Re: [Fwd: Re: The T'or Ruling]

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

> > [Daniel Lawrence]  Why are we getting into heated debates about a 
> > GAME that we play to
> > have fun? You are right, we can ignore and/or delete mail we don't 
> > want to deal with.... 
> > but that very act is often used to say that we are being unresponsive 
> > and wrong.  AQ used to be a lot more fun. 
> 
> You should see soccer games in Europe! Heated has nothing to do with
> with if its a game or not. If it did people woulnd't watch hockey games.
> You only put energy into what you care about. A lot of us like gaming
> therefor we put a lot of energy into making it better.

Hmmm...bad image..pissed off aq players burning down stuart center
because a character died. ;)

> 
> > When playing a game, like monopoly or Risk... it would never occur 
> > to me to turn to one of
> > my friends and say "Your Cheating!" It would take GREAT provocation 
> > before I would do
> > that, like they would have to be actually cheating.
> 
> And get caught. :) And no one really cares about monopoly or Risk. Put
> some money on the line, maybe a lot of money, make it something you care
> about and the same behavior will start being exhibited.

Gotta agree with Steve here.  You put serious time and effort into
a character, you get very attached to it.  Death happens, but bad
deaths are not cool, and deaths on a whim are worse.  Suffered two
too many of the whim deaths, and a bend death as well.  Didn't like it.
Let me kill myself by my own stupidity thanks, don't make it up for me.

> 
> If a rule was actually misplayed than the players finger is not
> misplaced. The fact that we are so quick to point that finger only
> says that its a common occurance. I don't really care about blame
> half the time. I want GMs to admit they made a mistake and endeavor
> not to do it again. This GMs are infalliable go piss elsewhere attitude
> is detrimental to gaming. I'd like to see infalliable GMs. That would
> be great and I guarentee they would never have the finger pointed at
> them. We have a group of GMs and I believe we are all answerable to
> one another and to our players. As you say, it is only a game, why
> maintain that GMs are infalliable and unquestionable if its only a
> game? We need to discuss rulings. And there will always be dissent
> because GMing styles differ.

*nod* I'm not infaliable, and I will retcon some dickup I've made in
game, just have a good reason for interupting me is all I ask.

> 
> 1) discuss our rulings. The rules basis for them and our intents and
>    motivations.
> 
> 2) Document these rulings for the future.
> 
> I think we are, currently, attempting to make strides toward #1. Number
> 2 is pretty worthless until we can get people to go along with #1. When
> that time comes and the majority of GMs on this list agree to openly
> discuss their rulings I would be more than happy to become point for
> item 2 (that is writeup everything and keep that list available for anyone
> to look at).

> In fact, I'm officially calling for a reforendum. Any GM who agrees
> with the above spew and is willing to discuss their rulings in keeping
> with item #1 (above), drop me a line. Lets see how far we have to go
> before we can start documenting our rulings and move toward GM
> consistency.
> 
> 						-Steve
> 

Add me to the list.

Wright