Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Frostbite_Ravenheart 06-06-05, 10:30 PM	Now I do not have the time to commit to GM-Ship but I I would just like to remind everyone what the future GM has in store for himself. First off he must get this IFGW on its feet and get it to run. A difficult task alone. But more importantly, at least in my mind, he must restore the foundations to what they were. I doubt most of the people here today can remember a time when all the foundations did was talk about its subject. I know personally the CoA has always had a problem drifting away from talking about magic but I'm noticing it and almost every other foundation have all but stopped discussing the subject. Hello, foundations are not threads made for people who are interested in playing a "Bad-ass pirate" or a "Sneaky Killer." The foundations are and forever shall be threads to discuss and create material with an on-going theme. A group of people who discuss several things at once and all work together to make spells or killer character combinations in place of several smaller threads with a smaller amount of people. This is how it was and this is how it remains today. That is there purpose whether or not most of you realize it or not. And unless we want to just forget what the foundations "founding fathers" fought so long with many of the WizO's for then we best do something. And it’s the GM's who are going to have to lead the change. -Frosty
WizO_Cat 06-06-05, 11:53 PM	Actully, I split this posts into its own thread because it deserves its own forum for discussion since it seems like I'm starting to see it in several threads now. In essence, I guess as a WizO I'm a little unsure about the focus for the rules, and I'll explain why. Way back wihen the earth was cooling :) , all of the foundation threads (or a sizable majority of them) used to reside on the Player's Handbook boards. However, the issue at that time was that there was not enough "expressive freedoms" allowed for the thread for people to roleplay and post off-topic on the occasional basis. Thus, many of the Player Handbook posters who didn't belong to a foundation, or just plainly didn't like them, would complain that the foundations were off-topic because the "blatently disregarded the Code of Conduct by violating some of the rules. (off-topic responses and posting in-character) Thus, these boards were started and purposely allowed off-topic responses and posting in character. Though this style ofposting was not normally allowed by the Code of Conduct and does cause meandering from the subject matter from time to time, it was permitted to allow an atmosphere for people to become comfortable and thus become more creative. Let me just state that I'm not trying to complain one iota. However, at the same time, it's sounding like the board is not ending up with the atmosphere that all had hoped. I'm just posting to see if there is anything in the Guild House rules that would need to be changed to make a "more conducive" atmosphere. Hey, we're here to help and we're open to suggestions. (You know, beyond "Ban poster X ...") If you feel that it just needs the nudge of the GMs, that's fine and we as the WizOs will leave things status quo. Just let us know.
Silmarien Aldalome 06-08-05, 06:26 AM	Ban poster x! ;) okay - I'm not seeing the same concerns, but perhaps I am not seeing things that other people do see :) @Frosty There's still a few of us founders here - probably making a headache for the WizOs (only joking :) ) and for the other posters. I do agree with you - to the extent that it's important to have the freedom to have Foundation discussions in the way you've described. They're places to 'hang out' and discuss things with like-minded folk and to meander and to enjoy all that shared activity in the way you described. I'm not sure we're going to get a new GM who understands your concerns though, in the new generation of posters. This new mob here think a bit differently to the Old Guard, perhaps. @all I don't see that we've lost the freedom to create Foundation threads in the way they were originally conceived (when we first migrated) because its not compulsory for your foundation to be part of the games. :) Thing is, posters are a transient mob. There are exceptions at most forums, and we at the Guild House, I think have a rather good track record at encouraging longevity in posting here. @WizO_Cat Activity fell off after migration because there is far less traffic in this part of the boards. If the Guild House was a subset of the D&D boards, we'd have a lot more natural activity. About changing things: Of course, there's always something to change, but I'm thinking first a bit of refactory and rest time with what we got, before reviewing it in the future, depeding on time and circumstance. One of the things I would change about the Rules (proper noun deliberate): Foundations being creative enterprises come up with wierd and wonderful things, often that don't fit into canon modelling of D&D stuff. I'm a big fan of non-canon initiatives. I can't include the HEF in the current rules architecture because of the limitations and that of course, is something that doesn't sit well with me. But, there are many things to appreciate and to respect in the new rules, so perhaps some 'wait and see what happens' and 'time may help'. I have other concerns with the architecture of the forum that have little to do with the IFG, but that's, as I have said, the substance of a submission to the WizOs. Very briefly, and in super-summary form - the transience of the posting community lends itself to another model of DM authority that would cost us less every time someone moves one. GM turnover fosters feelings of helplessness, betrayal and anger. Some posters get excited because they think they're in the running for GMhood. On the other hand, staying too long in the GM role creates different problems. So reframing the problem how to create an environment where it's not threatening to have transition in a role of responsibility. A culture is needed where rotation of responsibility is normal and culturally appropriate. And where there is an 'auto-cue' response ready to rock when someone decides to go walk about. Authority, IMO, should be invested into a "cued-list" of "pending" DMs - all ready to rock - so when someone moves on - it's like a Juke Box with lots of songs cued and ready. In this framework there's: no delay in 'ascention' of new GMs no forced disruption to the architecture of the game authority while we wait for the process to complete itself there is a creation of excitement for posters who can see their name moving up the lists as someone goes it retains the core features of the current model - that being that WizO authority is unaltered and that there be a separation of powers between WizO and poster and it doesn't intrude on the relationship between GM(DM) and WizO - that is - particular decisions will still need WizO contribution There's more to say - but not here. thanx stav
jagggar 06-08-05, 09:19 AM	I'd say the movement of the Guilds from the D&D boards to here do more than just lower traffic. Since the Guild House is under "Games: Message Boards" it does bring to mind that it's supposed to be a game environment as opposed to the original purpose of the guilds. I'm not going to be the most gung-ho about trying to return the Guild House to its original state. I've gone through a couple of boards being shutdown on me that scarred me for my Internet-life. If it has not arrived yet, there will come a time when all that is left of the Guild House which you fought for is a wistful flashback sequence. Perhaps after we get the IFWG off the ground again, there shall be a bit of a return to the way they used to be since everyone will stop being so up-in-arms about the rules being created.
Dyne 06-08-05, 03:12 PM	Ban poster x! ;) okay - I'm not seeing the same concerns, but perhaps I am not seeing things that other people do see :) @Frosty There's still a few of us founders here - probably making a headache for the WizOs (only joking :) ) and for the other posters. I do agree with you - to the extent that it's important to have the freedom to have Foundation discussions in the way you've described. They're places to 'hang out' and discuss things with like-minded folk and to meander and to enjoy all that shared activity in the way you described. I'm not sure we're going to get a new GM who understands your concerns though, in the new generation of posters. This new mob here think a bit differently to the Old Guard, perhaps. @all I don't see that we've lost the freedom to create Foundation threads in the way they were originally conceived (when we first migrated) because its not compulsory for your foundation to be part of the games. :) Thing is, posters are a transient mob. There are exceptions at most forums, and we at the Guild House, I think have a rather good track record at encouraging longevity in posting here. @WizO_Cat Activity fell off after migration because there is far less traffic in this part of the boards. If the Guild House was a subset of the D&D boards, we'd have a lot more natural activity. About changing things: Of course, there's always something to change, but I'm thinking first a bit of refactory and rest time with what we got, before reviewing it in the future, depeding on time and circumstance. One of the things I would change about the Rules (proper noun deliberate): Foundations being creative enterprises come up with wierd and wonderful things, often that don't fit into canon modelling of D&D stuff. I'm a big fan of non-canon initiatives. I can't include the HEF in the current rules architecture because of the limitations and that of course, is something that doesn't sit well with me. But, there are many things to appreciate and to respect in the new rules, so perhaps some 'wait and see what happens' and 'time may help'. I have other concerns with the architecture of the forum that have little to do with the IFG, but that's, as I have said, the substance of a submission to the WizOs. Very briefly, and in super-summary form - the transience of the posting community lends itself to another model of DM authority that would cost us less every time someone moves one. GM turnover fosters feelings of helplessness, betrayal and anger. Some posters get excited because they think they're in the running for GMhood. On the other hand, staying too long in the GM role creates different problems. So reframing the problem how to create an environment where it's not threatening to have transition in a role of responsibility. A culture is needed where rotation of responsibility is normal and culturally appropriate. And where there is an 'auto-cue' response ready to rock when someone decides to go walk about. Authority, IMO, should be invested into a "cued-list" of "pending" DMs - all ready to rock - so when someone moves on - it's like a Juke Box with lots of songs cued and ready. In this framework there's: no delay in 'ascention' of new GMs no forced disruption to the architecture of the game authority while we wait for the process to complete itself there is a creation of excitement for posters who can see their name moving up the lists as someone goes it retains the core features of the current model - that being that WizO authority is unaltered and that there be a separation of powers between WizO and poster and it doesn't intrude on the relationship between GM(DM) and WizO - that is - particular decisions will still need WizO contribution There's more to say - but not here. thanx stav What about people that are new to the forum? If we had gone by your system, Kingside_Bishop probably would've never been a GM, and he was one of the best that we could have asked for. The list of "GM Candidates" would become outdated rather quickly, and any attempt to update it would cause frustration for those that are bumped further down the list by newcomers.
Silmarien Aldalome 06-08-05, 06:32 PM	What about people that are new to the forum? Don't assume I don't value the new postership. You'll feel less upset if you see my words the way I mean them. :) Dyne, if I didn't value the new postership, then...... - why have I been PMing them with game invitations galore, :) - why do I engage newcomers - why do I praise newcomers - why do I post so many posts about newcomers being our 'primary' resource. Credit where it's due. Don't assume I'm out to get you. I'm not. You've been posted to at the Stormhand Federation because I think you're one of the most energetic posters we have. I'm relying on you to counter-engage, because I think you know how to handle it. But if you don't, please PM me and let me know :) I've also said at MetaThread on several occasions - that the new postership has evolved and they have different values - and they are neither better nor worse, but only different. And that change is good. In any case, it's not me you need to get your message to about all this, because I'm already convinced that change is okay and that the new posters are doing their thing just fine. :) If we had gone by your system, Kingside_Bishop probably would've never been a GM, and he was one of the best that we could have asked for. I referred KB to the WizOs and strongly supported his candidateship, firstly. :) Structurally, he was strong. But, he is a big enough person that he won't be offended by noting that rapid GM turnover isn't good for the forum. um, we shouldn't wrap the discussion up in cotton wool to protect an ex-GM. Your strong appreciation for him is wonderful, but he's not alone in having made a great contribution to the forum. Other pivotal posters have been Tenzhi, Frostbite, Aramar, Lady Rolindin, Redhase, and many many others, yourself, and myself (my work speaks well of my posting-hand here - I'm strong on motivationals, RP especially, and also on the structural dimensions [when I want to be] and I'm especially 'exploratory' of new game-boundaries). You may not see it, but I hope you'll try :) The list of "GM Candidates" would become outdated rather quickly, and any attempt to update it would cause frustration for those that are bumped further down the list by newcomers. Not necessarily. :) I'd like to challenge the assumptions in your commentary, but first, I need to be convinced you're not angry and that we won't flame. :)
Frostbite_Ravenheart 06-08-05, 07:31 PM	I'd say the movement of the Guilds from the D&D boards to here do more than just lower traffic. Since the Guild House is under "Games: Message Boards" it does bring to mind that it's supposed to be a game environment as opposed to the original purpose of the guilds. I'm not going to be the most gung-ho about trying to return the Guild House to its original state. I've gone through a couple of boards being shutdown on me that scarred me for my Internet-life. If it has not arrived yet, there will come a time when all that is left of the Guild House which you fought for is a wistful flashback sequence. Perhaps after we get the IFWG off the ground again, there shall be a bit of a return to the way they used to be since everyone will stop being so up-in-arms about the rules being created. Well I do not expect to so I shall not attempt to change your mind. I don't personally really care where the Wizo's put us we are what we are. As such I guess I'll reconsider putting a resume for GM-Ship. -Frosty
Dyne 06-09-05, 01:05 AM	@Sil: I'm not angry or flamey, you misunderstood my post. I just think it's a bad idea to "rank" people based on how good they are thought to be as a GM. I think it would cause a lot of frustration. Also, what about newcomers, not people that are new now, but that will show up in the future? Would they just ask the WizO's to sign them up for the "GM Waiting List" and be ranked with everyone else? How would the "oldies" feel if a new person came along and bumped them further down the list? It just seems like a flawed idea. If the 'transitionness' of the GM role is a problem, the WizO's could always make "GM Alternates" that immediately take over responsibility if a GM leaves. These alternates might also assume a role as a sort of Assistant GM, possibly acting as one of the DM's.
Silmarien Aldalome 06-09-05, 07:31 AM	@Sil: I'm not angry or flamey, you misunderstood my post. :cool: thank you for clarifying - erm, text gets so hard to interpret sometimes :) I just think it's a bad idea to "rank" people based on how good they are thought to be as a GM. I agree with you. That's why I wouldn't "rank" but would instead "cue up" on a "first in, best dressed" basis (an Australian saying - not sure if you guyz have it. Means "join the cue and wait your turn"). I'd *love* to see anyone try their hand at DMing, who feels they can do it, or who can demonstrate they know what to do. Some GMs are good at "Cheer leading" some are better at getting the rules right. I reckon we need all kinds of DMs. :) hmm - I was thinking of two month tenures (length of DM-hood) - or some not-too-long-not-too-short time frame. If the 'transitionness' of the GM role is a problem, the WizO's could always make "GM Alternates" that immediately take over responsibility if a GM leaves. These alternates might also assume a role as a sort of Assistant GM, possibly acting as one of the DM's. I've had the very same idea, but called it an "Emergency GM" - or a pool of them, much like the Army Reserves (who are not actual soliders, but who are "ready" in the event of emergency). Thanx for your post Dyne - I've just PM'd ya *grins* - Stormhand, thasis (the black) and Cazic just had a dream....(I sent it to jaggar too). Good to see you stav
Frostbite_Ravenheart 06-09-05, 03:22 PM	@Sil - It may be impossible for a human to catch a deer with his bare hands and feet alone. But if too many deer dream idle without any others to ignorantly guard their flanks than it would be oh so easy to cut all the deers heads off. Fair warning, take it as you will. -Frosty
Silmarien Aldalome 06-09-05, 06:19 PM	The Wombat is an Australian animal. It is short, fat, and brown haired. It runs very fast. I remember driving in Kosciosko National Park along the Snowy River a few years ago. The river was a glistening blue ribbon in the brilliant summer sky, way down below, as our car hugged the rugged cliff face on a dirt road wide enough for one, not two cars. When we got to the valley, the road joined the river. There, the wombat ran by my car, travelling at 40 miles per hour, easily. She is big and fat and has sharp teeth and a toxic bite But, when she is threatened, she may charge predadors head on, or She may burrow seeking the solace of the Underground. In this, she has access to two worlds, not one. The People Have The Power To Redeem the Work of Fools The Power to Dream, to Rule To Wrestle the Earth from Fools It is Decreed that People Rule It is Decreed that People Rule (Patti Smith) Earendil the Mariner comes to thee in thine sleep, Frostbite_Raven. The Deer's flanks are not guarded by Deer, but by Wombats. That's before I've started with Kangaroos and Koalas. And the Marsupial Mouse and female Platypus, with her poinsonous spurs. stav
Dyne 06-09-05, 11:39 PM	@Sil: I didn't get any PM. And what's with all the animals? What do deer and wombats have to do with anything?
Droga 06-09-05, 11:43 PM	mm... animals... kind of makes me hungry
Dyne 06-09-05, 11:49 PM	Got Wombat? :drool:
gabrion 06-09-05, 11:57 PM	It may be impossible for a human to catch a deer with his bare hands and feet alone. I once ran down a deer and slit it's throat. For real. Sorry, that wasn't on topic, but my short input here would be that there is a problem with the location of the Guild House. Granted I'm pretty new to the forums in general, but I know I never would have found it if not for a link in someones sig. I just thought I would point out that maybe there are more people out there who would like to be a part of this, but they don't know about it.
Dyne 06-10-05, 01:54 AM	I too found my way to the Guild House from the link in someone's sig (WizO_Cat's, actually). But where did I see that sig? On the D&D Boards. I strongly support the movement of the Guild House to the D&D Boards. I arrived here at about the transition from the "Old" to the "New," so I have some understanding of both sides. But, we need the "Old" bustling Guild House again, where people discussed new creations, in order for the "New" Inter-Foundation Games to be a success.
Bait the Bard 06-10-05, 03:48 AM	I too found my way to the Guild House from the link in someone's sig (WizO_Cat's, actually). But where did I see that sig? On the D&D Boards. I strongly support the movement of the Guild House to the D&D Boards. I arrived here at about the transition from the "Old" to the "New," so I have some understanding of both sides. But, we need the "Old" bustling Guild House again, where people discussed new creations, in order for the "New" Inter-Foundation Games to be a success. Truthery. I will discuss this at the bottom of my post. I would also like to add that I have always been of the opinion that the Guild House 'games' (or whatever they're called) were meant to be more on the Roleplaying side of things, as opposed to having actual stats, and whatever else. There are the Real Adventures forums for online games, as such. I beleive this comes form both the prescence of another forum devoted to online stats+dice RP gaming, but also because it was for roleplaying that the Guilds were origninally opposed to in the D&D boards. If, at that time, people were getting annnoyed because the Guilds were playing actual 'games', they would have been moved into a sub-forum of real Adventures, or something like that. See what I'm getting at? Also, from my occasional browsing though of the Guild House, I found that there were 2 main things that were bringing down the 'fun level' of the Guild House. The first was the situation with Droga, which basically boiled down to a rules debate, with various people having different opinions on the matter. I'm not going to revive the argument as it was, but it was deffinatly slowing down the game in a large way, as well as generating a lot of bad feelings. While it may just ahve been a clash of personalities, it was based on the fact that there were people arguing over the stats of their characters; how they fitted into the rules, or didn't. Now, you can see this as allt he more reason to bring the Big Rulebook out; but was it only because there wasn't enough rules that this happened? But this leads me onto my next point.. The rules that were being thrashed out at the time, and also the ones after that were being made to stop people making 'overpowered' characters were taking way to long to make. As the saying goes, "A quick game is a good game." And this was far from quick; the game was getting stagnated by the fine-tuning of rules, new proposals, seeing how they would fit in, etc etc. This, in my opinion, was/is sucking the life out of the game; and there are only two solutions: Get the full set of rules, and fast. Do away with the rules. Now, number one seems to be the direction in which the current GMs want the Guild house to go, and that's fine. But unless you get a comprehensive set of rules for the Guildhouse, and fast, it is my beleif that it will just stagnate, people will become disinterested, and leave (or just hang in their foundations, not join in the game). Now, as I said before, the Guild were put here for Roleplaying, and so it makes sense (to me) to go with option two, and make the IFWGs a Roleplaying game. This means that there will be no hanging around waiting for rules to be made, no endless discussion of stats, and what have you. The game can go on, with any arguents settles in character, and such like. The GMs would be there to help along the adventures, and also to resolve any 'powerplaying' - which is about the only thing that can go wrong in free RP, and it is usually delt with by the other 'patrons' anyway. Basically, it would speed up the IFWGs, which I think would be a good thing. It would also stop possible argument over stats or whatever, and allow everyone much more freedom. It would also mean that battles could be played out without thousands of dice rolls, instead with good RPing. I rest my case. As for the moving back to the D&D boards, I definatly think it should be done. I would suggest, that, no matter what style of gaming we do, a sub-forum be set up to hold that game threads, so they don't clutter up the rest of the space, and so people can have serious dicussions easily. Enjoy :D
Tenzhi 06-10-05, 04:05 AM	Now, as I said before, the Guild were put here for Roleplaying, and so it makes sense (to me) to go with option two, and make the IFWGs a Roleplaying game. This means that there will be no hanging around waiting for rules to be made, no endless discussion of stats, and what have you. The game can go on, with any arguents settles in character, and such like. The GMs would be there to help along the adventures, and also to resolve any 'powerplaying' - which is about the only thing that can go wrong in free RP, and it is usually delt with by the other 'patrons' anyway. Basically, it would speed up the IFWGs, which I think would be a good thing. It would also stop possible argument over stats or whatever, and allow everyone much more freedom. It would also mean that battles could be played out without thousands of dice rolls, instead with good RPing. This has been my opinion for awhile now. It keeps away the rabble-rousing rules-lawyers and puts any necessary power in the hands of the GMs, whilst keeping the original theme of the Foundations. As for the moving back to the D&D boards, I definatly think it should be done. I would suggest, that, no matter what style of gaming we do, a sub-forum be set up to hold that game threads, so they don't clutter up the rest of the space, and so people can have serious dicussions easily. I agree with this as well. Move back to the D&D boards and put the Johnny-come-lately SW-miniature clan threads somewhere else that's more appropriate.
Bait the Bard 06-10-05, 04:10 AM	Wow. First time that Elf-hater's agreed with me :twitch: Tenzhi, do you know the other GMs general opinions on the matter?
Tenzhi 06-10-05, 04:44 AM	Wow. First time that Elf-hater's agreed with me :twitch: I like to agree with elves from time to time in order to make them doubt themselves. :) Tenzhi, do you know the other GMs general opinions on the matter? You phrased that like I'm a GM myself, when in reality I just play one on TV. I can't really speak to their opinions for certain, but I might surmise that the ex-GM Orcy would like the rules laid out because he seems to prefer numerically decided confrontations (though I assure you he's quite adept at roleplaying as well). The ex-GM Silmarien might espouse a need for rules (whilst simultaneously wishing to break all of them), but I think he thrives better *here* without them. Many of the players come up with stuff that would be easier for them to implement in a less rule-restricted environment. As far as I'm concerned, the *only* need for rules is for the arena.
Dyne 06-10-05, 04:45 AM	The rules are already up. They are in the Welcome to the Guild House sticky thread. Some of them might be tweaked slightly, but we are basically all geared up to go. All that's left to do is polish it up and launch. Currently, we need two more GM's (Orcy and Kingside_Bishop quit), smooth out a few creases in the rules, then we can get the thing running.
Bait the Bard 06-10-05, 05:08 AM	The rules are already up. They are in the Welcome to the Guild House sticky thread. Some of them might be tweaked slightly, but we are basically all geared up to go. All that's left to do is polish it up and launch. Currently, we need two more GM's (Orcy and Kingside_Bishop quit), smooth out a few creases in the rules, then we can get the thing running. Well, I didn't see that thread until then, but I still stand firm beside my opinions. To simply put it, rules make thing take longer. If you try running a stat based game with too few rules, everyone get's confused/annoyed/whatever, and so you need to amke new rules to cover this, and so on. These rules also end up conflicting with other rules, so mroe rules must be created to fix this, and so on. Somewhat a downward spiral. While there are (will be?) GMs that are there to fix those kind of things, from what I've seen, when one of them steps in, people usually get heated about it, and it becomes a row. And even without the various forms of conflict and/or more rules, the very idea of stat based game in itself take much more time, and is, in my opinion, less fun than Roleplaying for a couple of reasons: You character development is based on the dice, not only how you want it. While you can RP in a stat based game, if you want to be all sneaky and everything, you will ahve to roll, say, a Bluff check, which must be PMed to whoever is running the game (the GM). There is also no sure way of determining its validity (while I know all of you will be honest, some people arn't, and this can mess things around). Opposed to this, in RP, you decide how your character goes, and if you want to be sneaky, it's up to how well you can pull it off, and what sort of person whomever you're RPing with is. And while you can say that people will abuse this and say that their character knows everything, they will be kicked out immediatly, as no one will RP with them. And just the fact that it is shorter. For RP ou can log in, and make a short, or long post, as you desire. The time you spedn on it is up to you, and while I am of the opinion that the more time you spend on it, the more fun it will be, I ahve met pleanty of RPers who make short posts, and yet enjoy it very much. In stat/dice based games, you do have to spend a certain amount of time rolling for your actions, checking your stats to see if you could do this action, and the like. Basically, this means you cannot just log in and post, you ahve to spend at least a decent amount of time, on every 'game post' you make. If you catch my drift. And Tenzhi, I did think you were a GM, or going to be one. I was obviously mistaken ;) Speaking of which, I might apply for a GM position. I beleive I am qualified, but some people here may think me biased :angelhide:
Tenzhi 06-10-05, 05:44 AM	And Tenzhi, I did think you were a GM, or going to be one. Understandable. I've been around here since forever and I tend to speak with the voice of authority. I'm here ~30hrs a week, have a great deal of RPG experience, and have been told by a number of people that I should be a GM. The main reason I'm not going for it, is because I wouldn't take any guff from whiny rabble-rousing players insisting that their homebrew creations are perfectly balanced the way they wrote them and must be allowed in the game as-is. My "dictatorial" attitude in that regards would almost surely rub someone the wrong way (and indeed, while I was merely a Judge and asked to review such things I did cause some consternation amongst various players). And the last thing I want to do is cause a ruckus.
De Batavier 06-10-05, 06:51 AM	My vision on this subject is, that the primary purpose of the foundations should indeed be their subject. They should discuss this subject and create new "stuff". I do like the extra game element and the change to RP a bit. I agree that the only place rules are needed is the arena or any other place where you have a contest like scene. I don't think a move to the D&D boards is needed. An extra link, like some of the other boards have (Eberron, Forgotten Realms, Character development, Character optimization, etc) on the D&D start page, is what we need. We porbably fall in the same categorie as Character optimization and development so the link should be there, i think. :twocents:
Dyne 06-10-05, 01:34 PM	I'd rather the stat-based gameplay was still there. For me, it makes me feel like something is actually really happening, instead of just talking. Also, when several people are wanting several different things to happen (such as in a battle, when everyone wants to win themselves), the stats and dice decide. I find the "RP Only" style to be extremely confusing when doing anything but talking. I remember from the Drow Murder Mystery that it was more RP-oriented, but it kinda got to me when there were Wizards running around with no spellbook who just assumed they had every spell in the game. Perhaps I'm just a rules-oriented guy, but I really couldn't enjoy the game at all if their wasn't a rules structure.
Frostbite_Ravenheart 06-10-05, 02:40 PM	I might apply for a GM position. :thinks: :blink: :twitch: :gah: :smirk: Wannabie boy-bards like bait should not hold power. Period. Well Bait/Tenzhi we seem to be outnumbered. Its the old versus the new and the new are comming out on top. I definitly agree with both of your ideas. If we want to see anything happen I do hope one of the more "conservative" oldies gets the next gm-position. Bait, I was your fiddle in the DEW wars and thats only beacuse you were there first. I wouldn't let that happen again but I would be honored if you re-joined us and applied for the gm position. I know u hate the whole rules thing but I think if enough of the older people got the position we could change that. -Frosty
jagggar 06-10-05, 04:26 PM	Note:This is one of those odd posts that gets drafted while not actually looking at the topic and the typer went back and added things in at different spots, so if it sounds odd. . . There's a part of me that desires the freedom of the free-form roleplaying of which you speak. In fact, free-form roleplaying was how I first came to view it as a social activity (as opposed to my only-childhood imaginings). However, it was messy. In a way ignoring someone could be seen as exclusion, even if they say they blow up the world. It's scary how powerful we became in response to a few people god-modding. A pause in the action because the moon from Majora's Mask just hit the planet we were battling on? Few posts later, "Oh, well I just popped everyone on over to another dimension just before it hit. Continue fighting." My character was eventually killed shortly before the topic died. What did we do? Started up another one and came up with reasons for our characters to be back even if they had died. What's powerful to one person isn't to another. People can get trapped into a power struggle and then end up with amazingly powerful characters since they continually see the other as more powerful. On top of that, you've got a broad base of fantasy out there. Maybe for one 'world' people are amazed by a simple light spell while another 'world' is amazed and worried about anyone who can't cast one. Perhaps someone bases their character's casting on a magic system in which countering spells does not happen, ever. What happens when that person comes up against someone who is always prepared to counter spells? Who wins, who loses? That's at least one reason that we need to use a system of some sort. It's quite obvious almost that we use the d20 system since we are here on the Wizards of the Coast message boards. If I wanted to have a large amount of freedom in what was created I'd probably use something like Guardians of Order's Tri-Stat dX or The Window which I found while browsing the net and do it on another board. But we're here and we're going to use d20 when we use a system. One of the things we need when using the d20 system is "balance". I know it gets thrown around a lot, and I guess I'd agree with quite a few people who've said that balance isn't based on Fighter vs. Wizard but on what they can each contribute to the party. Well, we've taken the d20 system in another direction along with I'm guessing the Core Colsseum: Player vs. Player. So balance for us It sounds nice to say that we could just use stats to battle or such, but then comes the point where someone says that they did X outside of battle when X would be helpful here also, but with the stats they aren't able to do it. Thinking further, saying we would only use stats for battle would put some characters at a disadvantage, the ones' whose talents lie outside of battle. As some sort of a forewarning or such: If we were to drop the use of rules in favor of roleplaying except for when it came to battles, I would resign as GM. I feel comfortable currently because there are guidelines, it does not take an enormous amount of discretion. Even with others by my side I wouldn't feel comfortable with that much power. And now something that's not quite so in-depth: I think it wouldn't be a bad idea if we had a link from the D&D boards. While we're still finalizing things I'm not sure I'd want it just yet. Don't want people dropping by a newly noticed board only to not come back since they see everyone's still talking about rules. Wow. Didn't know I typed that much. Last thing to tag on, No, I don't really get your drift. Not every post will require rolling. I see Bluff checks being used to disguise oneself, but if Character A decides to go off and lie to Character B abou Plan PENGY I don't see that requiring any checks unless Character A is pretending to be someone else or something like that. Or maybe I just need "game post" clarified.
Tenzhi 06-10-05, 07:22 PM	It sounds nice to say that we could just use stats to battle or such, but then comes the point where someone says that they did X outside of battle when X would be helpful here also, but with the stats they aren't able to do it. Thinking further, saying we would only use stats for battle would put some characters at a disadvantage, the ones' whose talents lie outside of battle. Conversely, a character who is able to do something in concept cannot exist via the limitations of stats. It's a two-way street. So in order to be able to realize both types of characters (stat-based and concept-based) we have to have both kinds of roleplay. As the stat-based roleplay is only necessary for confrontation, it makes sense that they would only see use in an arena-type situation. The character whose use lies outside of battle shouldn't need stats - after all, social skills can't be used against PCs outside of combat anyway. No, I don't really get your drift. Not every post will require rolling. I see Bluff checks being used to disguise oneself, but if Character A decides to go off and lie to Character B abou Plan PENGY I don't see that requiring any checks unless Character A is pretending to be someone else or something like that. Or maybe I just need "game post" clarified. Not every post will require rolling - but once the rolling starts it may take days to get through it all. What is a fairly quick process at the table (or even over IRC) is a lengthy arduous task full of delay over message boards. One-on-one battles that should take minutes end up taking hours. And the more people involved the greater the ratio of minutes:hours becomes.
Bait the Bard 06-10-05, 08:48 PM	Wannabie boy-bards like bait should not hold power. Period. Feh! :P Well Bait/Tenzhi we seem to be outnumbered. Its the old versus the new and the new are comming out on top. I definitly agree with both of your ideas. Well, it seems to me that we are not 'outnumbered', as you put it, at least in this thread. Dyne opposes the RP-Only style, and his opinion is valid. I also think (though it's harder to tell) that Jagger also disapproves of the RPing style. Those in favour at the moment seem to be Tenzhi, you, and me, with De Bativier on the sidelines. Go learn some maths Frpsty :P But, I really don't want to turn this into a 'Majority-rule' thing; what I really want to find is something that most people are happy with, and that can get started quickly, so as not to delay the game any longer. I also think that there are a number of other people who want the same thing. If we want to see anything happen I do hope one of the more "conservative" oldies gets the next gm-position. No, I would say that if we want something to happen we have to have a GM who is active, and will go about implementing things, not just sit around discussing them. Weather they implement RP or not is up to them, but something needs to happen, and the sooner, the better. (If anyone took it so, this is not a jab at the current (or ex) GMs, as I respect them, and the hard work they've put in. I'm just talking in general terms.) Bait, I was your fiddle in the DEW wars and thats only beacuse you were there first. I wouldn't let that happen again but I would be honored if you re-joined us and applied for the gm position. I know u hate the whole rules thing but I think if enough of the older people got the position we could change that. :rofl: And.. how exactly would you stop it form happening? :P And as for GMing. I think I would enjoy the experience, and try to get some things happening, but I really don't want to get in as part of a group thing to turn the IFWGs into RP-only. I don't think that would go down well.. However, I'm also very busy at the moment, so I'm not really sure if I could be active enough, or guarantee internet activity. I will think about it. My vision on this subject is, that the primary purpose of the foundations should indeed be their subject. They should discuss this subject and create new "stuff". :clap: I agree totaly with this. The foundations were created to discuss, and add, to their subject. It shoudl stay like that, but, as almost everyone wants the IFWGs, we may as well have them. In a sub-forum, as I said before, so as not to disturb the 'deep discussions'.
Silmarien Aldalome 06-11-05, 08:10 AM	Hi everyone. @Dyne, I'll send to your e-mail address, and try that. @all the argument I tabled about 'hit-rates' and the D&D boards, where greater posting rates is a simple, statistical agument that goes like this: If a) 5% of "passers by" decide to post, b) the D&D boards have, say 1000 passers by a day and c) this part of the world has say, 100 passers by a day (i.e. fewer) d) then there will be 50 posts per day, not 5 by simple exposure to greater numbers of posters. If you stand on the corner of 1st Avenue and 100th street with a pop corn stand, and have an exact same pop corn stand on Time Square, you would be expected to sell more popcorn. regards stav
Dyne 06-11-05, 11:46 AM	As some sort of a forewarning or such: If we were to drop the use of rules in favor of roleplaying except for when it came to battles, I would resign as GM. I feel comfortable currently because there are guidelines, it does not take an enormous amount of discretion. Even with others by my side I wouldn't feel comfortable with that much power. I like the RP stuff sometimes, but this game just won't work at all without a rules-structure. So, I too would quit the game. @Stav: I still never got a message. I don't understand why, my PM box and email aren't full, and I've been getting messages from other people.
jagggar 06-11-05, 02:30 PM	Well, it seems to me that we are not 'outnumbered', as you put it, at least in this thread. Dyne opposes the RP-Only style, and his opinion is valid. I also think (though it's harder to tell) that Jagger also disapproves of the RPing style. It's not that I disapprove of it exactly. It's more that I disapprove of it in this setting. Not that I'm going to yell at anyone who says, "I just can't stat this character, it would be blasphemy." and RPed anyway. If such characters get in trouble which must be resolved by battle, I guess I sort of see a champion system pop up.
Bait the Bard 06-12-05, 07:10 AM	I like the RP stuff sometimes, but this game just won't work at all without a rules-structure. So, I too would quit the game. Well, it does basically come down to this. I say that it can work, and will work better as an RP. You say it needs rules. And, basically, neither of us can prove this, so the point becomes moot.. And as for Jaggers GM worries, I think that adopting an RP style would make it easier to run the game, giving them more time to devote to other things. Basically, with an RP system, everyone else who is RPing will, if they are reasonable people, act reasonably, and so no one needs to check in on them. If someone 'unreasonable' appears, and tries to work the system to his advantage, everyone else would just not let him carry on. It does work on a kind of trust system, but I know that all the people around ehre would not powerplay, and so the game would be fun, quick and enjoable. But back to the GMing. As I said, in an RP, it's usually the other players who really take care of things, so the GM shouldn't need to step in, or quote 'The Law' very often. This would leave them more time to add to the Rp world, Rp their own character, and so get more form the game, and put more into it, making everyone's experience better.
Dyne 06-12-05, 02:22 PM	That's probably the main problem. I am positive that at least a few people would powerplay, and there's nothing the others could do about it except get upset at them. Additionally, the people that we are most familiar with here won't be the only ones playing (hopefully). Especially if we are moved to the D&D Boards, there will be a lot of new players. There's no way to ensure that everyone will act reasonably, and so it kinda ruins the system. Also, if I recall correctly, the entire reason it crashed before was because people were accusing each other of powerplaying. It was mostly because people were using homebrew material that others thought was overpowered. If there were no rules, I believe it would magnify this problem greatly. With the current system we have now (the structured rules), there is a much closer watch on the material. One of the main focuses this time around is balance, and I think it's something that should be focused on.
jagggar 06-13-05, 04:04 PM	When someone godmods there's generally three to four solutions: Ignore - No one mentions what they say/do in their reply. Godmodder may then yell at people for ignoring them. Play Along - This often leads to a slowly increasing power-level at best. At worse it leads to a quickly increasing power-level. Tell Them They Are Godmodding - Will most likely be denied or such. May eventually turn into a flamewar. Flame - Not the answer, definately not here. I'll admit that I have problems thinking that everyone who shows up here will be a reasonable person. What would the role of GM be if we went to a freeform system?
Bait the Bard 06-13-05, 11:24 PM	That's probably the main problem. I am positive that at least a few people would powerplay, and there's nothing the others could do about it except get upset at them. When someone godmods there's generally three to four solutions: Ignore - No one mentions what they say/do in their reply. Godmodder may then yell at people for ignoring them. Play Along - This often leads to a slowly increasing power-level at best. At worse it leads to a quickly increasing power-level. Tell Them They Are Godmodding - Will most likely be denied or such. May eventually turn into a flamewar. Flame - Not the answer, definately not here. Well, in any game people will powerplay. The last big argument here was over Droga (and Sil), when most people thought Droga's character was overpowered, he said it wasn't, flames insued. My point here being that powerplaying can happen in Stat-based systems just as easily as RP games. In either of the games, as long as people can talk nicely about it, and not just scream out "J00 p0werplay!!11!", things can be resolved nicely (either through creating a new character, or learning to tone down your 'control' over other players). What would the role of GM be if we went to a freeform system? In general, to statrt new (and interesting) RP threads, to help people generate plot ideas, and to tie things together. It would be good to be an active RP poster, so that you can sort out in-character difficulties before they become larger ones. The GMs could also add to the setting, plan a plotline for some big (and fun) event, and those sort of things. Basically, make and keep games running. Also, related to the first section, they could drop into a thread where someone is 'powerplaying', and useing either good RP, or talking skills, try to explain to the person what they're doing, show them how to RP better, and keep the game flowing. With the GM Rping style things, their characters should be 'powerful' ones, with a reason to be in almost any thread, so they can sort out any difficulties. This can either be by having a roveing character, or a magical one, who can teleport around, so that they can appear in any sistuation without too much fuss. I'll admit that I have problems thinking that everyone who shows up here will be a reasonable person. While I admit that some people have quick tempers, or haven't RP'd much, or something, I'm pretty sure that with a quick intorduction and good examples pretty much everyone here would be a good, and fun, RPer. Of course, there are ********s everywhere, but what can you do?
Dyne 06-14-05, 12:58 AM	My point here being that powerplaying can happen in Stat-based systems just as easily as RP games. I beg to differ. In case you haven't noticed, Droga and Sil are redoing their stuff. Droga has already toned the Skygge down a bit, and Sil is attempting to put his HEF Lore into a form that everyone can agree on. Powerplaying happened last time because there was no restriction on material. This is the exact reason why powerplaying happens in RP Only: no restriction. This time, however, there IS restriction. As I've said, homebrew stuff is being looked at MUCH more closely. Game-breaking stuff isn't going to get slipped in again. It is just increasingly difficult to make a RP Only game work with more people. It takes a lot of trust, and the more people, the more varied the opinions of those people, and the more difficult it is to develop that necessary trust.
Frostbite_Ravenheart 06-14-05, 08:46 PM	And.. how exactly would you stop it form happening? :P I dont have a lot of time I devot to this at the momment. I will say this though Bait: You were well-rooted during the DEW wars. I showed up second and was forced to become your second as I wanted to play in your faction. This is my ball court now. I may not have as strong a presence as I used to but don't think that just beacuse I don't talk as much that what was isn't. I've got either a personal or foundation alliance with 75% of the people not in CoA secret or not. What have you got Bait? No foundation, no friends, no allies, few people who remeber you and even fewer who care. Who's the ***** now? ;). -Frosty
Bait the Bard 06-14-05, 10:38 PM	I dont have a lot of time I devot to this at the momment. I will say this though Bait: You were well-rooted during the DEW wars. I showed up second and was forced to become your second as I wanted to play in your faction. This is my ball court now. I may not have as strong a presence as I used to but don't think that just beacuse I don't talk as much that what was isn't. I've got either a personal or foundation alliance with 75% of the people not in CoA secret or not. What have you got Bait? No foundation, no friends, no allies, few people who remeber you and even fewer who care. Who's the ***** now? ;). -Frosty :rofl: :rofl: :bow: Nicely said :P However, you seem to have forgotten that my talent is to start low, and build up. I've had two years of practise in the DEW at it (you weren't around at the very beginning, were you.. ;) ). And I'm used to working by myself, anyway, if you recall ;) And there's still the Lods of Darkness Foundation.. :P And you'd be suprised at how quickly I can make freinds.. :plotting: I love it! You've just reminded me why I RP :) Thank you Frosty :D Now I just need some RP!
Tenzhi 06-15-05, 01:31 AM	Also, if I recall correctly, the entire reason it crashed before was because people were accusing each other of powerplaying. It was mostly because people were using homebrew material that others thought was overpowered. If there were no rules, I believe it would magnify this problem greatly. "Powerplaying" cannot happen without rules. The very nature of the beast requires rules and stats, as it definitively requires one character having an advantage over another. As long as there are rules, there will be people who exploit them and gain advantage over others who cannot exploit them as well.
Dyne 06-15-05, 01:43 AM	"Powerplaying" cannot happen without rules. The very nature of the beast requires rules and stats, as it definitively requires one character having an advantage over another. As long as there are rules, there will be people who exploit them and gain advantage over others who cannot exploit them as well. Well... tough cookiees. What I meant was more like people running around and acting like they're god. I know there will be plenty of people posting like "I chop you in half, badass style, without even breaking a sweat. :cool: " That isn't very fun for some of us (especially those at the receiving end). Anyway, I like rules partially because I feel more secure in them, and partially because they make me feel more like something is actually "happening," rather than just talking. However, the RP part is an essential part, so I really like to take both parts together.
Tenzhi 06-15-05, 01:53 AM	I say that it can work, and will work better as an RP. You say it needs rules. And, basically, neither of us can prove this, so the point becomes moot.. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding (or putting, depending on who you ask). Before they tried to instill rules, things went pretty smoothly - when they tried to put rules into it things ground to a screeching and yelling halt. Seems like fair proof to me. Arguments happened before they tried to install rules, but those arguments were on the flavourful nature of various effects and didn't really impede discussion or play. Arguments post-rules revolved around balance and rules - and since the rules were necessary for play, play can't go on until such arguments are settled. More proof.
Bait the Bard 06-15-05, 04:07 AM	What I meant was more like people running around and acting like they're god. I know there will be plenty of people posting like "I chop you in half, badass style, without even breaking a sweat. :cool: " That isn't very fun for some of us (especially those at the receiving end). Oh, let me go further, and say that nobody likes this (exept maybe the person who does the action). The thing we're discussing isn't weather powerplaying is good, or should be allowed (an empathetic 'No!' to both), but in which system it is less likely to occur. Anyway, I like rules partially because I feel more secure in them, and partially because they make me feel more like something is actually "happening," rather than just talking. Rules do make (some ;) ) people feel more secure; they do add a certain 'firmness' - boudry? - to the game. However, it is my opinion that rules/stats limit much more than bring any stability. With a good RP GM, you really don't need the rules to feel secure, just the knowledge that the other people arn't total :censored:, and that the GM will lay down the law. However, the RP part is an essential part, so I really like to take both parts together. What has happened in a couple of other RPs that I took part in, is that people began with RPing a character, and adventuring with them, etc. They then decided to make up a general character sheet for their character, just so people could kind of see how their character would be in actual D&D. These sheets were look at, discussed, and what have you, but they in no way affected the actual RP that was going on. Nobody went back to the sheets and then decided 'Oh no, I can't do x.'. You could do this here, just so people can see how other people's characters 'stat out'. As various peopl have suggested, you then could use those stats to battle in the Arena, with optional rewards, or something like that. One thing I should point out though is that noone had set rules/limits on their character, on the character shhet. They just created them how they thought they would be, with strengths, weaknessess, and quicrky things. They were no gods on paper ;)
Dyne 06-15-05, 01:53 PM	Another thing, if we went by RP Only, all the effort we put into the rules would be wasted. And I'd like to see how the rules work out before we take any drastic action like that.