:49:15 GMT -5 Mara said:

So, instead of automatically knowing that 6 is higher than 5, you want us all to Google stuff in order to know what they mean?

Yeah, that sounds way easier.

Oct 9, 2014 15:49:15 GMT -5 Mara said:

I'm just pointing this out, because no one else has seemed to consider that the prose stat designations will be rife with the same problems as the numbers currently do, and thusly, changing them will change nothing. Because there will always been a few people who aren't sure what things mean or what they are doing with the stats. (Not everyone has common sense.) And I personally think this just makes it more confusing. Numbers are cut and dry/black and white; these descriptions are more vague/gray.


So....

Crazy out-of-the-blue idea: Why even have stats? Why not just remove them altogether? I mean, keep skills and stuff, but the stats? You've already down-graded them into less categories anyway.
Besides, I've heard more than once from staff members that stats really don't count; they're the least important category on the application template. So why have them?

Because a mathematical system still needs to be put in place. But having a 10 digit system, where one of the numerals is just an "unquantifiable representation" has never made any sense to anyone. And it repeatedly winds up being something that needs to be explained over and over again, and for YEARS now the previous stat system was something had always been debated between not just players but staff to as many of us has experienced and witnessed first hand--again--for YEARS. Eventually it hits a point where the nonsense needs to change rather than the simple status quo that continuously runs into problems.

I mean, good for you, you're aware that 5 is greater than 6, but now apply that say Telekinesis. Now can you tell me precisely what you're capable of with that stat and NOT have it be different from another player's or staffer's point of view? If we're both being honest, we both know you can't say your view of what that stat is matches what theirs will be. Hence why some were saying that stats were the least important thing on an app, because they were so terribly defined! Now they have quite blatant definitions while remaining simplistic for ease of use and being able to go through an app much quicker.

Novice, Apprentice, and Journeyman are each easily recognizable terms, anyone who has even the most basic lexicon knows what Novice and Apprentice means at the very least. But each of those terms have been utilized in RPGs and RP-ing in general literally since the late 70s when the first DnD books came about. They're familiar terms and obvious ones at that.

Yes, they're more vague rankings than a hard number stat, which was the problem with the hard numbers I addressed earlier. People still only had a vague understanding for them, and thus there were consistent cases of players "not playing their stats" when the definition of those hard numbers were already so skewed. These rankings have clear definitions, while providing wiggle-room and variance for the players to have creative freedom, while also having clear boundaries of one's capabilities.

But, sure, we can go the temper-tantrum route. Why have stats? Hell! Why have apps?! Why have character boards or classes?! Crap, man! Why even have a forum board at all! I can do all this stuff in my MIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIND! WHO NEEDS YOU LOT! I'M MY OWN BEST FRIEND AND RPER IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD! I DO IT ALL BY MYSELF IN MY OWN LITTLE UNIVERSE INSIDE MY BRAIN!

[Rugs]

While discussion is certainly welcome, let's simmer down a bit, guys :3

[Juzt]

I very rarely take notice of or comment on changes you guys, not being an very active member. (You probbaly barely remember me lol) Looking at it though I approve very much of the changes to the stats. Numbers are meaningless in my view. We are not playing a game like dungeons and dragons where stat numbers matter. We are writting stories, in my view at least. Descriptions are more useful, because what diffrence does 1 point make. A 4 vs a 5 in healing say. What can a 5 do that a 4 can't? its to difficult to describe. Broader categories are welcome.

I know where Mara is coming from but I found when making apps I spent my time second guessing what the Mod wanted from me. I want my charchter to be good at this... but have i made him/her too good. Maybe I should drop the other stats to match up, but is that believeable. I think this way is a little simpler. Creating charchters here has always been really difficult as it is. Not that that is wrong long posts are expected here and you can only do that if you know your charries inside and out. However, the lsat thing we want to do is intimidate new folks.

Now lets all calm down. I can see the other side to, perhaps if we had something that gave an excample of what these categories mean. What a Superior person in some power or other can do in comparison to a novice. oh yes and maybe not have sperate words for stats vs abilites. I don't know if thats possible. I think it would be easier though if both stats and abilites had the same words.

Anyway hope I hope I am being helpful.

[Dutch]

Oct 9, 2014 15:49:15 GMT -5 Mara said:

So then if we change from the numbers to these descriptions, and only that is changed, it will not effect the GFC status? (Assuming there is no OP stats.)

Correct, outside of stats GFC abilities, races, equipment, etc will still be locked in. We're not looking to take away from people, only to even the playing field with as little change to everyone's character concepts as possible.

Oct 10, 2014 9:04:41 GMT -5 Juzt said:

I can see the other side to, perhaps if we had something that gave an excample of what these categories mean. What a Superior person in some power or other can do in comparison to a novice. oh yes and maybe not have sperate words for stats vs abilites. I don't know if thats possible. I think it would be easier though if both stats and abilites had the same words.

Anyway hope I hope I am being helpful.

Any comment or suggestion is helpful Juzt

As for examples, the staff is currently working on applying some of their current characters to the new format. We'll have both the old app linked to the new example one, and ya'll will be able to see clearly how the scales transfer. Those examples however won't be posted until the members have been given ample time to comment/critique the new format, as well as get to know it a bit better.

Figure this would show what each category of the stat scale would look like, using characters that are already familiar to the site.

I did try playing around with the wording for each scales, and for the most part it's all universal with the exception of the physical stats. With what you see there we felt best described the tiers for stats as well as skills. After all, one can Master the kloo horn, but can't really Master strength. Make sense?

[Jenno]

Bit tired but hopefully this makes sense.

I know I was concerned about the whole words/numbers thing, that very present part of me that's all 'I don't like change' was screaming that numbers where the best option, but really I don't think it matters. But something still doesn't sit right.

I think that the thing is, either way, words or numbers, people are still going to want them explained further. I mean, I know what 'Master' means, but how exactly does that apply to telekinetics? Can a Master pull down a star destroyer from space or can they use pillars like baseball bats? The examples are silly/extreme but I hope they get my point across. It may just be that it's an issue of interpretation as well, someone may believe that a score/rank means one thing and another might believe it's slightly different (slightly stronger or weaker), one word doesn't really do much more than a number system.

In the way that we used the guides to explain the stats before, I still feel like we'll need guides to provide a bit more depth to lay out the limits/boundaries of the abilities. So in that way, I don't think the issue of numbers or words is really that big of a deal, I just think to make reviews easier on both parties and allowing staff and members to be on the same page, there's going to need to be a guide which universally outlines the stats for all different sections/apps.

So yea, I'm not fussed about words or numbers, but if you sit down with a decent sized number of people (10+ maybe) and first of all ask them what they think those different categories mean and compare that to what you thought, it might show you that there is a variety, which would cause some issues down the road.

Once staff have put up some demonstrations of the new change, try and see if some members will submit some of their own submitted apps (like a beta test after the staff-only alpha test).

Hopefully that kinda got my point across.

Oh yea, and personally (again, words or numbers is a non-issue for me) I think a scale 1-6 is a bit lacking, and find it a bit strange that the areas which had what, I thought, a greater range of variance between scores (force powers) now actually has a lower number of varieties than lightsaber forms if you include Specialist. But essentially I just think a scale of 10 would better show the large range of diversity that you need to display when you have hundreds of characters on the forum.

Yay discussion!

~Jenno

[Apillis]

Well, if we're talking examples, going with the "pulling down a star destroyer", there have been many master Force Adepts in Star Wars, but only a handful ever encroaching that level of power, so that'd go under "Legendary", I'd think. Because that is one hell of a "legendary" feat to utilize the Force at such an immense aptitude and magnitude. Which I suppose, if I had one criticism I'd remove "Unskilled" and have "Novice" as the lowest stat the more I think about it (given a novice is an unskilled person to begin with), and then set highest rank to be rather than "Master" it'd be "Legendary", essentially keeping in line with the historical/mythological context in which Star Wars actually is given it's all happened a long, long time ago.

But, really is it such a terrible deviation to go with a 1 to 6 scale for Force abilities, when there has been a 1 to 5 scale for lightsabers? Lightsaber forms have just as many variances and unique combinations as any Force power/ability does, and in fact it takes the Force just to be able to do them (unless we're talking about a droid or mechanized body possessing the reaction time and speed to be able to simulate someone augmented by the Force). So really this just simplifies it more with a more easily comparative dissemination of what the skills signify, also when compared to their other stat counterparts. The problem is all of that was non-existent before.

Also, having to explain a stat system is not the real issue. It's how easily it can be explained is the issue, and that seems to be what's getting ignore completely. Trying to explain the 10 numbered stat system was terrible, because every time the basic response to it was, "...Okay.", more so because there was one stat that couldn't even be used because it was just there as a representation as an unquantifiable sum, and it begged the question what purpose that served when people with 8s or 9s were doing great feats equal to or near equal to what you see in the tv shows, video games and movies. So rather than becoming this figure of an immeasurable level, it merely represented a stat no one can use and that's it, so it further begged its purpose. But then further awkward explanation was required when the difference between a 4 or 5 was negligible and oft both considered as "average", but then it became more muddled when the difference between them was slight. Yet when comparing to a 6 to 7 the difference was large, and when comparing a 7 to 8 the chasm was massive; but then compare an 8 to 9 and suddenly it was a difference was separated by time and space the gap between them was so great.

Now take all of that and translate it into RP, and now you're left with the task--can you explain the chasm between a 4 and 3? Can you explain what exact edge between 6 has over a 5? Why is the difference between a 7 and 8 so extreme? Why the same for 8 and 9 for that matter? Why is a 10 an unquantified representation when no one really knows exactly what that means? Does it mean Palpatine levels? There have been a few who have accomplished some level or close to some level of what Palpatine has done spanning Star Wars history. So why couldn't a 9 do such things too if a 9 represents the "best in the galaxy" and are a "rare few in the galaxy", because if we're talking a "rare few in the galaxy" we're also talking about only a handful in the entire Star Wars history as well. Or hell, what not an 8 as well?

And on and on that nonsense debating, questioning, and explaining goes for that last 5 years I've been at this site between players to other players and staff, even staff to other staff--again for YEARS. This is more simplified. It's hard to b.s. that a novice will be able to better at something than someone receiving (or had received) direct training in it, i.e. an apprentice. It's gonna be hard to say that while someone may have something mastered they are on equal footing as a legendary figure in the field. You can't tell me that difference between an apprentice who is still learning and accomplished individual who is a journeyman that their given skill don't have a clear divide between them. Each of these terms have clear definitions and clear chasms between them, and are very simplistic to understand.

It's not that you have to explain something to a new player or even veteran players, it's how simply it can be explained.

[Mara]

If anything I said in prior posts was taken as snarky or mean or sarcastic or anything, I apologize. Whether it was intentional or not. And I'm sorry if anyone took offense by it. I was trying to have a civil discussion, as was asked for by this thread, but if did not come off that way, again, I apologize.
But if I continue to be attacked for no apparent reason, for expressing my opinions, I will simply just depart this thread, and leave the discussion up to the rest of you.


Also, I'd also like to point out that I am not condemning the change, nor am I against it. I am merely pointing out some of my concerns with the whole thing and issues that likely will crop up. And how I'm not sure how the switch from numeral to prose stats will really change these issues that the new stats are meant to erase. Because like Jenno mentioned, there will be problems no matter how the stats are done.

Which is the only reason I even brought up the crazy idea of eliminating the stats entirely.


And I'm not sure that it's only a case of which system is "easier." There's lots of things that could be easier, but they aren't done, because they are the best way to do them. What I think is most important is how well they are understood.


However, if they are explained fully and properly (and people with confusion are dealt with in patience and not annoyance, as the numbered stats has seemed to bring from time to time), I think it would alleviate the majority of the confusion that would pop up. (Just as doing the exact thing with the numbers would have done.)

Oct 9, 2014 16:41:51 GMT -5 Neology said:

You had to google average, unskilled, expert, etc.?

No, I did not. But some people might if they are unfamiliar with them. Yes, they are basic terms that most people should be familiar with, but it's a whole different ball game, in my opinion, when it comes to RP.

Because contrary to what Apillis is assuming, not all roleplayers have experience beyond forum roleplaying. Forum RP is the only medium I have ever RPed in (except for a brief stint in chat RP). I have never played D&D or any kind of tabletop game. Or been involved in any other kind of RP. So no, in an RP context, I have never ran into the "apprentice, journeyman, master" etc. when referring to stats in an RP setting. Not until they were brought up here.
(In fact, SWU is the first, and only, RP I've been in that's even required stats in the applications.)

Quite honestly, when I first read "journeyman" I think of electricians and plumbers, not how to rank my RP character in stat categories. But that's just my take on it.

Oct 9, 2014 16:41:51 GMT -5 Neology said:

This has been up for discussion in the staff sections since early August. It would have been helpful to get your feedback at some point before now.

I did not post in there, because although I do have access to the staff board, as a former staff member, I do not personally feel comfortable posting in there, for reasons I will not go into here.

[Apillis]

I'm not trying to be demeaning when I do this and what I'm about to say in this post. I'm actually just trying to cut through everything and get to the nitty gritty of it to clear the air. Now. Here:



Now I ask not to be insulting but for honest and genuine answers.

Is that definition too confusing or complicated in any form?

Is there something about its definition that is not understandable?

Given its definition do you have a clear understanding of what a person is capable of within a field with said defined level of skill?

For me personally. It's as clear as day and so very easily understood.

The criticism seems to be that the stat system will still need to be explained. The thing is... of course it will. Any stat system will need to be explained. Criticizing something because it needs to explained is utterly missing the point. The point as I've mentioned before, is not that something needs to be explained, but how simply and clearly it can be explained.

Each of the words used have very clear definitions, while also providing plenty of creative freedom and variance to what you can write under those defined terms.

Given the nature of the vast variety of unique skills and powers that exists within Star Wars completely eliminating a stat system would make things more complicated. As it would then require people to expound precisely in written detail what powers and abilities they have and at what skill levels, which also makes GMing or people not playing to their apps an increased issue. While on top of which making reviewing apps much more difficult because on top of already quite long appearances, personalities and bios, now there's these written out abilities and powers to read through as well and that's on top of their explaining it in the bio. All of which culminates making the app reviewing process longer when the goal is to make it more simplistic so people can get to rp'ing sooner rather than having to wait a week or even up to a month or two months to finally get a character approved. The site has people leaving often out of frustration because of how overly complicated it winds being largely because of the current nonsense of the stat system to which I've already only scratched the surface of in earlier posts, yet still shined a blaring light on its numerous issues.

So the solution becomes clear, streamline the app process, and part of that comes with revamping the stat system. As mentioned before, the issue is NOT that the stat system will need to be explained. Notice in any video game or RPG or any RP site everything about the site's app needs to be explained whether or not it has a stat system. Having to explain something is never the issue, that's simply par for the course, the issue is how easily you can explain it and how well it can be understood.

[Jenno]

Oct 11, 2014 22:32:46 GMT -5 Apillis said:

For me personally. It's as clear as day and so very easily understood.

Honestly, that's great, having spent a lot of times with roleplays/rpgs in different forms over the years I know what it means as well. The thing is, people are kinda dumb. If I think of people I grew up with, people I went to school with around the time I joined SWU, teenagers (and some teenagers we've had join the site in the past, because we get a lot of them and with new cartoon and upcoming films it's likely we'll see more coming to our site) a large number of them would have had no idea what Journeyman meant, when essentially, in the context of our stats, it could just be replaced with the word Skilled (which is a simpler/easier way to explain it).

And yes, we are criticising the fact the stats will need explaining, because if they still need explaining beyond the one word (which they should) so that members/newbies can grasp the extent of the abilities then there's actually then little point to that one word (which is why earlier I said numbers/words don't really matter for the stats) because the key and crucial part which will affect us all is the expansion/definition of the stat indicators.

I think the main thing that we (maybe just me) want is to just hear from the staff whether or not they're going to be doing a universal guide to go along with these universal apps. The app itself is going to be pretty simple really, there's not a whole lot to pick at with it, the meat of the content's going to be in the guides, by the further definitions of powers and such. At the moment there's just this lingering fear that there's only going to be this one word to define the abilities and that's it (I think for me the issue's mostly with the force powers since they're typically so whimsical and portrayed in different ways in different sources), because from my experience with SWRPS/SWU, I feel like that's not going to end too well.

I still think a 10 tier system would be best, for all the stats, force stats and saber stats, something that puts them on the same playing field (like I wanted to do with the saber stats back on the old app), I don't think there's a real particular reason for that other than people always used to say it was weird we had two different scales.

Ooooooooooh, idea.

Something that always irked me a bit, it would link into the apps but also a little beyond it to the site's rules. It might be a good opportunity to more clearly define the 'no more than four force users' rule and change it to no more than four force sensitive characters, and then title the two apps Force Sensitives and Non-Force Sensitives. Because in the past people would suddenly just pop up that they were force sensitive, or wouldn't actually use the force so much as say that the force sometimes influenced/supported their character, which kinda annoyed me since the purpose of bringing in that rule was to properly try and display that force sensitives are the minority and not everyone has that magical connection. Probably would have been easy for me to change that when I was red, buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut reasons.

There was something else, but now I've forgotten. Need to stop writing these when I wake up/am about to go to sleep.

[Rugs]

I think, and I'm going to put a disclaimer here that my mind has been entirely on football for the last two days and I've only really sort of skimmed over most of the arguing here, that we're agreeing on the same general principle here and getting lost on the semantics.

Again, that's keeping with my disclaimer in mind here.

Far as I can tell, some concern, as with Jenno's post, is that we'll take efforts to make the stats clear to the member base, like with a guide similar to the ones we have in the section notes. I think that's a perfectly valid concern and I think it's something we'll take steps to make sure is implemented as clearly as possible.

I also think some of the arguing is revolving around the concern that people might not understand what some ranks mean. That's also a valid concern.

The way I see it, the journeyman rank is meant to fill the average, middling role. Now we could, with little issue, change the rank to average and not really lose anything there, since they fill the same space. That could cut down on some of the confusion. Or skilled, as Jenno suggested. They all fill the same place, and I think we're losing the forest for the trees in arguing over and over about journeyman vs some other word. If there's concern about it, it can be adjusted.

It might be a good opportunity to more clearly define the 'no more than four force users' rule and change it to no more than four force sensitive characters, and then title the two apps Force Sensitives and Non-Force Sensitives.

I actually quite like this suggestion, personally.

[Meira]

Since I'm on my phone, and about to leave for work, I'll be brief.

1. Regardless of what system we end up using, we will of course have a guide to help explain what we want to see in apps for our site. We're not going to just leave it and hope people understand. But with the streamlined apps, we have an opportunity for the whole thing to be a bit neater.

2. Words vs. Numbers: I'd like to share my personal reason for wanting to switch. We are all aware that SWU is about writing and for many of us, the stats were a formality. I personally disliked the rigidity of numbers because it left very little room for creative freedom. If you had a 5 in something, and someone else had a 6, it was hard to define just where the line was in there and what would or wouldn't be believable in whatever interaction two people might be writing out.

Now, working with your writing partner to find a doable middle ground for actions within a thread has always been my go-to method, as the two writers can usually come to terms on something that works for not characters. I believe this new version can accommodate that a bit easier.

My vision for this was to see characters within categories that allow for differentiation. Two journeymen characters will have different skills and will display them differently. A character can be having a good day and another having a bad day and they'll excell or fail accordingly. The prose version of ranking allows for a more fluid interpretation, and a more prose approach to stats. Personally, that's what I want to see for SWU. I think it will allow someone to explore a range of skill while still maintaining boundaries.


I hope that makes sense to all of you. Obviously, the reason why we've put this up is to hear feedback from more than just ourselves. We are taking everyone's input seriously and will do our best to tailor this new app to SWU as best as we can.

[Valcor]

If suggestions are still being taken, I personally would like to see height and weight make a return on this app as I do not currently see them there. I understand this may be covered by some people under appearance, but many applications only cover clothing, skin tone and hair in their appearance sections. I find height and weight to be a helpful indicator as to the size of the person without having to try and interpret from someone's appearance section how big they are.

[Dutch]

Oct 24, 2014 10:52:22 GMT -5 Valcor said:

If suggestions are still being taken, I personally would like to see height and weight make a return on this app as I do not currently see them there. I understand this may be covered by some people under appearance, but many applications only cover clothing, skin tone and hair in their appearance sections. I find height and weight to be a helpful indicator as to the size of the person without having to try and interpret from someone's appearance section how big they are.

Yup! This Sunday, 10/26 will be the last day we take member input for the new app formats. So def not too late

I'll admit it was my hope that people would include their size/dimensions into their appearance section (given it's part of their appearance xD) but if this is something multiple members want to see back on the app it won't be a pain to slide them right back in before/after appearance.

Really they were just 86'd to help keep the app as short and sweet as possible.