Post/Author/DateTime	Post
lostpike 04-16-07, 11:26 PM	I am looking for the AR where I can create my team. I have access to the team benefits but dont know where to find the team creation sheet. Thanks David
lostpike 04-17-07, 04:25 AM	Second question, Does everyone on the team have to have access to the team benefit or only that benefit leader?
vvincent 04-17-07, 08:22 AM	I am looking for the AR where I can create my team. I have access to the team benefits but dont know where to find the team creation sheet. Thanks David Hmmm. I know that when we have released adventures that included Teamwork Benefits, the document has always accompanied the AR - which should be standard procedure. Contact the con coordinator/DM of your event. If they can't provide it - contact the regional Triad (if it's a regional adventure) or the Circle (if it's a Core). Second question, Does everyone on the team have to have access to the team benefit or only that benefit leader? Everyone has to have access to the benefit. Vernon L. Vincent
lostpike 04-18-07, 12:00 AM	know where to find the official posts on this?
pedr 04-18-07, 06:36 AM	It will, presumably, be entirely up to the way your local triad (or the Core team) chooses to implement the rules option. Teamwork benefits are Closed except to characters who have specific access to them, so you need to refer to whatever campaign documentation gave access to find the answers. There won't be a single campaign-wide pronouncement on it, I don't expect, until and unless they are included for Open access by the next LGCS.
taylorj 04-18-07, 12:20 PM	Teamwork benefits are Closed except to characters who have specific access to them Sooo... you're saying they're Limited access? :shifty:
bitznarf 04-18-07, 12:42 PM	Teamwork benefits are Closed except to characters who have specific access to them... Strictly speaking this is not true: Closed: A PC may not take advantage of any rules item listed as Closed, ever. Thus if it was closed, a PC would never be able to use the teamwork benefits.
pedr 04-18-07, 12:59 PM	Ah, I was about to apologise, and then I realised that, technically, I'm not wrong. Teamwork benefits are Closed unless you have campaign documention opening them. The extract from the LGCS you quoted refers to "rules options in this document". As teamwork benefits aren't in the LGCS, the line doesn't apply to them. This can be seen more clearly thus: teamwork benefits are not listed as Closed in the LGCS. Therefore the statement that "[a] PC may not take advantage of any rules item listed as Closed, ever." does not apply to them. This doesn't mean they're not Closed to most PCs in the campaign, at present. That is a terribly tortuous exposition, however. Perhaps it would be better to describe them as not-Open except to characters with campaign documentation opening them. My love of the English language balks at considering "not-Open" and "Closed" as two separate states, however, and it is clear from the line "If a rules option is not included in this document, you must have campaign documentation Opening it for your PC" that things are only Open if they are either listed as Open in the LGCS or you receive that campaign documentation. Everything else is, by deduction, not-Open. Therefore everything is Closed, unless you have campaign documentation. The Closed list in the LGCS merely indicates those rules options which will never be Opened. That clear now? :D
bitznarf 04-18-07, 02:48 PM	From a logic standpoint, if something is 'not-Black' does not mean that it is White. In the same way being 'not-Open' does not mean something is Closed. The problem with your statement is equating not-Open to Closed. And there is actually a term that has been introduced in a semi/non official way to describe those rules options that are neither Open nor Closed: NONC. In the same way, just because something is not-Closed does not mean it is Open.
pedr 04-18-07, 03:07 PM	I would argue that there are only two logical states for something which can be described as 'open', namely 'open' and 'closed'. Timlagor's 'ajar' is, I suppose, a possible third state, but I'd say that a door which is ajar is open, not closed. I think I have support for this in the LGCS system which speaks of 'Opening' rules options for characters. Of course we're arguing semantics and if I'm not careful I'll invite an Oxford Living Greyhawk reunion where Timlagor and King Kashue and I can rehash an argument had in a different thread (which I stayed out of, I'll note!) I suppose the long and short of this is that I support the classification into Open and Closed and see no real need for a third category. Everything's Closed unless there's campaign documentation saying it's Open. The LGCS lists some things which are always Open, and some things which are always Closed. Everything else is at the very least 'not-Open' unless you have campaign documentation.
bitznarf 04-18-07, 03:26 PM	Well, if you don't feel like discussing the semantics of this, thats fine by me. Feel free to look me up if you change your mind though ;)
pedr 04-18-07, 03:35 PM	Heh, I've enjoyed it ... but it's not actually helping the OP anymore :D I agree with your Online Campaign, though!