RE: of rules and munchkins

["Brandon Stenger" <bh010296@email.msn.com>]

I am, once again, all for this. I'm willing to help in any way necessary. I
would suggest starting with rulings that we recall we have made, or rulings
that we have witnessed as we were playing. And what I mean by that is,
rulings that were based around our character's specialties. For example,
I've had a ton of experience with Isis rulings that not many others would
care to know or have bothered to learn.

The first step then, would be to compile the rulings, which I am willing to
do, and then publish online. Send them my way, or to the list, and I will
work with them as I am able.

Brandon

-----Original Message-----
From: Steven E. Ames [mailto:steve@virtual-voodoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 1:35 PM
To: Benjamin Austin
Cc: gmlist@cioe.com
Subject: Re: of rules and munchkins


> But is there a list of common rulings that have not been included in
the
> book?  I know at some point recently there was a discussion about the
> newer GMs, and others for that matter, being able to look at older
rulings
> made by other GMs but I don't remember if anything came out of it
(damn
> fickle memory).  I'm not suggesting by any means that we sit down and
go
> over the book and make common place rulings for vague passages but I
do
> understand the frustration that players have.

Agreed totally. This is why the constitution is tiny, but the actual law
is HUGE. I think we _should_ produce a second document that includes
common rulings and the justification for those rulings. As long as the
new document used the same numbering scheme as the actual manual then
having a "GM's Guide" would be valuable and a quick reference. We've got
some talented people who could build an on-line version pretty easy
(people can print at their own leisure on their own dollar :).

Any thoughts on this? Any volunteers? I think we can all agree that the
people putting a lot of effort into this should get an eep reward just
like writing up adventures.

> There's also the options of researching spells and developing new
skills
> which also makes the game open-ended.

Quite right.

> > 3. Realism. The game is easier to relate to if it isn't glaringly
> >
> > 4. Simplification. Making the rules simpler to use without removing
any
>
> 3 and 4 are often a trade off.  Games that go over-board in realism
are
> _usually_ incredible complex and slow to play.  Balacing the two is a
> difficult process.

Yep.

> > 2. Gameflow takes precedence over all else... including realism. Any
> > mechanic that slows (or halts) a game is bad. Any mechanism which
> > causes
> > people to forget they are role-playing and go "that's dumb" is bad.
>
> I would say that fairness (or, probably, consistency would be a better
way
> of pharsing it) is on the same level as gameflow.  Few things piss
players
> off more than not being able to do something one week and then
watching
> five people do it the next.

Couldn't agree more. Documented precedence (aka "GM's Guide") would be
extremely valuable in promoting consistent rulings.

-Steve