Re: of rules and munchkins

["Steven E. Ames" <steve@virtual-voodoo.com>]

If we are sending rulings to the GM-List (or directly to Sean who has
graciously volunteered to organize) make sure to include the relevant
section of the manual (by section number and name).

-Steve

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brandon Stenger" <bh010296@email.msn.com>
To: "GM List" <gmlist@cioe.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 3:44 PM
Subject: RE: of rules and munchkins


> 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
>
>