Post/Author/DateTime	Post
WizO_Catoblepas 12-30-04, 08:53 AM	Ok all, this is a thread where you can air concerns with the Foundation Wars rules. However, there are a few ground rules to airing the concerns: 1) Don't make the concerns personal. If there is a specific GM that you had problems with, don't "call them out" by mentioning a name or specific instance. That's baiting and it is against the Code of Conduct. However, a fair concern to bring up would be, "I believe that the GM position has too much power over assigning magical devices. Thus I believe that the rules need to be modified to incorporate this." Remember, the point of the thread is to remember that there may be systematic problems with the rules, not personal ones. 2) The old Foundation Wars is of the past. I highly suggest that you just forget about any grudges and move along. Ok, the two above rules are a good ground base to get this thread going. If more rules come to mind, I'll add them. Keep in mind that this is a living document when it comes to this. My last comment is that if you really want the Foundation Wars to come back, I highly suggest that you follow the above rules. Remember that the WizOs have to approve the rules before the Wars get started up again. I'll just say that I only have one vote and Shadow will definitely have the majority say in this, but I'm starting to waver a bit after the last grievance thread ... it's in everyone's best interest to get along ...
Silmarien Aldalome 12-30-04, 08:54 AM	Thanx W.Cat, Muchly appreciated. I'll begin by giving comment on game-rule boundaries, and what I need from posters. Where game-boundaries and limits are unclear, posters need to be adaptable, by either, accepting an ad-hoc ruling, or alternatively, posting to MetaThread about the issue that's unclear To GM effectively, it can't be that posters take matters into their own hands. There are legitimate processes that need to be honoured, and there are two key foci for those processes, those being the PC statistics thread and the second one being the MetaThread. PMs are an informal mechanism, which may allow a third method Moving on from the past has to be a norm, and most people do this well. When a player does not "like" a particular method or rule, it's not OK to rework any process, without formalising it. It's important to be able to recognise that a game is a collection of features that we won't ever have 100% concensus on. Quiet posters have the same privileges as noisy posters, but don't express their view. My concern is thus, about representation. That is - no GM can do their job, unless posters accept rulings. So, my main point is about GM boundaries - and the necessary pre-condition for there to be a preparedness and readyness in posters to accept game limits even when you don't agree with them. Most people do this well. But our *new* rules need to reinforce game-limits and boundaries, and have provision for GMs for handling areas where there is inevitable disagreement, from time to time. Regards stav
WizO_Catoblepas 12-30-04, 09:20 AM	I'm just a 3rd party in all of this ... However, keep in mind that just because someone is silent doens't automatically mean that they are in agreement. They just may feel fed up since they don't think that they have a say. In order to start off with a concensus, it might be a good idea to poll most of the planned rules to make sure everyone is on the same page. Whether it be the GM who enforces the rules during the game, that's fine if that's what everyone agrees with. However, I'm thinking that it may be a good idea to get a concensus of the entire board on the rules before proceeding further. Remember, the key to having fun is to get the most posters involved. If they don't think that they are in the process of the rules of the Foundation Wars, why should they want to get involved?
Silmarien Aldalome 12-30-04, 09:41 AM	Thanx W.Cat. I'm on the same page as you about getting 'em involved. I agree with you that some posters don't post 'cause they're fed up. :) Also some don't cause they're scared to post amidst the & us loud ones. Some don't cause they're content to be advised, once we're done. I've had many posts from excited posters too..... The contented folk don't post their contentment widely - it wouldn't be typical to post that to a WizO, I'd imagine. Anyhowz - ta muchly for the advice. warm regards stav
Demonfey 12-30-04, 10:11 AM	This seems like a good place to restate something I posted earlier, since it can be quite important: WHAT PEOPLE NEED TO REMEMBER IS THAT IT'S JUST A GAME! STOP GETTING ANGRY AND REMEMBER THAT IT HAS NO EFFECT ON YOUR REAL LIFE, EXCEPT HERE! STOP :censored: FLAMING EACH OTHER, AND TRY AND BE RATIONAL ABOUT THINGS, ALL OF YOU! CHRIST! It's something all of us need to remember and work with.
WizO_Catoblepas 12-30-04, 10:18 AM	Thanx W.Cat. I'm on the same page as you about getting 'em involved. I agree with you that some posters don't post 'cause they're fed up. :) Also some don't cause they're scared to post amidst the & us loud ones. Some don't cause they're content to be advised, once we're done. I've had many posts from excited posters too..... The contented folk don't post their contentment widely - it wouldn't be typical to post that to a WizO, I'd imagine. Anyhowz - ta muchly for the advice. warm regards stav That's the reason why it would be better to poll everyone. That way, everyone can respond anonymously and the entire population is heard. Any other way and you're only making assumptions. ;)
Tenzhi 12-31-04, 01:24 AM	If they don't think that they are in the process of the rules of the Foundation Wars, why should they want to get involved? Why do those who weren't involved in the rules-creation process of D&D want to get involved in D&D games?
WizO_Catoblepas 12-31-04, 01:47 AM	Why do those who weren't involved in the rules-creation process of D&D want to get involved in D&D games? True. But every DM and group can modify the rules to their game to fit their style of play and thus have a say to how their game is run. You don't have WotC security rushing into a house and say a group must play the game exactly the way the designers noted. In fact, check out Charles Ryan's comment in my sig with respect to this. That is the nice thing about the D&D rules as they are. However, on the Guild Board, we're only going to have one Foundation War and the War is going to be run as proscribed by the one set of rules. As a WizO, I really am not concerned with the specifics of the rules. If everyone wants to make it so that the half-orcs can snap the necks of their opponents with the snap of their fingers, that's fine. However, the one thing that the WizOs definitely want to avoid is having to open and close threads because they erupt in a flame war due to disgruntled game participants. Our only comment is that it would be wise to get the input of all and polls are a great way to do that. Looking at some of the other threads, I got the impressions that not all felt that their voice was being heard.
Tenzhi 12-31-04, 02:15 AM	But every DM and group can modify the rules to their game to fit their style of play and thus have a say to how their game is run. You don't have WotC security rushing into a house and say a group must play the game exactly the way the designers noted. Far be it from me to dispute that the rules are malleable; however, while a DM may take his players' thoughts under advisement it is he that actually implements and finalizes the house rules. Looking at some of the other threads, I got the impressions that not all felt that their voice was being heard. Mayhap it's the pessimist in me, but I come away with a different impression - that not all feel their demands/ideals are being acceded to.
Silmarien Aldalome 12-31-04, 04:34 AM	The various assumptions and conclusions are being tested, with hypotheses, I've cast through a Poll thread. It's the first in a series. The initiative was a good idea, W.Cat :) The responses are diverse - the posters are a heterogeneous group of people with differing views and opinions. But I note only three respndents responding to the current questions. I prolly need to rework the poll :) Also: One hypothesis I can't test is about the journey of maturation - and about developmental trajectories of people and about behavioural tendencies (given their stage in their life journey) and who typically 'mellow' as life progresses. Oppositional defiance is a character trait - not fixable by any regigging achievable on the boards. It needs wisdom to alter the outcome. Having said that - most posters are kind (enough), wise (enough), accepting (enough) and sorry (enough) to work with. :) Most of them are good people. Regards stav