Post/Author/DateTime	Post
IMarvinTPA 06-03-07, 03:16 PM	Ok, I've scoured the LGCS, and I can't find a term for something that is not in either list. The closest I've got is "Non-Open". But that, in my mind, includes Closed things. BTW, when did they change from Core, Limited, NPC, and Restricted to Open, undesignated, and Closed with a note, and Closed? I'm trying to re-update my spell database since at least one user has asked about it recently. IMarv
kenobi65 06-03-07, 03:39 PM	Ok, I've scoured the LGCS, and I can't find a term for something that is not in either list. The closest I've got is "Non-Open". But that, in my mind, includes Closed things. There is no official term for this. The unofficial term seems to be "NONC" (Neither Open Nor Closed). BTW, when did they change from Core, Limited, NPC, and Restricted to Open, undesignated, and Closed with a note, and Closed? With this year's LGCS. And, fundamentally, there are only 3 categories now: Open, NONC, and Closed.
Timlagor 06-03-07, 04:27 PM	Noncy is such a silly term. I use Ajar or Unlisted.
Lupo 06-03-07, 06:12 PM	Ok, I've scoured the LGCS, and I can't find a term for something that is not in either list. The closest I've got is "Non-Open". But that, in my mind, includes Closed things. BTW, when did they change from Core, Limited, NPC, and Restricted to Open, undesignated, and Closed with a note, and Closed? I'm trying to re-update my spell database since at least one user has asked about it recently. IMarv schroedingerish :P ciao martin m.
clannagh 06-03-07, 08:27 PM	Noncy is such a silly term. I use Ajar or Unlisted. are you suggesting its NONCense ???
LGMoses 06-04-07, 02:02 AM	I call NONC limited and that works well. Limited. easy to remember and understand.
frupton 06-04-07, 02:37 AM	schroedingerish :P ciao martin m. I'll do my best to propagate this one.
GenghisBob 06-04-07, 03:06 AM	AJAR! what else would you call it?
clannagh 06-04-07, 03:18 AM	schroedingerish :P ciao martin m. technically that would mean the feat/prc becomes illegal once your use of it is observed but its status is undefined before that point
Britt 06-04-07, 03:28 AM	Or that it's both legal and illegal until your use is observed, at which point there is a nigh infinite possibility that it becomes illegal, without campaign documentation.
Mocoso 06-04-07, 08:01 AM	I call NONC limited and that works well. Limited. easy to remember and understand. I think we should all just call it limited. trying to force people to not use a term for it, just because the triads believe if it's limited people will try to seek it out is backward-thinking.
Ralis 06-04-07, 11:42 AM	Now about just "NA" for Needs Acess.
Dr.Cornelius 06-04-07, 01:28 PM	I'm trying to re-update my spell database...Your database rocks - Thanks!
Britt 06-04-07, 01:50 PM	I think we should all just call it limited. trying to force people to not use a term for it, just because the triads believe if it's limited people will try to seek it out is backward-thinking. You can call it Susan for all I care. The point is that if you name something and discuss it, you draw attention to it, thereby increasing the amount of time people spend thinking about it. People should be focusing on Open and adapting to new rules options as they gain access.
RedKnightofKet 06-04-07, 02:08 PM	You can call it Susan for all I care.... So, the Complete Champion is....Susan? :rimshot: Sorry - couldn't resist :D
KarmaInferno 06-04-07, 02:27 PM	You can call it Susan for all I care. The point is that if you name something and discuss it, you draw attention to it, thereby increasing the amount of time people spend thinking about it. People should be focusing on Open and adapting to new rules options as they gain access. What people "should be" doing and what they will do are two separate things. I see folks pestering their Triads to introduce NONC stuff into new regional mods now, as much as they used to pester over Limited stuff. There's been no real change. It is human nature to think about what you can't have. By not naming a category that everyone is using anyway, you are only creating a confusion in semantics where before there was a clear understandable term that everyone knew. People will continue to focus on this category regardless of your wishes. You can either be stubborn and continue to ignore it, or try to work WITH that tendency to achieve your goals, not against the flow. -karma
Britt 06-04-07, 02:32 PM	Actually, I have noticed a dramatic decrease in the amount of discussion and requests for Susan stuff. Yes, some people will always want it, but some will never think about it now and others will think about it less.
TetsujinOni 06-04-07, 02:48 PM	I have to fall on the side of Britt's position here... There is really only one category to worry about as a player: Open. For writers, there's similarly only one category to really worry about: Closed. If you get access to a special item, it may not even be from a source you were expecting - I have access to some Dragon magazine item that I've never seen, and haven't been able to track down the issue to see what it does... And it even fits the RP background of the character who got it! (Crazy luck, that). Short version: this is much simpler than the FOUR lists that used to exist.
Mocoso 06-04-07, 03:48 PM	Actually, I have noticed a dramatic decrease in the amount of discussion and requests for LIMITED stuff. Yes, some people will always want it, but some will never think about it now and others will think about it less. ... and yet, it will always come up as new people play the game... Hey! that solves the problem! Don't let new people play! GOOD IDEA.
Mocoso 06-04-07, 03:51 PM	I have to fall on the side of Britt's position here... There is really only one category to worry about as a player: Open. And when a new player gets something on an AR and looks it up and it's not on the Open list and it's not on the Closed list they think "oh no, i can't use it --- so now what?" and this issue will keep appearing. A simple definitiion in the LGCS, would cure that "anything not on the Open list is considered Limited and must be achieved through campaign documentation." No the BS answer of "if nobody talks about it, nobody will worry about it" WRONG!
RedKnightofKet 06-04-07, 05:24 PM	And when a new player gets something on an AR and looks it up and it's not on the Open list and it's not on the Closed list they think "oh no, i can't use it --- so now what?" and this issue will keep appearing. A simple definitiion in the LGCS, would cure that "anything not on the Open list is considered Limited and must be achieved through campaign documentation." No the BS answer of "if nobody talks about it, nobody will worry about it" WRONG! Ummm... page 11, as follows: Chapter Four: Rulebooks The rules options in this document are divided into two types of access: Open and Closed. See Appendix 4 for more details on these classifications. If a rules option is not included in this document, you must have campaign documentation Opening it for your PC. It does say it. :rolleyes:
bitznarf 06-04-07, 07:47 PM	For writers, there's similarly only one category to really worry about: Closed. Technically speaking writers don't have to worry about Closed. Closed only applies to PCs, not NPCs. What writers do have to worry about are some internal documents that are only available to the Circle and Triads (I think).
clannagh 06-04-07, 08:06 PM	You can call it Susan for all I care. The point is that if you name something and discuss it, you draw attention to it, thereby increasing the amount of time people spend thinking about it. People should be focusing on Open and adapting to new rules options as they gain access. First Shrodinger and now Wittgenstein. This game is getting very complex.
Lupo 06-04-07, 08:47 PM	First Shrodinger and now Wittgenstein. This game is getting very complex. yea, heinlein had made a book about it :) you know the poor shroedinger cat? the one sitting undetermined in the box with the poison. now schrödinger postulated two possible outcomes, but no way to determine the outcome before looking into the box. according to heinlein the cat just found the experiment boring and left the box. if the state of the cat is not certain, how do you proof that the place is certain??? :D (and you remember, the experiment forbids ANY testing or measuring of the box). this is much like the situation of the circle, the moment they try to keep the box with NONC items shut, everyone is jumping on the opportunities to get hold of the few items that are handed out. creating a hype for certain classes/feats/spells for a short while and then either losing interest or - due to the vast number of players toying with it - coming up with certain ueber combinations that break the game to some extend. i do see the idea behind simply not naming the single NONC options for calming down the hype to some extend. whether this is the best way of handling it i don't know. ciao martin m.
solbergb 06-04-07, 09:12 PM	Ok, I've scoured the LGCS, and I can't find a term for something that is not in either list. The closest I've got is "Non-Open". But that, in my mind, includes Closed things. The big shift was from the concept of "open/limited/npc/closed" as a global thing to a given item/feat/spell/PRC/etc being open or closed for YOUR CHARACTER. Ie, everythign is closed if it isn't open from documentation you have. When you get documentation that changes it, more stuff is open FOR YOU. closed means you don't have access yet. Barring special mission (and for items, even that doesn't work) you can't build a character around something that isn't open, because most closed things will never open for your character. Closed in the LGCS means you won't ever get access. That's all. Closed with "author only" dagger means the bad guys might get access. Closed without "author only" I think is supposed to be similar to the old "restricted" category (nobody never gets access onscreen) but some postings from the circle have indicated it is more like "nobody never gets access onscreen unless we allow it for a special occasion" which is a lot scarier. But if they abuse it, we'll all howl and policy will likely change.
dkay807 06-04-07, 09:34 PM	What a silly debate. The LGCS is explicit. Whether items that are neither open nor closed have a name of their own or not is irrelevant, new players will ask the same questions. It's a small price to pay for the more simplified LGCS breakdown. Cheers to the LGCS 7.0 (or is it 7.5 now?)
cycloptic_squirrel 06-04-07, 09:46 PM	schroedingerish :P *ponders how many ranks in knowledge(24th century technology) he would need to craft a Heisenberg Compensator and jury rig it to his campaign access* Hmm... I might need to set aside a feat for skill focus...
frupton 06-04-07, 09:47 PM	What a silly debate. The LGCS is explicit. Whether items that are neither open nor closed have a name of their own or not is irrelevant, new players will ask the same questions. It's a small price to pay for the more simplified LGCS breakdown. Cheers to the LGCS 7.0 (or is it 7.5 now?) I think it's "Cheers to Susan."
clannagh 06-04-07, 10:41 PM	What a silly debate. The LGCS is explicit. Whether items that are neither open nor closed have a name of their own or not is irrelevant, new players will ask the same questions. It's a small price to pay for the more simplified LGCS breakdown. Cheers to the LGCS 7.0 (or is it 7.5 now?) That is not true. Mid-last year (back around Aprilto June from memory) there was a long series of complaints by one particular poster about restricted access being "unfair" and basically saying that circle had no right putting restrictions on him/her as a player unless they applied to everyone (in other words were banned outright). The player in question saw character development as a competition and other players gettign AR or metaorg access to something restricted as a "cheat" that gave them unfair advantage in his race to create the coolest funkiest most damage dealing etc character. There has been a distinct drop off of posts of the "why is xxx restricted, i demand access to it" style whinging since the names change. I think its one of the cleverest moves circle ever made.
Puggle Halfwine 06-04-07, 11:20 PM	You can call it Susan for all I care. Snatch rules! <3 Britt!
IMarvinTPA 06-04-07, 11:21 PM	It is pretty clever. Up until a database maintainer (IE me) tries to give a value to everything in the database and finds that most of the entries have no value. But at least I have an understanding of the logic now. (And a realization that I need to update the labels.) IMarv
Britt 06-04-07, 11:28 PM	Snatch rules! <3 Britt! 10 points for Puggle.
cycloptic_squirrel 06-05-07, 12:55 AM	10 points for Puggle. Am I missing something, or is Puggle just really good at recognizing obsure references to a six year old unfilmed screenplay?
Britt 06-05-07, 12:58 AM	Snatch was a pretty big movie. Not sure what you mean by unfilmed screenplay.
cycloptic_squirrel 06-05-07, 01:31 AM	Oh, yeah. I definitely missed something. Short version: nevermind, not important. I misread Puggle's comment to mean "I snatch the rules away!" rather than "Snatch is an awesome movie!" Not getting what I thought was a reference, I did what I normally do, I went to goggle. There were only two words I deemed significant (snatch and Susan) which I would expect a lot of noise in the results, but if you narrow your search parameters just right... anyway, near the top of the list was this screenplay (http://chrismoore.com/griff_screenplay.html) which was written by Chris Moore, but never filmed, so he put it up on the internet for his fans. I'm not quite sure of your literary tastes Britt, but I figured Moore wouldn't be stretch. Turns out Susan was a character that was in the script for half a page, after which she got snatched away and eaten by griffons. That was closely followed (page-wise) by a conversation how the past does not matter (i.g. it does not matter that one of the main character worked the makeup counter at the department store; he now acts as a soldier and he has a BFG, so he's awesome). I surmised that Susan's name didn't matter, since that's in the past, much like the term 'limited', which is why Puggle could snatch them. It seemed like big a stretch though, so I questioned it. So turns out to be a coincidence; I'm not sure if it's the 'million monkeys and million typewriters' effect or the 'if you look hard enough, you will eventually see Col. Sander's face in a taco' effect. My recent lack of sleep might also contribute. :P I think there were beverages of a refreshing nature involved when I saw Snatch, so that also contributes. :pint:
Mocoso 06-05-07, 07:59 AM	Ummm... page 11, as follows: Chapter Four: Rulebooks The rules options in this document are divided into two types of access: Open and Closed. See Appendix 4 for more details on these classifications. If a rules option is not included in this document, you must have campaign documentation Opening it for your PC. It does say it. :rolleyes: Then ARs shoudl specify that options are Opened for PCs
TetsujinOni 06-05-07, 09:20 AM	The ARs that I've seen state "gain access" rather than 'is Opened', or 'is unlocked' (D&D campaignism that bugs me for some reason). It's Open, or it's not. Though I'm curious about the DB you're maintaining, IMarvin...
pedr 06-05-07, 09:48 AM	'Access' was the previous terminology. We're going to have to live with 'Core access' to rules items (rather than actual items, for which the terminology is current) even into Year 8 as I think there are early Year 7 modules which used the old terminology as they were created before the new LGCS came out.
solbergb 06-05-07, 11:49 AM	"Access" is still used for when you can buy it (eg, 3 AR's after the adventure, or any regional module, or any time)
Zanzibax 06-05-07, 05:04 PM	NONCense
IMarvinTPA 06-05-07, 06:13 PM	Though I'm curious about the DB you're maintaining, IMarvin... What do you wish to know? IMarv
Timlagor 06-05-07, 10:47 PM	There has been a distinct drop off of posts of the "why is xxx restricted, i demand access to it" style whinging since the names change. I think its one of the cleverest moves circle ever made. Yeah. Threads about the number of categories there are for rules items to be in (anything from 1 to 6 depending on who you ask) are so much more entertaining!
clannagh 06-05-07, 10:50 PM	Yeah. Threads about the number of categories there are for rules items to be in (anything from 1 to 6 depending on who you ask) are so much more entertaining! at least we do not get beseiged by people wanting to play a beholder
Timlagor 06-06-07, 02:04 AM	at least we do not get beseiged by people wanting to play a beholder Just Duskblades.. (there've been at least 2 threads on that recently)
Zanzibax 06-06-07, 09:02 AM	Actually, I have noticed a dramatic decrease in the amount of discussion and requests for Susan stuff. Yes, some people will always want it, but some will never think about it now and others will think about it less. WOTC introduces HASBRO into the realm of mind control. *urk* Was...not...to...say...*ooof* I'm sorry, Zanzibax is not here right now, if you would like to leave a message, please hang up and try again.
KarmaInferno 06-06-07, 03:47 PM	Though I'm curious about the DB you're maintaining, IMarvin... I know when entering items in HeroForge, the system prefers everything to have a labeled category. So I end up having to assign items to the categories "Open", "Limited", and "Closed" anyway. It is human nature to want to name everything. Having something not-named just bugs the hell out of me. -jason
TetsujinOni 06-07-07, 03:16 PM	It's really not that complicated conceptually: Nothing without campaign documentation is open. Some things are Closed. The LGCS is campaign documentation for everyone. This is a pain to model for HF, I realize.
IMarvinTPA 06-07-07, 03:35 PM	It needs a word, even if nothing in the LGCS gets explicitly tagged.
solbergb 06-07-07, 04:41 PM	Imarvin, the conceptual shift the circle is trying to promote is that stuff isn't open or closed for the CAMPAIGN. It is only open or closed for a CHARACTER. With no inbetween, beyond a listing of closed items that is really just for authors and their NPC's, and to allow triad members to resist pleas to give out those items on AR's or special missions without fuss. In this campaign, it isn't a good idea to plan for anything you don't have access to. When you get it, you can adjust your plan (much easier now with retraining)
bitznarf 06-07-07, 05:10 PM	It is only open or closed for a CHARACTER. ... With no inbetween, beyond a listing of closed items that is really just for authors and their NPC's, Strictly speaking, even from a character standpoint, this is not true: there is an inbetween: "Q: I can’t find a rules option listed in the LGCS. Does that mean it is open or closed? A: It is technically neither. The LGCS only lists rules options you can take without documentation, and rules options you can never take. Anything that is not listed in the LGCS requires campaign documentation. Once you receive such campaign documentation, the rules option is effectively opened for your PC."So, yes, there is something between Open and Closed for a PC. For NPCs, Open and Closed mean literally nothing. Being Closed without the 'available for authors' tag does not mean that authors cannot use it.
IMarvinTPA 06-07-07, 06:37 PM	So, maybe the term should be "Catch as catch can." The problem is, there is no label for the items that live in limbo until a character gains access but is not strictly forbidden. Maybe I'll use the term "Limbo". It's just annoying to have a "corner case" the size of Alaska. IMarv
lunarfish 06-07-07, 06:46 PM	IMarv: I believe the unofficial term (at least on the boards) has been "NONC". Locally, many people still use the "Limited" designation. I suspect you could simply retain "Limited" or use "NONC". However, I would like to nominate "Ajar" for your new database term. I like the way it rolls off my tongue.
Zanzibax 06-07-07, 06:52 PM	IMarv: I believe the unofficial term (at least on the boards) has been "NONC". Locally, many people still use the "Limited" designation. I suspect you could simply retain "Limited" or use "NONC". However, I would like to nominate "Ajar" for your new database term. I like the way it rolls off my tongue. I still like the name "NONCense".
lunarfish 06-07-07, 07:52 PM	To true.
TetsujinOni 06-08-07, 03:32 PM	For an inclusive database, there are four states for a rules item with relation to a character, or in general: Open (null) Author only Closed and the question of including null should be included for both open and closed searches.
bitznarf 06-08-07, 04:09 PM	Author only does not exist. It is a misnomer that doesn't actually mean anything under the current LGCS rules. The only thing that matters for authors are some internal documents.
solbergb 06-08-07, 05:02 PM	I wouldn't go quite that strong. Author only means "this closed thing can be routinely added to NPC's without special review". Lack of the dagger on a closed thing means "only if carefully reviewed and for specific plot purposes" or some such. I dont know exactly, because although I've written a couple minor things for LG, I've never seen an up to date writers guide document - we just get a template and the triad reviews against the rules I guess. But that's the gist I got from another thread where we bullied the circle into responding after they let slip on a Dispel Confusion that "Closed" never means "Restricted" in the old sense (which was - it can't appear onscreen in the campaign. It can happen offscreen - ie you could have an awakened animal in a plot, but you can't have a druid awaken an animal during a battle involving PC's)
echoota 06-09-07, 08:09 AM	Our group continues to call it "limited" and new players are likewise indoctrinated into it's continued use. It is afterall the most important rule item category in LG, especially for D&D players unfamiliar with LG, and so it needs a label.
The_Jester 06-09-07, 10:01 AM	... and yet, it will always come up as new people play the game... Hey! that solves the problem! Don't let new people play! GOOD IDEA. And will continue to be solved with 2-seconds of conversation. And when a new player gets something on an AR and looks it up and it's not on the Open list and it's not on the Closed list they think "oh no, i can't use it --- so now what?" and this issue will keep appearing. A simple definitiion in the LGCS, would cure that "anything not on the Open list is considered Limited and must be achieved through campaign documentation." Something they'll likely notice while filling out ARs two feet from a Herald-level GM who should know what the hell he's doing. Of all the times I've introduced new players to the game, they've always needed to be sat down and had the full explanation of everything and NONC is just one more explanation. I spend more time explaining how the big shiny magical item they found cannot be kept but is instead sold and split 6-ways on a 4-man table but they can buy it back later for full price.
IMarvinTPA 06-09-07, 10:10 AM	Of all the times I've introduced new players to the game, they've always needed to be sat down and had the full explanation of everything and NONC is just one more explanation. I spend more time explaining how the big shiny magical item they found cannot be kept but is instead sold and split 6-ways on a 4-man table but they can buy it back later for full price. Ah, so the Triad is in collusion with the Merchants in Greyhawk to help bolster their bottom line! IMarv
chesspiece 06-09-07, 11:38 PM	"Closed" never means "Restricted" in the old sense (which was - it can't appear onscreen in the campaign. It can happen offscreen - ie you could have an awakened animal in a plot, but you can't have a druid awaken an animal during a battle involving PC's) Minor correction, minor tangent... Even in the old sense, there were newly Closed items that could still appear onscreen until the modules they'd been written into had retired. I am aware that some Judges would help phase out these Closed items (editing the statblocks to make them 'legal' or choosing not to use the Closed items). The Circle's stated position was that the Closed items had been playtested and were therefore suitable for use in that module, and not to worry since these rules items wouldn't be around much longer.
JohnduBois 06-11-07, 10:18 AM	Ah, so the Triad is in collusion with the Merchants in Greyhawk to help bolster their bottom line! IMarv Please... who do you think reaps the profits from that racket? Clearly the Triad member's PCs... :P :rolleyes:
Majoru Oakheart 06-11-07, 10:58 AM	Please... who do you think reaps the profits from that racket? Clearly the Triad member's PCs... :P :rolleyes: Clearly. That's why we made the deal with the Mouqollad Consortium during 590CY. Besides, why do you think they are so powerful as a trade guild? ;) Chris Wachal POC - Ket Triad
JohnduBois 06-11-07, 11:09 AM	Clearly. That's why we made the deal with the Mouqollad Consortium during 590CY. Besides, why do you think they are so powerful as a trade guild? ;) Chris Wachal POC - Ket Triad Oh, my... Does this mean that, as of about a month ago, we can get a piece of that, too? Selling out our nation's morals for Baklunish Wal-Marts... SO worth it... John du Bois Furyondy Triad, Plots and Editing
IMarvinTPA 06-11-07, 11:20 AM	I spend more time explaining how the big shiny magical item they found cannot be kept but is instead sold and split 6-ways on a 4-man table but they can buy it back later for full price. Let's roleplay this: Begining of the adventure: Quest Giver: "Ok, you six adventures need to go do this for me. Each of you will get 1/6th share in the bounty and loot you find on your mission." Party: "But there are only four of us." QG: "There are six of you." Party: "Uh, ok..." .... Time to sell that +1 Greatsword: Party Fighter: "I'd love to have that sword, I'll buy it from you guys from my share of the loot instead of selling it to a merchant!" Party: "Nah, we have to sell it to the county store first." Store: "Here's 1/12 the full price of the sword for each of you." P: "But there are only 4 of us!" S: "No, there are six of you." P: "Where!?" S: "At the inn, I guess. I'll hold their share until they get here." PF: "Uh, I know we just sold you that sword. Can I, um, buy it from you now?" S: "Sure, full price!" PF: "For a used sword!? I know it's used cause I used it after I pried it out of that guy's cold dead hands." S: "Yep, it's refurbished." PF: "You're quick!" S: "We strive to serve." IMarv P: "So, who were the slackers in our party that didn't show up?" Party Wizard: "I don't know, but when I get my divination spells, they're so dead."
bitznarf 06-12-07, 11:16 AM	Sounds about right Marvin. And yet oddly enough the PCs end up with roughlt the right amount of gold as you play.
The_Jester 06-12-07, 11:35 AM	And no matter the size of the one-horse town you're in and the actual gp limit of said town they always have enough to buy the magical loot.
Vamroc 06-13-07, 10:13 AM	What do you call something that is neither Open nor Closed? A ***** LOL
Vamroc 06-13-07, 10:15 AM	What do you call something that is neither Open nor Closed? A woman not worth dating. LOL