Re: Updates.

[Wright Frazier <khelek@ns1.cioe.com>]

> actor didn't like.  As a punishment/consequence for the
> character's actions at that time, the actor made him
> "relive" the life of every person he had ever killed.

As Joe himself said..thats not a punishment to relive the death
of every person he killed, thats a bonus, even if you gain
only a few things.  Also, do not say that Gm's are running it
wrong, we have 0 details on this from any source beyond Joe,
and it is not Joe's fault if its misunderstood, may be it
wasn't outlined properly to him, or if it was done over time,
it was forgotten since there is no written documentation whatso
ever about it.
Experience is good enough, esspecially for things like combat,
and I believe one of his major points was that he wacked
several combat veterans of vietnam in some gunfight with
police, as well as several police officers.  So even if
he does gain some minor knowledge from these people, he is
gonna get a lot of knowledge that shouldn't be given out,
i.e. even 1/10 of the training that a US Marine receives is
still going to help significantly.


> 2.  The player/character certainly did NOT immediately write
> down anything RIGHT after the fact so normal memory checks
> would apply.  Since he got all of these memory/experiences at
> once, it would be nigh on impossible for the character to have
> the knowledge to create bullets.  If anything, the character would
> have enough knowledge to get himself blown up in the process.
> 
> 3.  There was no write up since this should not have had any
> far reaching effects other than to curb a characters blood lust
> if played out properly.
> 
> Once again, GMs should NOT take players words on what they
> know or what they have.  This brings up another point which Dan
> has already sort of fixed.  There are a couple of items that I made
> (which were not supposed to get into player hands anyway, but
> they pulled something out of their a**) which got changed in the
> magic item database to be SIGNIFICANTLY more powerful than
> they were.  Any change to a GM's magic item should be run through
> the GM who gave it unless something in game happens to that item
> so that it is modified through the course of an adventure.  Often 
> these modifications take the form of such and such player said "that
> is not the way this item is supposed to work".  The GM that player is
> running under that evening changes it to match what the player says.
> Occasionally a GM has "fixed" an item so that it isn't in their opinion
> so "Mega".  Even if this is Dan doing the fixing, I think the original GM
> should be contacted.  This should be done so that the GM can either
> be made to understand how what they gave out was unacceptable, or
> so that the GM has a chance to defend their decision/point out how
> someone altered the item.

And how are we supposed to do this when there is no write up on it or
the item given out is badly detailed?  Answer, we can't, so it should
be written up.


Wright