OOC For IC

No, she didn't mutter to herself. It was italics, not bolded.

I am giving inside glimpses to Nicole's thoughts because she's now being pretty passive and is keeping her own counsel on effectively everything. Didn't you notice she almost had zero input in the planning session and her only real concern was regarding legality?

Ok then I misunderstood you.

Clarification; did Nick get close enough to engage Blake in melee combat?

Yeah the way I see it she managed to shoot and but Blake's shield away and now the group have a moment to take her down before she can get a new one up.

Yeah, I wasn't expecting Nick to get within melee round that quick.

But was she not fierring as mad there is a limit to damage a kinetic shield can take.

Okay really I don't get it now.

I believed 'last round' [the reply at 22.57] Nicole was within melee distance [ie less than 50cm]. Now you say she is 'closer to Blake'. How closer can you get - by this point Nick should be on Blake unless they've moved.

No, she was not firing yet either. 'Point blank range' is going to be within 50cm from the target. Nick did this in the case that the enemy's shield was extended around the body, thus possibly being able to get the gun inside the shield.  She deliberately chose not to fire because getting into ranged combat was [in Nick's opinion] was going to be stupidly mismatched [and she saw the Chief's firearm fail, so why attempt the same damn move again?]

As I said before, the whole goal was for Nicole to basically, physically crash into Blake and then start slicing her up with her claw-blades while ideally using her large weight and strength to pin her down - reasoning that while they might be a powerful mage not even they like someone repeatedly punching them in the head with an artificial arm.

From the looks of it, Nicole has done moves I didn't desire and I now don't really understand her current position to be able to give any further directions.

Ok let me explain what I believe you meant and you can tell me what you actually meant and we can retcon it.

I thought you meant Nicole ran towards Jodie fierring at the shield to take it down, and then tried to get into combat range?

The shield is pretty soldid and can only really be taken down with massive amounts of damage.

Nope.

Nicole deliberately didn't fire as she went towards Blake because she'd seen Morgan try/fail that method and she didn't want Blake to notice her running towards her.

She also realised that some form of shield was up - however, she suspects that she might be able to get inside the shield and then shoot her.

Nicole's plan was this.

- Run at full force at Blake, hoping to remain unnoticed for as long as possible.
- Just before she gets in 'clawing distance', to rapidly open fire [ideally make Blake notice the gun and not the hand]
- Pop claws out of hand and stick them into Blake as they collide. Ideally, their neck.
- Get Blake on ground.
- Hit her repeatedly in the head to make it impossible for her to think of any magick to do.

This is why Nicole hated the decision at the start of combat - she likes when she can shoot down enemies with her rifle before they get close enough to really hurt her. Today, it's the other way around - Nicole needs to get into 'melee range' before Blake kills her at range.

Ok I will write up a ret con look it over and see if I have gotten it this time.

So currently Serge doesn't have a way to soak damage from a bullet. But before I let Serge get shot I should probably ask this question.

Is Serge is able to fire off a quick spell in response to the bullet being redirected to him?

I mean it all o pretty quickly he do not have time to draw anything but if he do not use foci and just sort of react then yes.

Quick question:

Is Correspondence 3 enough to 'thicken' space and make it harder for people to teleport within an area?

I think so yes, it is not mentioned in the book but if we look at the 3 dot of other Spheres you can by then start manipulate it, like for example Time 3 allowing you to make yourself move faster or make something fall slower. It would probably not be as strong as on higher dots but I think you can do something with it yes.

RE: Thread. Are you sure that the Chief burned the body before they got to search it?

Yes he would be so concerned with Jodie not regenerating, far more concerned with that than getting any items she might have.

(OOC: I would have assumed by plauers read the game information before making a character and that unless they let me know they where familliar witht he setting and knew about stuffy elders and as such they did not need a warning for that. Not that the Masters of Steelhaven are stuffy but in continuing with the Vampire example. I would assume that reading about the game and knowing it was a Camarilla game the player wanted to hav a rebel with the consequenses that come with being a rebel.

You do understand that if someone have lest many loved ones to a group they are not likely to listen to all neuanse of what was said, if you tell a Jewish person who list family during Haulocost that their love of school means they have the same skills that the Nazis value do you think it would go over well? Do you really think it is unresonable for this person to react with anger to that?

B: That is part of the problem Yes after allot of explination I get that Nicole think Fran betrayed her hwoever I also think it is completely beyond all reason. Now it is not a problem for a character to have opinions that are beyond reason, it is a problem when that player demand the GM make the NPCs think what they PC is doing is perfectly logical and resonable. In one of the D&D games I was in my character had extrmee abandonment issues, this led him to extremely fast imprint on those who he liked and then go to extreme lengths to keep them from ever leaving him, falling into despair if they did. Now this was not resonable, it did lead to good roleplay though. it would have been a problem if I demanded the GM have NPC's react as if this was perfectly normal.

That someone have a reason for being rude and unresonable do not eman they are not rude or unresonable.

In short I have no problem with Nick having hang ups, that is perfectly fine, she is a great character and she is well played. The problem is not that, the problem is you expect NPCs and other PCs not to react to the things she do in what I see as a logical manner.

Look at it this way, one of the bullis who was after me as a kid was from a horrible home where he should have been moved, he and his seven siblings had been split up and his foster parents was abusive. The teacher said to my mother when she complained about how this boy treated me. "But M have such a horrible home." My mother replied "Yeah well then rapport it to social services that M have a bad home do not eman he get to bully Anja." I mean I get why he lashed out, now as an adult looking back I can even forgive as I get it but that do not mean M's actions should not get any consequenses.

C: We have had years asking about Nicole's logic and while some of it I get some of it make little sense. However her set og triggers are perfectly fine, what is not fine is demanding that everyone else in game will be ok with them. Fran think Nick is dangerously uunstable and is hurt and flabbergasted by her reaction and that is normal, basically you have I feel some choices when making a character, if you do not want a character to get negative reaction for being prikly do not make a character with tons of hidden triggers because pepole will react badly. If I meet someone who go ballistic because I wear a black shrit and they hate pepole wearing black because it triggers something in them and they go raging at me for it I am not goign to want to spend time with this person. I might understand and sympatize but I would think them nuts and think I have no need of that drama in my life.

D: And here is where not getting your logic kick in, you say no you do not want Nicole to always be right but you are complaning that NPCs are reacting you your rude, crude, extremely prickly character. You ahve basically maxed out making Nicole hard to get along with and then complain with it is hard to get along with her. I can not for the life of me understand what it is you want here. Her eis also the problem Jeffry while he have a bit of a temper is moderate and progressive, that you see him as rigid and basically a tyrant makes no sense to me, and I do not really see how that can be reconsiled as it makes no sense. Also the problem is Nicole have been so badly behaved towards everyone there is very, very little goodwill left to bend the rules or to try to understand her that is also something that come with behabing in such a way. Jeffry have bent, he have tried, have have done more for Nicole than for anyone to reach her and be understanding and that you do not see that means we do not really speak the same language here.

We are basically back to a player who made a stereotypical die with their boots on Anarch and then complain that they are not accepted by most of the Camarilla.)

[Recut your reply to avoid repetition etc.]

I would have assumed by plauers read the game information before making a character and that unless they let me know they where familliar witht he setting and knew about stuffy elders and as such they did not need a warning for that. Not that the Masters of Steelhaven are stuffy but in continuing with the Vampire example. I would assume that reading about the game and knowing it was a Camarilla game the player wanted to hav a rebel with the consequenses that come with being a rebel.

Irrelevant point in this case. What is done is done.

You do understand that if someone have lest many loved ones to a group they are not likely to listen to all neuanse of what was said, if you tell a Jewish person who list family during Haulocost that their love of school means they have the same skills that the Nazis value do you think it would go over well? Do you really think it is unresonable for this person to react with anger to that?

In short I have no problem with Nick having hang ups, that is perfectly fine, she is a great character and she is well played. The problem is not that, the problem is you expect NPCs and other PCs not to react to the things she do in what I see as a logical manner.

Never said it wasn't. Everyone has their berserk buttons, hangups and sore points.  What's more, folks often have 'foot in mouth' issues which if the other party accepts was a genuine mistake, will normally forgive after a while - including Nick.

That is part of the problem Yes after allot of explination I get that Nicole think Fran betrayed her hwoever I also think it is completely beyond all reason. Now it is not a problem for a character to have opinions that are beyond reason, it is a problem when that player demand the GM make the NPCs think what they PC is doing is perfectly logical and resonable. In one of the D&D games I was in my character had extrmee abandonment issues, this led him to extremely fast imprint on those who he liked and then go to extreme lengths to keep them from ever leaving him, falling into despair if they did. Now this was not resonable, it did lead to good roleplay though. it would have been a problem if I demanded the GM have NPC's react as if this was perfectly normal.

Nicole only got annoyed with Fran because she insulted her professional credibility, not because 'she disagreed'. Plus unless Fran doubles-down on it, the anger will pass. She feels a little betrayed yes [she thought Fran knew her better] but she's been around long enough to not blow it out of proportion. Nicole does not hate people because they disagree with her.

Nicole's views aren't 'beyond reason', they are reasoning you don't agree with. This world is full of people who have different thought patterns; there is no 'one and right way' to think on anything [though there are perhaps 'wrong' ways to think about things, like those who are genuinely ill]. But on the topic of 'no reason', what about Nassa? Morgan giving up I can understand, but a man with Nick has only had good/neutral dealings with? A man looking at a woman who charged and just went into melee range with a Big Bad to help save his life?

C: We have had years asking about Nicole's logic and while some of it I get some of it make little sense. However her set og triggers are perfectly fine, what is not fine is demanding that everyone else in game will be ok with them. Fran think Nick is dangerously uunstable and is hurt and flabbergasted by her reaction and that is normal, basically you have I feel some choices when making a character, if you do not want a character to get negative reaction for being prikly do not make a character with tons of hidden triggers because pepole will react badly. If I meet someone who go ballistic because I wear a black shrit and they hate pepole wearing black because it triggers something in them and they go raging at me for it I am not goign to want to spend time with this person. I might understand and sympatize but I would think them nuts and think I have no need of that drama in my life.

If Fran thinks Nicole is 'dangerously unstable' after she got upset/annoyed after she repeatedly insulted her Science, then I would say that's a Fran problem. Of all the things Nicole has done to piss people off, you can't say 'insulting another's magick/science' is one of them [this is why Nick has deliberately avoided talking about their 'Wheel of Life/Death' thing to Fran and even soft-pedals her atheism with Choristers]. Of course she is prickly about it - Mage is about willpower and if Nicole doesn't believe that all her Science is 100% right they won't work, will they? It is quite possible [for example] that during the Horizon interlude Fran falls into talking with Anton Van Hess about the issue, and he gently replies 'I think you might have insulted her Science, miss', leading to her at least understanding the logic of it, even if she doesn't agree.

Lastly, outside of this one topic Fran and Nick do in fact get on fairly okay. No relationship is perfect, is it? And as these are people who at times, literally hear voices and in Fran's case kills seemingly random people for a semi-religious justification... now, who are you to lecture me on being 'unstable', eh? Pot, say hello to kettle!

Look at it this way, one of the bullis who was after me as a kid was from a horrible home where he should have been moved, he and his seven siblings had been split up and his foster parents was abusive. The teacher said to my mother when she complained about how this boy treated me. "But M have such a horrible home." My mother replied "Yeah well then rapport it to social services that M have a bad home do not eman he get to bully Anja." I mean I get why he lashed out, now as an adult looking back I can even forgive as I get it but that do not mean M's actions should not get any consequenses.

And what would you [or your mother] have thought if the teacher's proposed solution would have been 'don't worry, I'll keep on punishing him with no explanation of why I'm doing it or showing them the right way to go about things'? This is why I say the likes of Morgan are acting like a 'seagull manager' - in Nicole's POV, he makes a lot of noise, then randomly shits on her. And it's got to the stage she simply doesn't want to get shit on anymore - and 'passive characters who never take the initiative or chat' are really dull to play.

D: And here is where not getting your logic kick in, you say no you do not want Nicole to always be right but you are complaning that NPCs are reacting you your rude, crude, extremely prickly character. You ahve basically maxed out making Nicole hard to get along with and then complain with it is hard to get along with her. I can not for the life of me understand what it is you want here. Her eis also the problem Jeffry while he have a bit of a temper is moderate and progressive, that you see him as rigid and basically a tyrant makes no sense to me, and I do not really see how that can be reconsiled as it makes no sense. Also the problem is Nicole have been so badly behaved towards everyone there is very, very little goodwill left to bend the rules or to try to understand her that is also something that come with behabing in such a way. Jeffry have bent, he have tried, have have done more for Nicole than for anyone to reach her and be understanding and that you do not see that means we do not really speak the same language here.

I don't see Morgan as 'rigid and a tyrant' OOC, I see a guy who is out of his depth when it comes to trying to manage someone like Nicole [and before you say anything, I get she's not easy], and as such it's making the situation worse because they're caught in a negative feedback loop and it's getting increasingly toxic. In RL, chances are Nicole would simply leave [folks leave toxic workplaces/bosses all the time] but this is not a real option here because if Nicole 'leaves' her story ends. You say 'I can not for the life of me understand what it is you want here' but the thing is, I have said repeatedly. Let me spell it out one last time.

For Morgan to think 'I am not getting through to Nicole' and to start wondering if a different management style would work better.

Also,

For Morgan to decide what he wants from Nicole and then actively, openly telling her this and how it can be achieved.

This doesn't result in 'giving Nicole what she wants'. It's clearly communicating what he wants from her and if needed, getting her the training how to achieve it [and in return, and if she doesn't think it's a trap, Nicole communicating back what she wants]. Because basically, she is a de facto member of the security team for Steelhaven [which means in org terms Morgan is also her direct boss] and he admits she has her uses. What was he expecting? In the world of work, it's rare for a new hire to turn up not only with 100% of the skills they want, but knowing exactly what the culture of the workplace is and their duties [official or not]. This is known in management as 'onboarding'.

I also question how Nicole has been 'so badly behaved'. Yes, she as pissed off a few people - Morgan, Colin and Adley the top of this list. But that's not everyone; in fact that's a minority. I'd argue the majority of her interactions with other Chantry members has been positive or neutral. Yes, she has had a few bust-ups with other NPCs over time, but... not sure here. Are you assuming she's going about constantly picking fights [she won't; once 'burned' she leaves them be]. Or that these NPCs are so thin-skinned they hold a single argument against Nicole forever? Yes, a few of her 'antics' might have left them shaking their heads [though again, they won't all be of the same opinion that it was wrong or if it was, how wrong] but again, there's been positives too which will count in her favour.

We are basically back to a player who made a stereotypical die with their boots on Anarch and then complain that they are not accepted by most of the Camarilla.)

Except this isn't true. And the fact you keep on saying this despite telling you otherwise is telling. I accept on the surface Nicole appears to be this, but IC conversations show that while her Sleeper politics are radical to the point of being hard-left, her Awakened politics are much more of the reformist stamp. Can't NPCs tell the difference? So in this case, she's less an VtM Anarch and more a VtR Carthian.

Let us not forget, that in some key areas Nicole is in agreement with the prevailing mood in the Chantry - for example, on the idea of Fallen avatars [though she has differing reasons]. I'd argue here [from an OOC management POV] that the Chantry's expectations are simply too high. That they expect someone who agrees with them, is 100% trained, a 'good fit' with their culture and never screws up and in return they offer throwing their lot in with some pretty major Big Bads which could very well kill them. To quote Colin IC back at the start - 'it's an invitation to put your box with our boxes in a middle of a minefield'.

You tell me. How is this so attractive to a possible hire?

I am going to argue here that Steelhaven is in fact in a bit of a tight position when it comes to personnel. That there's too many Awakened who if offered Steelhaven, would reject it. It's not hugely wealthy a Chantry, it's seemingly constantly fighting something, it's made some powerful enemies and has members pushing some very unpopular policies [I'm not saying it's a nobody, but it's not a major player yet, esp to Etherites]. Therefore, the Chantry's leadership can't afford to be too picky in recruitment, and at times might need to accept folks who's 'talents' and 'worth' are more potential than actual - like a second-rank football team might need to make gambles on 'undiscovered' players because they cannot afford to hire the existing [discovered] talent or talent which comes with some baggage.

In this respect, Nicole is a classic 'rough diamond' character. The Chantry can either decide to make some effort to 'polish her up' to see if that works or they can simply toss her away because she's not instantly ready to be set into a ring. I am merely suggesting they take the first option rather than the second.

I will have the split this reply up over several posts as yesterday I went playing Pathfinder, today I am going out to a support group meeting and tomorrow I am playing D&D so my batteries are a bit charged out.

Never said it wasn't. Everyone has their berserk buttons, hangups and sore points. What's more, folks often have 'foot in mouth' issues which if the other party accepts was a genuine mistake, will normally forgive after a while - including Nick.

Absolutely however if one constantly blow up on others due to one's hand up and issues that generally will make you an unpleasant person to be around, even if the other party understand where the issue come from.

Nicole only got annoyed with Fran because she insulted her professional credibility, not because 'she disagreed'. Plus unless Fran doubles-down on it, the anger will pass. She feels a little betrayed yes [she thought Fran knew her better] but she's been around long enough to not blow it out of proportion. Nicole does not hate people because they disagree with her.

Nicole's views aren't 'beyond reason', they are reasoning you don't agree with. This world is full of people who have different thought patterns; there is no 'one and right way' to think on anything [though there are perhaps 'wrong' ways to think about things, like those who are genuinely ill]. But on the topic of 'no reason', what about Nassa? Morgan giving up I can understand, but a man with Nick has only had good/neutral dealings with? A man looking at a woman who charged and just went into melee range with a Big Bad to help save his life?

That is the problem Fran did not, no one other than Nicole think she did that is the problem. And it is perfectly fine to have a character who have unreasonable hang ups where even innocent comments are taken as grave insults, I have characters like that as well, the problem is that when you have berserk buttons like that where even innocent comments are taken as insults then others will tend to avoid you as no one want to constantly walk on eggshells.

Look at it this way when I was a kid I was constantly bullied. When I went on a boat trip to Denmark with my mother a kid my age asked me if I wanted to dance and I yelled at him. I thought it was a trap, a chance to bully me more as that had happened so many times. Yes there was reasons for my actions but I can not fault that kid if he now an adult still remember the crazy bitch who just went off at him for asking her to dance. Even if it is understandable such behavior is alienating.

Nassa have no issues with Nicole and he like her. He thought Jeffry was right in the situation in the hallway but he recon Nicole's protests are due to not knowing just how fricking fast a Archmage of Life can regenerate.

If Fran thinks Nicole is 'dangerously unstable' after she got upset/annoyed after she repeatedly insulted her Science, then I would say that's a Fran problem. Of all the things Nicole has done to piss people off, you can't say 'insulting another's magick/science' is one of them [this is why Nick has deliberately avoided talking about their 'Wheel of Life/Death' thing to Fran and even soft-pedals her atheism with Choristers]. Of course she is prickly about it - Mage is about willpower and if Nicole doesn't believe that all her Science is 100% right they won't work, will they? It is quite possible [for example] that during the Horizon interlude Fran falls into talking with Anton Van Hess about the issue, and he gently replies 'I think you might have insulted her Science, miss', leading to her at least understanding the logic of it, even if she doesn't agree.

Lastly, outside of this one topic Fran and Nick do in fact get on fairly okay. No relationship is perfect, is it? And as these are people who at times, literally hear voices and in Fran's case kills seemingly random people for a semi-religious justification... now, who are you to lecture me on being 'unstable', eh? Pot, say hello to kettle!

I mean we have been over it before and I know Nicole is not advocating random violence but the way she talks do make it sound like that. The rumor of this person who advocate in many of the NPCs minds violent revolution combined with what Fran see as extreme mood swings and hidden triggers that make her go off for no reason will make her think Nick is dangerous unstable. That do not mean she is correct but Fran have not read the OOC posts. But yes Fran might talk with some of those who have had more to do with Nicole and her opinion can change.

To explain better how I mean. In the series Them, one of the main characters have PTSD due to have been tested mustard gas on in the military, the gas giving of a sweet smell before he got excruciating pain. When his daughter bake him a pie the sweet smell triggers his PTSD and he yell at the kid and toss the plate with the pie in the wall. Now looking at this from outside the audience can sympathize with why but that do not mean it was a reasonable response or that the kid did not have right to be sad and upset at her father for his reaction to something as innocent as giving him a slice of pie. The child did nothing wrong, and while the father's triggered reaction is understandable it still make him seam unstable to anyone who do not know his backstory.

And what would you [or your mother] have thought if the teacher's proposed solution would have been 'don't worry, I'll keep on punishing him with no explanation of why I'm doing it or showing them the right way to go about things'? This is why I say the likes of Morgan are acting like a 'seagull manager' - in Nicole's POV, he makes a lot of noise, then randomly shits on her. And it's got to the stage she simply doesn't want to get shit on anymore - and 'passive characters who never take the initiative or chat' are really dull to play.

We would want the kid to have help, however he could not be allowed to keep bullying me. Basically just letting him continue because he have a bad home is not a solution either.

Here is the thing Nicole's reaction to Jeffry are completely understandable, that is not where the issue lies. The problem is your demand I change his character to make him and everyone else not react badly to Nicole. For him she is crude, rude and entitled who constantly question his decisions, not just questioning them arguing against them, in the field, in front of others. Now he acknowledge she is a skilled security officer but he is not sure her behavior issues are worth it.

I don't see Morgan as 'rigid and a tyrant' OOC, I see a guy who is out of his depth when it comes to trying to manage someone like Nicole [and before you say anything, I get she's not easy], and as such it's making the situation worse because they're caught in a negative feedback loop and it's getting increasingly toxic. In RL, chances are Nicole would simply leave [folks leave toxic workplaces/bosses all the time] but this is not a real option here because if Nicole 'leaves' her story ends. You say 'I can not for the life of me understand what it is you want here' but the thing is, I have said repeatedly. Let me spell it out one last time.

For Morgan to think 'I am not getting through to Nicole' and to start wondering if a different management style would work better.

Also,

For Morgan to decide what he wants from Nicole and then actively, openly telling her this and how it can be achieved.

Here is the problem, it is not a buyers market for young mages wanting to find a Chantry to belong to, especially not a well established late spring/summer Chantry like Steelhaven.

Your demands here is a bit like when you have someone who is right out of collage in a field where there are more applicants for jobs than there are jobs available who demand special treatment and that the boss change their entire way of doing thigns to make them happy.

If Nicole have any spesific requests then by all means Jeffry might listen to her and see what he can do. He was asked if he could treat Serge a bit softer than most and did so, speaking more softly to the kid than most other mages. However he is not going to change his entire leadership style because someone who frankly are lucky to be able to be part of a powerful Chantry want it her own way.

Look at it this way if we go back to Vampire, are the Sheriff going to change his way to behaving because one young Neonate who he think might make a good deputy but who still is one of many and really are lucky to even having gotten to stay in the city, are unhappy with his leadership style?

As for what Jeffry want from Nicole it is very simple:

To contribude to the Chantry in the ways she can, just like everyone else.

Try to be a good neigbour with the other members of the Chantry.

That is it. Now he can see her as an assistant in keeping the Chantry safe, especially when George elave and Narim take over and the Chantry get more technologically present having a Technomancer to help with security would be useful but he still will demand the respect his position warrents.

However Nicole is welcome to come to him with her requests and he will listen. He will also listen to complaints but not in the field in front of those he is supposed to lead as that undermine his authority and he can not have that in a combat situation. Think of it like in Werwolf where the Pack Leader can always be challanged but not when the Pack is at war or in a combat situation.

Ok I will reply more later I do not have more time for it now.

Okay. I will reply to it all once you have covered all the points.

Ok to make this a bit shorter as I do not see a point in going over the same points again or to go over every situation in the game. It seams this boil down to the simple point of you and me having completely different views of reality.

To me Jeffry is a reasonable, perhaps a bit old fashioned but kind, respectful man who is a good and understanding leader, To you he is not. Ultimately an NPC are controlled of how I see the world and I can not understand yours. I can see how Nicole in character have a problem with most who are authority figures but your ooc complaints I can not understand you.

I can make NPCs and try to match them to Nicole's points of views but as I do not get her or your points I can not promise they will be perfect. I can not make NPCs conform with her points of view or stop being annoyed at her behavior. I do not see their behaviors as wrong or that Nicole is treated wrong and I can not run a game with NPC behaving in some way I do not even understand.

To me this is that you have made a character who are at odds with the opinions, behavior and social norms of most everyone else and who is prickly and generally hard to like in addition and then you protest when others do not like your character. Sorry but I can not do anything about that.

I have shown this conflict to gamer friends and one of them said it is like if in a D&D game where the GM are running a campaign set in Menzoberransan and one of the players decide to play a Lawful Good character hellbent on changing the society, fight for male rights and stand up against the Matron Mothers and then the player the pissy when this result in negative social situations for the character.

Another player said it is like if you want to play Cyberpunk, have made a character perfect for Cyberpunk and then get annoyed when the world this character live in do not conform to the Cyberpunk setting she was made for even if the game was never Cyberpunk.

In short I can not change how NPCs react to Nicole unless she change how she behave. I am perfectly ok to have a rebel character in the game, but the thing is rebels are seldom liked, this conflict give good RPG opportunities and I am happy to run with that. But will I change the game world to fit your idels no I am not going to do that.

I ask this, then.

What do you suggest I do to to fix this situation, then?

I would suggest that if you want allies who agree with Nicole I can set up a plot for that. Other than that I am not sure. I just can not give you want you want, most members of Steelhaven will react negatively to the way Nicole act, there are exceptions but most would however I can set up a more rebel storyline by for example getting her into contact with the Disperates.

[If] one constantly blow up on others due to one's hang up and issues that generally will make you an unpleasant person to be around

I dispute the idea that Nicole is constantly getting into arguments with people. There will be many [alas, offscreen] conversations where Nicole will be neutal or even friendly - she is a person who is generous [within limits] and willing to help out. In some respects, I'd argue the Nick-Serge interactions will be more 'the norm' than the shitshow which is Nick-Morgan. How about Nick-Cava? Or Nick-Kinfolk? Or even Nick and the Thig salesperson at the expo?

To me this is that you have made a character who are at odds with the opinions, behavior and social norms of most everyone else and who is prickly and generally hard to like in addition and then you protest when others do not like your character. Sorry but I can not do anything about that.

Actually, you can. Give Nicole more 'fluffy' scenes with NPCs she's not interacted before [or even ones she has] So you get more internal examples of Nicole being friendly / helpful / nice / playful. Because I think the issue here partly because of a 'selection bias' ie the scenes we play.

That is the problem Fran did not, no one other than Nicole think she did that is the problem. And it is perfectly fine to have a character who have unreasonable hang ups where even innocent comments are taken as grave insults, I have characters like that as well, the problem is that when you have berserk buttons like that where even innocent comments are taken as insults then others will tend to avoid you as no one want to constantly walk on eggshells.

Welcome to Nicole's world! She didn't mean to insult Morgan about 'comparing his apprentice to the Union' but that's the way he took it. What happened in both situations was that innocent comments were taken the wrong way and the other party has to live with that. Like in RL, either the 'offending' party either a) apologises and/or b) resolves to never touch that topic again [like Nick has with Morgan > Union or Gottschalk > Nazis] or they continue pressing that beserk button out of sheer bloody-mindedness. I'm going to say here a) Nick is not going to keep on pressing the button and b) I am going to assume most NPCs won't either. Even if they believe they are right. Unless the topic is something which is a 'make or break' issue.

Nassa have no issues with Nicole and he like her. He thought Jeffry was right in the situation in the hallway but he recon Nicole's protests are due to not knowing just how fricking fast a Archmage of Life can regenerate.

Yet he's also given up on her? If she'd been smarter, I would have had Nicole giving an 'et tu, Nassa?' look to him.

I mean we have been over it before and I know Nicole is not advocating random violence but the way she talks do make it sound like that. The rumor of this person who advocate in many of the NPCs minds violent revolution combined with what Fran see as extreme mood swings and hidden triggers that make her go off for no reason will make her think Nick is dangerous unstable. That do not mean she is correct but Fran have not read the OOC posts. But yes Fran might talk with some of those who have had more to do with Nicole and her opinion can change.

I think there's been enough social Fran/Nick interaction for her to know that Nicole is only really proud of two things - her Science and her mundane career as a mechanic. If someone is proud of something, they're not likely to be happy it being belittled or outright insulted.

Here is the thing Nicole's reaction to Jeffry are completely understandable, that is not where the issue lies. The problem is your demand I change his character to make him and everyone else not react badly to Nicole. For him she is crude, rude and entitled who constantly question his decisions, not just questioning them arguing against them, in the field, in front of others. Now he acknowledge she is a skilled security officer but he is not sure her behavior issues are worth it.

Are NPCs not allowed their own 'character development', then? That he's not allowed to wonder whether something can be done to lessen the 'crude, rude and entitled' nature of Nicole apart from simply yelling at her? You keep on saying that Steelhaven is moving into 'summer' - perhaps part of this growth is where Morgan [amongst other seniors] improve their person-management skills so they can get 'the best' out of folks like Nicole?

Here is the problem, it is not a buyers market for young mages wanting to find a Chantry to belong to, especially not a well established late spring/summer Chantry like Steelhaven.

This might be true, but this is where 'realism' fucks up.

Nicole could survive at Steelhaven for a very long time - in fact, as things stand now I don't actually see her causing any more problems. She will not offend anyone again because she will not have any meaningful conversations with anybody. She will not make mistakes because she will never take initiative. She won't 'undermine his authority' because she will never say anything unless directly bidden. This is known as a 'loss minimisation strategy'; and as Nicole doesn't know what exactly is wrong or why, the best method is to simply stop doing anything which might be 'a risk'.

Millions of people do this every day. This is known as the 'time clock mentality'; where folks just go through the motions, fulfilling the demands of their employer and not a bit more. I can RP that in my sleep. Issue is;

a) That's really boring from a player POV.
b) That's rubbish from an ST POV because I'd never follow up any plot hooks unless you literally put them into her neck and yanked it.
c) You would have to effectively create a whole new world of folks for Nicole to interact with which wasn't the Chantry.

a) will drive me to end up quitting, b) is not fair on you and c) is really not fair on you.

You suggest;

Nicole is welcome to come to him with her requests and he will listen.

but she won't right now. Experience has 'taught her' that he doesn't want to hear alternative views unless explicitly bidden and even then, to not cross any of his own views or assumptions. He [or Nassa] should have noticed that at this point she is defensive to the point of actually expecting being physically attacked. Any reasonable management trainer shall tell you; if you want to really have your subordinates genuinely 'push upwards' new ideas and so on, you have to create an enviroment where the subordinates feel that they can do this.

In short I can not change how NPCs react to Nicole unless she change how she behave. I am perfectly ok to have a rebel character in the game, but the thing is rebels are seldom liked, this conflict give good RPG opportunities and I am happy to run with that. But will I change the game world to fit your idels no I am not going to do that.

Nicole has now changed. That's the issue. It 'fixes' the immediate issue but at the cost of making her a shit PC from a roleplay POV [and isn't good for the Chantry either as it makes her a less valuable asset]. The question is; are certain NPCs going to think 'wait, I'm not sure this is better?' and perhaps consider a different strategy or are they going to simply think 'this is all just a Nicole problem' and continue with the seagulling?

No one is saying you should play a character who just go though the motions, no one. What I am saying is that if you think Jeffry is a idiot boss who is an asshole because he have some limits he will not see crossed then really your logic make zero sense to me.

The problem have never been Nicole's character, she is a great character. Having a character who is a rebel is not a problem at all. The problem is you expect NPCs to not react badly to a rebel, especially one who is prickly and quite often rather rude and crude that is the issue. That Nicole and Jeffry butt heads are perfectly fine that you expect me to chance Jeffry so that he will agree with and behave in a way Nicole want is not.

I am not going to go though a wall of text about every little point as we have done so allot of times before.

Again NO ONE is telling you to place a card punching character, none of the other PCs are. YOu can play Nicole jsut as you want to play her however that yes mean many will have a bad reaction to her.

Nicole reminds me of Agrippa, he spoke out against the establishment in the 1500's Europe, he spoke openly about magic, he spoke against the Church and even advocated for women's rights and he was flabbergasted when he lost jobs, was arrested and generally was seen as a outcast. Now Agrippa is cool, he is a really interesting person but he was not well liked in his time.

You can not make an Agrippa in a Renaissance world and then be upset when those around him react badly to him but that do not mean he is a bad character or that you should not play a character like that.