Rape in RPG's: Why is it a hot topic?
Kevin Lowe
Keywords:
I just finished answering a post about an in-character rape, and it made
me think a little more deeply about the whole issue of rape in RPG's.
Yes, it's a nasty topic... but why?
RPG characters die all the time, and I'd rather be raped than die. In
games with critical hit systems, hit locations, or unforgiving referees
characters can lose limbs or organs easily, and I'd rather be raped than
lose an arm, leg or eye. In fact, I can think of whole hordes of things
that can happen in role playing games (curses, transformations,
imprisonment in a hell of some kind, medieval torture, being used as food
for weird alien larvae) that seem to me (an adult male who has never been
raped) far, far worse than rape.
This is a little disturbing, because as a referee I would rule that a
character lost a limb, or was killed, without a qualm. In one game I
played in, I was kind of hoping that, after a nasty accident, my
character would be paralysed from the waist down so I could get some
cripple pathos out of the whole incident (it was a soap-opera scifi game,
admittedly a special case). But I don't think I would ever have a PC
raped in one of my games... it seems to be beyond the pale somehow. Even
though a villain _might_, say, hold a PC down and cut their eye out, if
they were so inclined.
(Oops, Brisbane summer storm coming, I'll hurry up).
Does anyone care to discuss this inconsistency? I'd like to have a
consistent basis for what I will and won't do in a game, for my own
benefit and as a sort of "social contract" with the players. Am I just
hypersensitive about rape, or is everyone? Does this relate to player's
legendary disinclination to surrender or be captured? - after all, rape is
a very unpleasant form of loss of control. Or would you folks out there
treat rape as a bit like death in RPG's? In that, if the risk was
signposted and the player took the risk, then the player should take
his/her lumps. (Bad choice of words, but what the heck).
Yours, Kevin Lowe (Brisbane, Australia).
C. Z. Rasmussen
>
>I just finished answering a post about an in-character rape, and it made
>me think a little more deeply about the whole issue of rape in RPG's.
>Yes, it's a nasty topic... but why?
Most players do not consider it terribly likely that *they* will be hacked
to death by an assortment of swords, or turned into a crispy critter via
fireball or red dragon breath. Rape is a hazard which is faced by players
in real life, particularly if you are a female on a college campus or in a
nasty neighborhood. I suspect that the fact that it could happen to players
makes it more terrifying when it happens to characters. In any case, I
would like to note that I played with a similar group for a short time in
high school; about half the group was disgusted enough by the DM's antics to
walk out and form a new group.
C. Z. Rasmussen
er...@mv.mv.com
Thomas A. Vallejos
>I just finished answering a post about an in-character rape, and it
made
>me think a little more deeply about the whole issue of rape in RPG's.
>Yes, it's a nasty topic... but why?
(snip)
Unlike death or amputation rape is a violation not only to the body but
to the spirit. Psychologists call it the ultimate form of control.
>characters can lose limbs or organs easily, and I'd rather be raped
than
>lose an arm, leg or eye.
There is a differnt pyschological aspect to rape than, say, losing an
eye.
(snip)
>This is a little disturbing, because as a referee I would rule that a
>character lost a limb, or was killed, without a qualm.
(snip)
I don't think its that disturbing. In fanatsy stories prsioners are
taken to the dungeon and tortured w/help of fiendish devices such as
the rack and the iron maiden. It's part of the melieu. I admit that in
the 1990s situations such of this include descriptions of rape, but why
should the GM gross out his/her players. GMs are by in large good
people, even the killer types. So it stands to reason that GMs don't
normally use rape on characters because it is UNNECESSARY to do so in
the game and therefore don't think about it.
>Does anyone care to discuss this inconsistency? I'd like to have a
>consistent basis for what I will and won't do in a game, for my own
>benefit and as a sort of "social contract" with the players. Am I
just
>hypersensitive about rape, or is everyone? Does this relate to
player's
>legendary disinclination to surrender or be captured? - after all,
rape is
>a very unpleasant form of loss of control. Or would you folks out
there
>treat rape as a bit like death in RPG's? In that, if the risk was
>signposted and the player took the risk, then the player should take
>his/her lumps. (Bad choice of words, but what the heck).
>
>Yours, Kevin Lowe (Brisbane, Australia).
Maybe it is sensitivity. As a rule PCs don't surrender voluntarily. In
all the games I've been in I only remember one time where the party
surrendered without any fighting take place. I've been playing for 17
years.
Tom vallejos
The Amorphous Mass
> Summary:
> Keywords:
>
> I just finished answering a post about an in-character rape, and it made
> me think a little more deeply about the whole issue of rape in RPG's.
> Yes, it's a nasty topic... but why?
>
> RPG characters die all the time, and I'd rather be raped than die. In
> games with critical hit systems, hit locations, or unforgiving referees
> characters can lose limbs or organs easily, and I'd rather be raped than
> lose an arm, leg or eye. In fact, I can think of whole hordes of things
> that can happen in role playing games (curses, transformations,
> imprisonment in a hell of some kind, medieval torture, being used as food
> for weird alien larvae) that seem to me (an adult male who has never been
> raped) far, far worse than rape.
Granted. But _players_ (female ones, anyway) are actually fairly
_likely_ to have been raped -- it's much more likely than torture,
dismemberment and death (you can't offend a dead player anyway) and it's
scars are not generally visible. If a new player walks into the room
missing his left arm you know something terrible happened to him at some
point and you can take appropriate precautions; if a new female player
walks into the room you can't tell if she's been raped or not, but it's
fairly likely she has, and at any rate odds are you aren't going to
ask. So, if you don't know if a player has been raped and you don't
want to find out the hard way you will be very careful and circumspect
about the issue.
That's my take on it, anyway.
----------------
The Amorphous Mass (james-f-...@uiowa.edu)
aka Hyacinth, elven ambassador to the Human Islands
"Black as the night, swift as the wind, subtle as a summer sunset,
lovely as moonlight on the sea, and generally pretty wierd"
Jo Walton
tom...@ix.netcom.com "Thomas A. Vallejos " writes:
> Unlike death or amputation rape is a violation not only to the body but
> to the spirit. Psychologists call it the ultimate form of control.
The last time we had this discussion (on r.g.frp.misc, I believe) Sarah Kahn
argued convincingly and chillingly that this distinction is to define women
in exclusively sexual terms ("Rape is more damaging to the spirit than having
your right arm torn off, because sex is more important than your right arm"?
No.) Any psychological torture (including rape) is a violation - and more of a
violation than, say, an accident.
I believe the general consensus the last time was that because death and
violence are within genre conventions and rape is not, and because rape within
games can threaten player/GM trust, and because there may be rape-victims in
the group, rape in games is generally a bad idea.
--
Jo
***********************************************************
- - I kissed a kif at Kefk - -
***********************************************************
Storytelling Card Games from the Magellanica Company:
Into the Dark Continent, Dragon's Cave, & Deserted Chapel
Now available nationally, distributed by Esdevium Games
Michael Sandy
Why is there an inconsistency about having death, mutilation and
permanent curses in a campaign, but rape is of a different quality?
Because it is much more one-sided serious. Let me put it crudely:
many male adolescent gamers would rather watch or describe crudely
a rape scene than a mutilation scene, and in response to this
people who pride themselves on mature play steer away from it.
Twits may fantasize about rape and getting away with it,
but they are incapable of dealing with the emotional complexity
of it in a nontrivial way.
I mean, they can understand how their character would react if it
were bullied or hurt, but can't comprehend SEX. Emotional attractions
and detestations are hard for immature gamers to play around, and the
habit sets in.
A lot of people have bad experiences with games where sex and rape were
brought in by immature, often cruel people. At the best it was tacky,
and at the worst it was a form of harassment which the harasser
justified as "only in a game", or "just being in character".
That is my opinion as to why rape in RPGs is seen the way it is.
Michael Sandy
Yean Wei Ong
ml32...@student.uq.edu.au (Kevin Lowe) writes (in part):
> I just finished answering a post about an in-character rape, and it made
Funnily enough, so have I ...
> me think a little more deeply about the whole issue of rape in RPG's.
> Yes, it's a nasty topic... but why?
>
> RPG characters die all the time, and I'd rather be raped than die. In
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Not having been raped or killed before, I don't consider myself
in a position to judge relative severity. No one is ever really
given the choice of being raped or killed (at least, not to my
knowledge), so it's difficult to say. How a person takes it
depends on his/her individual personality.
> characters can lose limbs or organs easily, and I'd rather be raped than
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> lose an arm, leg or eye. In fact, I can think of whole hordes of things
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't want to sound like I'm criticising you, Kevin, but if
this is the way you feel, then aren't you missing the point of
role-playing? Isn't role-playing about acting a role, rather
than just playing games with mere numbers? (And I'm not knocking
the _occasional_ hack and slash session, which I have and will
continue to enjoy.) Sure, in terms of game mechanics, a rape is
less annoying than a lost limb, but characters are more than a
bunch of numbers. At least, they should be in any game where rape
is a part of that game.
A friend of mine has written his own role-playing system, where one
of the attributes is Sanity. If your character suffers psychological
trauma, his/her Sanity goes down, and you, the player, are expected
to role-play the character appropriately. I'm sure this has come
up in other role-playing systems before, but the idea is there that
a character is more than just Strength, Intelligence, etc.
> Does anyone care to discuss this inconsistency? I'd like to have a
Sure, here goes ...
For a start, I personally don't think that you can compare rape
to physical wounding (in terms of game mechanics). Sure, in
reality, there is usually great physical injury involved, but
rape is _much_ more than the infliction of physical pain--it has
a psychological and spiritual aspect as well--one that a mere cut
(no matter how big) does not have.
When one person rapes another, what they are doing is degrading
the victim. They are saying to the victim, "You are nothing--I
am using you just how I please, and there's nothing you can do
about it." You don't get that in normal combat because, while one
person might have injured another, the first person must be pretty
careful not to get injured in the process. Rape is a one way thing;
combat is not. Even foes that hate each other have at least a
grudging respect for each other--if they lose that respect, they
run the risk of being killed because they have underestimated
their opponent. Rape shows a total lack of respect and decency.
From a Christian perspective, people were made by God to relate
to each other with love; it's easy to see that rape is one of the
greatest violations of this design specification, considering that
sex is, in its natural state, one of the most intimate ways that
two people can relate to each other and express their love for one
another.
Back to the game mechanics side of things ... while a character
might sustain physical damage, it can usually be fixed. Even
with severe wounds or death, magic can cure. Rape, on the other
hand, is not curable. Nor is the loss of virginity, while we're
on this topic.
Sure, the _physical_ side of things can be changed, but _not_ the
spiritual. Even if a female character (whether PC or NPC) were to
have her hymen repaired after having sex (I always laugh when I
read about potions that do this, and are called "Potions of
Virginity Restoration" or things like that), there is no way one
could consider her to be a virgin any more. If you (the reader,
not Kevin) follow the argument that virginity is a purely physical
state, then would you consider a man who has had sex to be a virgin
still? Men don't change physically after having sex, do they? It
has to do with one's mind and soul. Once that innocence--that purity
--has been lost, it cannot be regained. That is why it is so
valuable. (Interestingly, I have been unable to find a word that
defines "a man who has not had sexual intercourse yet" ... used in
its strictest sense, a virgin is _specifically_ a woman who has not
had sexual intercourse yet.)
Well, I hope that this has helped your understanding of why rape
is different from a combat wound, Kevin ... writing all of this
has certainly made _me_ think about the issue more rigorously!
Any other views out there? :-)
Regards,
Yean Wei.
--
Yean Wei ONG Department of Psychology
MSc(AppPsych) Student The University of Western Australia
yea...@freud.psy.uwa.edu.au Crawley WA 6907
Opinions expressed are strictly my own. Australia
Trevor Martin Medina
: I just finished answering a post about an in-character rape, and it made
: me think a little more deeply about the whole issue of rape in RPG's.
As a general rule, Dragons and swords are not an expected means
of death- we do not anticipate ever meeting Cthulhu, or Tiamat herself.
Death is something that can happen to anyone at any time. Realistically
as well as in the realm of Role play. But rape is an act of cruelty and
unmitigated evil which, as many other people have noted, is also a
violation of not only the body but of the mind. It also has a deeply
personal affect in that it is a danger that we *all* must face, if not
for ourselves, then for our wives, sisters, daughters, and other
family and friends. A very real danger that makes most people feel
uncomfortable to discuss. Be glad I'm not a sociology major- this topic
could run for *days*.
: RPG characters die all the time, and I'd rather be raped than die. In
: games with critical hit systems, hit locations, or unforgiving referees
: characters can lose limbs or organs easily, and I'd rather be raped than
: lose an arm, leg or eye. In fact, I can think of whole hordes of things
: that can happen in role playing games (curses, transformations,
: imprisonment in a hell of some kind, medieval torture, being used as food
: for weird alien larvae) that seem to me (an adult male who has never been
: raped) far, far worse than rape.
That is a matter of opinion (not insulting, just noting). The
issue for discussion is wether or not you want life or quality of life.
I never understood that in some instances, death might be the better
option. The thing that changed my mind was "The Sand Pebbles" with Steve
McQueen. After a U.S. sailor wins a boxing match against a local, the
local is paraded in the streets, being tortured. As the victim is being
paraded in front of the Navy vessel, McQueen takes a rifle and kills the
poor guy. It is a question that has no easy answers and must be decided
upon by each indvidual person who considers the question. I pose the
question each time I make a commentary on self defense- how far are you
willing to go to protect yourself or someone you care about? Are you
willing to kill another human being who may very will rape and/or kill
you? Or your child? Some people may very well feel that death is the
better option; for men particularly. When you are dead, it is finished-
when you are raped and live, you face a long, torturous road of pain and
suffering. Some people don't have the strength or support to make that
journey. Some people will have the force of will to say- "I survived.
No matter what else happened, I survived." Where there is life, there is
hope. At least to the more optimistic among us.
: This is a little disturbing, because as a referee I would rule that a
: character lost a limb, or was killed, without a qualm. In one game I
: played in, I was kind of hoping that, after a nasty accident, my
: character would be paralysed from the waist down so I could get some
: cripple pathos out of the whole incident (it was a soap-opera scifi game,
: admittedly a special case). But I don't think I would ever have a PC
: raped in one of my games... it seems to be beyond the pale somehow. Even
: though a villain _might_, say, hold a PC down and cut their eye out, if
: they were so inclined.
Crippling and maiming does not have the particular connotations
of rape- it does not have the "domination" aspect, where your body and
spirit are broken and someone else establishes their "superiority" over
you. Losing a limb does not have the same feeling of powerlessness and
personal violation that rape inflicts- as a deliberate act.
Weather conditions snipped
: Does anyone care to discuss this inconsistency? I'd like to have a
: consistent basis for what I will and won't do in a game, for my own
: benefit and as a sort of "social contract" with the players. Am I just
: hypersensitive about rape, or is everyone? Does this relate to player's
: legendary disinclination to surrender or be captured? - after all, rape is
: a very unpleasant form of loss of control. Or would you folks out there
: treat rape as a bit like death in RPG's? In that, if the risk was
: signposted and the player took the risk, then the player should take
: his/her lumps. (Bad choice of words, but what the heck).
The degree of realism should be considered by the GM and the
players- if you are dealing with teenagers, the problems of the "grayer"
areas should be avoided. If you are dealing with older players,
particularly the more experienced role players, then you should test the
waters and find out what level of realism the players are comfortable
with. Generally. There are always exceptions to the rule. AD&D is
always a gray area- it can be high adventure with minimal 'realism' or it
can be constantly oppresive and disturbingly realistic. Modern games
tend to flow in a more determined direction- Most White Wolf games and
Call of Cthulhu almost demand a certain balance of fictional role play
and disturbingly realistic violence. But the degree is still left to the
discretion of the GM- I know of deviant behaviors (Necrophilia- which
everyone knows) to the more graphic types that will disembowl a person
and masturbate with the entrails, while the victim is still alive. For
all of you who were disgusted and appalled, that is an example of "going
to far", but I have known people who would cheerfully discribe that
scene. It makes for graphically realistic role play, but it can also be
personally and emotionally disturbing- particularly for younger players,
although even older or more experienced people will be repulsed by what I
just described. The bottom line is that there is no hard and fast rule
of thumb for deciding what is too much- most groups that I play with tend
to gloss over the details of what might be considered questionable.
: Yours, Kevin Lowe (Brisbane, Australia).
Trevor Medina
(Somehow, "cheers" didn't seem appropriate)
dcrei...@ivory.trentu.ca
>Summary:
>Keywords:
>I just finished answering a post about an in-character rape, and it made
>me think a little more deeply about the whole issue of rape in RPG's.
>Yes, it's a nasty topic... but why?
Because it's a nasty topic in real life.
>
>RPG characters die all the time, and I'd rather be raped than die. In
>games with critical hit systems, hit locations, or unforgiving referees
>characters can lose limbs or organs easily, and I'd rather be raped than
>lose an arm, leg or eye. In fact, I can think of whole hordes of things
>that can happen in role playing games (curses, transformations,
>imprisonment in a hell of some kind, medieval torture, being used as food
>for weird alien larvae) that seem to me (an adult male who has never been
>raped) far, far worse than rape.
Many women would disagree. I have talked to numerous women who say they
would
prefer to be killed rather than raped. As males this is not something
we can truly understand, the pervasive fear, horror and shame are not
really something we have come to be afraid of.
>
>This is a little disturbing, because as a referee I would rule that a
>character lost a limb, or was killed, without a qualm. In one game I
>played in, I was kind of hoping that, after a nasty accident, my
>character would be paralysed from the waist down so I could get some
>cripple pathos out of the whole incident (it was a soap-opera scifi game,
>admittedly a special case).
Whoa whoa whoa! "Cripple pathos"?!
Umm, obviously you aren't disabled either.
Do you think you could have phrased that in a LESS sensitive way?!
> But I don't think I would ever have a PC
>raped in one of my games... it seems to be beyond the pale somehow. Even
>though a villain _might_, say, hold a PC down and cut their eye out, if
>they were so inclined.
>
Ironically I might. But I would a) not describe it in ANY way and
b) be prepared to spend a lot of in game time talking about it,
dealing with it IC and OOC.
Odds are I just wouldn't do it.
>(Oops, Brisbane summer storm coming, I'll hurry up).
>
>Does anyone care to discuss this inconsistency? I'd like to have a
>consistent basis for what I will and won't do in a game, for my own
>benefit and as a sort of "social contract" with the players. Am I just
>hypersensitive about rape, or is everyone? Does this relate to player's
>legendary disinclination to surrender or be captured? - after all, rape is
>a very unpleasant form of loss of control. Or would you folks out there
>treat rape as a bit like death in RPG's? In that, if the risk was
>signposted and the player took the risk, then the player should take
>his/her lumps. (Bad choice of words, but what the heck).
>
>Yours, Kevin Lowe (Brisbane, Australia).
When a character dies it doesn't automatically raise dramatic fear of
real life death in the player's mind.
I fear rape would.
Frankly it's just something I don't want to exist in the real world.
So I don't want it to exist in my fantasy life either.
As for death, I know death is inevitable.
David Creighton
Doug Easterly
> What about us Disabled American Veterans out there who have been injured
> in the line of duty? Should we be put off or offended by death and
> injury in the game? Should you treat us differently?
>
> What if you had a player in your game who was physically handicap and had
> to use a wheelchair, would you not have any paralyzing injuries? What if you
> had a player in your game that was blind, would blindness never enter
> your game? How do you think that player would feel if he knew you were
> treating them differently because of your perception of disability?
>
But, Wayne, rape *is* different. Unlike a mugging, a murder, an accident,
an injury, etc., rape has a stigma of shame attached to it unlike any other
form of violence. Rape victims are often put on trial in court, by their
families, and by total strangers. Worst of all, they often put themselves
on trial. Because our society has a hard time separating sex (and our
hangups about it) and the violent and dominating nature of rape, we end
up attaching much more emotional baggage to rape than we do to disabilities,
mugging, war injuries, and so on. In fact, my understanding is that folks
who have been raped experience psychological after-effects similar to
those who have been tortured. The kinds of scars left by rape are very
different. The analogies you use are not entirely apropos.
Doug
Anne B. (Nonie) Rider
> What if you had a player in your game who was physically handicap and had
> to use a wheelchair, would you not have any paralyzing injuries?
If I thought my roleplaying would hurt them, then no.
Most handicapped people were made that way accidentally--by genetics,
by car accident, and so on. Most rape victims were made that way by
people who thought they had a RIGHT to rape them, and who thought of
their own needs and angers as all-powerful, and the victim as just
an NPC in their personal story. And our society supports too much
of this view.
If I roleplay a handicapped character, I'm not supporting crippling
people. But many GMs, especially young males, who roleplay rape
scenes, do so in a way that supports the original depersonalization.
I've seen characters raped because they were female; because their player
was female; because the GM thought it was funny; because the GM thought
it served them right; because their character pissed off a villain;
because the GM was looking for a new atrocity; because their previous
characters had all been raped and the GM wanted to continue the streak;
and so on.
Myself, because I DIDN'T have my own ugly memories to be reminded of,
I put up with the in-character rapes for my first few gaming years,
and then ditched those GMs along with all the other jerks. But my
friends with less pleasant histories find it very difficult to game
with virtual rapists.
--Nonie
James Shields
> Granted. But _players_ (female ones, anyway) are actually fairly
>_likely_ to have been raped -- it's much more likely than torture,
>dismemberment and death (you can't offend a dead player anyway) and it's
>scars are not generally visible. If a new player walks into the room
>missing his left arm you know something terrible happened to him at some
>point and you can take appropriate precautions; if a new female player
>walks into the room you can't tell if she's been raped or not, but it's
>fairly likely she has, and at any rate odds are you aren't going to
>ask. So, if you don't know if a player has been raped and you don't
>want to find out the hard way you will be very careful and circumspect
>about the issue.
Very, very true. Besides, if you want to shock your players, there are better
ways. Recently I had a rather nasty mercenry/assasins group out gathering the
hearts of heroes who nearly fell in battle.
The party was helping to heal these guys. One night when they were all asleep
a couple of the party members woke up. Suddenly, they found that they
couldn't move and that things were TOO quiet. In fact, they really wanted to
move ... some guy dressed all in black robes was cutting out the heart of the
sick hero lying on the bed. He was obviously screaming, but the characters
couldn't hear anything ... (whoever said that low level spells suck is wrong)
Anyway, the look of horror on the players' faces while watching this was
great. Naturally, you can't do this all of the time. They get used to it.
But, ever once in a while, something really nasty is great. Besides, it's
actually a lead in to two different adventures that are coming up for them in
the future (my world isn't "episodic" ... things happen while they're
travelling ... events are interrelated).
Rape? Of the plot devices one could use, it's probably the weakest. So, why
use it?
James
Bradley Smith
lucifer <luc...@infernal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Although not entirely relevent, what about the magic item Girdle of
>masculinity / Femininity. I would say that was a _severe_ personal violation.
Not quite, O Bringer Of Light. If we were to count that as a
severe personal violation, then _every_ thing bad that happened to your
character, ever, would count as one. Hmmm... Maybe I can sue my DM for
having my character attacked while on a mission of mercy! ;-)
But, getting back to the point, there is next to no way that I
know of for a person, in our version of reality (he says, hedging his
bets), can be forced to change sexual characteristics, against his/her
will. Yeah, I can whack off certain parts of your anatomy, but you'll
still be a man. Rape, OTOH, can and does occur in our reality.
Comparing the two isn't _quite_ appropriate.
Brad
--
************************************************************************
*The Few....The Proud....The Puppybrothers! Bradley N. Smith *
* Look for a recruiter near you! har...@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu*
************************************************************************
Jo Walton
>
> What about us Disabled American Veterans out there who have been injured
> in the line of duty? Should we be put off or offended by death and
> injury in the game? Should you treat us differently?
>
> your game? How do you think that player would feel if he knew you were
> treating them differently because of your perception of disability?
Yes, I would treat them differently, and yes, I would give more thought to
putting in anything that touched on their disabilities. Trying to ignore
someone's disabilities isn't doing them any favours. You think it would be OK
to have a paralysing injury happen to a handicapped player's character? Would
you also invite them tightrope walking in real life? You need to have a
certain sensitivity to people's problems. For some people it would be a
problem, for others it wouldn't - the GM should be careful and not just drop
people casually into something that might be traumatic. For (trivial) instance
I have two Germans in my Tuesday night game. Therefore if we were playing Space
1889 I'd certainly tone down the caricature Germans...
Rhiannon Davies
Rape is a crime of supreme violence against the essence of the person. It
is like Orwell's Room 101 - designed to kill the inner person, it's physical
manifestations are comparatively superficial. Perhaps the comforting idea
that we cannot be dominated in our essence ('they can do what they like but
they can't control what I think') is too challenged by rape for us to find it
acceptable in a recreational context.
Cheers for now
Rae
===============================================================================
The opinions expressed in this post are not necessarily my own...
===============================================================================
Rhiannon Davies R...@rces.demon.co.uk +44 114 281 8806
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
To echo (and agree) with Mike ( moo...@shrsys.hslc.org ), the amount of
traffic hasn't been sufficient to warrant a seperate newsgroup. While I
agree that any Living City threads will seem lost on the sea of general
D&D postings, this is the appropriate place for them for now. IF we can
get enough people talking about LC, _then_ we can ask for our own group.
- cisco
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
ci...@src.honeywell.com lope...@maroon.tc.umn.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------
An employer? Oh yeah - I do have one of those. I guess that
means I have to use this space for a disclaimer. *sigh*
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Is
No, as far as I know there is no established group either
for Living City, RPGA, or for convention threads in general.
If you want to set one up I'll be a frequent visitor.
-quistar (who for net purposes remains deliberately
anonymous)
<;-(}
"That was shallow, cheap and wholly based on hormones. Works
for me!" -- Freakazoid!
Ed Gibson
>To echo (and agree) with Mike ( moo...@shrsys.hslc.org ), the amount of
>traffic hasn't been sufficient to warrant a seperate newsgroup. While I
>agree that any Living City threads will seem lost on the sea of general
>D&D postings, this is the appropriate place for them for now. IF we can
>get enough people talking about LC, _then_ we can ask for our own group.
On aol, there is a living city area in the (Fellowship of On-line Gamers)
section. This is an RPGA network club. However, they could always post in
this newsgroup, we'd just have to let them know about it.
So does anyone have a topic in mind or do we want to discuss the old
favorites, complaints about modules and character generation.
Ed
Kevin Lowe
: In article <47hpsq$i...@dingo.cc.uq.oz.au>, ml32...@student.uq.edu.au (Kevin Lowe) writes:
: >character lost a limb, or was killed, without a qualm. In one game I
: >character would be paralysed from the waist down so I could get some
: >cripple pathos out of the whole incident (it was a soap-opera scifi game,
: >admittedly a special case).
: Whoa whoa whoa! "Cripple pathos"?!
: Umm, obviously you aren't disabled either.
: Do you think you could have phrased that in a LESS sensitive way?!
Yup. Easily. But actually, I expressed exactly what I meant to mean.
Pathos is the quality of an expression (such as a painting, speech or
song) that evokes a feeling of pity or sympathetic sadness. As opposed
to ethos, the quality that inspires "high", noble or universal feelings.
It's originally a Greek word. The tragic plays of ancient Greece, like
Oedipus Rex, are good examples of pathos.
There are a lot of words ('enormity' and 'pathetic' leap to mind) that don't
always actually mean what they are (carelessly) used to mean in some
circles.
If, hypothetically, I had played the role of a crippled teenager in a
wheelchair, some feelings of pity or sympathetic sadness are what I
would hope to evoke. They would be evoked, partially, because she would
be a cripple. If you are a follower of "political correctness" that
would have me use something like "ambulatorily challenged" or
"differently mobile", well, take this discussion to email and we can
argue about it there.
This actually relates to some extent to the thread. :> Those posters who
have said that they would consider introducing rape into a game have all
said (thankfully) that the emotional responses of those involved would be
examined in the game. If carefully and sensitively handled, a story
about rape, as an RPG, could include the elements called ethos and
pathos.
Thinking about such a game as a tragedy, rather than the usual violent
"comedy" (in the old sense, of a story in which everyone is alive at the
end), would help. Soap operas include elements of comedy, tradgedy,
"important" social issues, sex and sometimes violence, and they are some
of the most popular programs on TV in America, England and Australia, at
least. I think RPG's can at least handle any subject matter that a soap
opera can. The standard of acting and scriptwriting can't be much worse :>.
: David Creighton
(Followups have been limited to .advocacy, as this has next to nothing to
do with .dnd any more).
Apart from my (trivial) disagreement with you over pathos, which led to
some thoughts I'm glad I thunk anyway, thanks for an intelligent and
considered reply, David.
Still yours, Kevin Lowe (Brisbane, Australia).
John Edwards
said:
->I just finished answering a post about an in-character rape, and it made
->me think a little more deeply about the whole issue of rape in RPG's.
->Yes, it's a nasty topic... but why?
Because it's one of the most evil acts that can be inflicted
on someone. It not only leaves the victim alive, but scarred
more permenantly than anyone can imagine (unless they have gone
through it themselves).
->RPG characters die all the time, and I'd rather be raped than die. In
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I hope you're talking about RPG here. I don't really think
you know what you're talking about when you speak of being raped.
First, it COULD happen to you. Yes, men can be raped. Think
about it. Do you really think you could just walk away from it?
I've known rape victims. Two women I knew, tried to kill
themselves afterwords, rather than go on, living with what had
happened.
You need to sit back and think about exactly what you're
saying here. You have no idea what you are talking about.
John
===================================================
= I can picture in my mind a world without war, =
= A world without hate. =
= And I can picture us attacking that world =
= because they'd never expect it. =
= Jack Handey =
===================================================
Douglas L. Vandenburgh
: ->RPG characters die all the time, and I'd rather be raped than die. In
: I hope you're talking about RPG here. I don't really think
: you know what you're talking about when you speak of being raped.
: First, it COULD happen to you. Yes, men can be raped. Think
: about it. Do you really think you could just walk away from it?
: I've known rape victims. Two women I knew, tried to kill
: themselves afterwords, rather than go on, living with what had
: happened.
And we've had women post who didn't have that reaction. People
aren't all the same. Since neither of you has any personal
knowledge of what it's like, you're both equally ignorant
on the subject.
- Doug
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
EG> On aol, there is a living city area in the (Fellowship of On-line Gamers)
EG> section. This is an RPGA network club. However, they could always post in
EG> this newsgroup, we'd just have to let them know about it.
EG> So does anyone have a topic in mind or do we want to discuss the old
EG> favorites, complaints about modules and character generation.
EG> Ed
How about possible methods of injecting some continuity into the game? I
understand that the 'Raven's Bluff at war' idea (not sure of the exact
name the idea went under) was a proposal in this direction, to make Living
City adventures seem like they were taking place somewhere other than a vacuum.
I can see several solutions to the problem. Unfortunately, I don't see any
easy ones. Most solutions revolve around one person (or group of people)
writing a very large number of LC modules. This would be unattractive for
the people involved. If there was a 'bible', like TV shows have, this
would help. But someone would have to compile and maintain said bible,
again a LARGE investement of time.
I don't see an easy solution to this, and that saddens me.
Is
>I can see several solutions to the problem. Unfortunately, I don't see any
>easy ones. Most solutions revolve around one person (or group of people)
>writing a very large number of LC modules. This would be unattractive for
>the people involved. If there was a 'bible', like TV shows have, this
>would help. But someone would have to compile and maintain said bible,
>again a LARGE investement of time.
>
>I don't see an easy solution to this, and that saddens me.
>
product detailing the sights and people of the Living City. A recurring
rumor I've heard refers to the idea of a "Volo's Guide to Raven's Bluff"
or somesuch--perhaps this is the mysterious "LC5" product referred to in
the latest Polyhedron. This would make life a lot easier for all writers,
including those who own to old out-of-print modules.
>How about possible methods of injecting some continuity into the game? I
>understand that the 'Raven's Bluff at war' idea (not sure of the exact
>name the idea went under) was a proposal in this direction, to make Living
>City adventures seem like they were taking place somewhere other than a vacuum.
>
campaign events that have a lasting impact on the tournament campaign.
For those who don't know, Living Death is set in Gothic Earth in the
1890's, and is TSR's answer to Call of Cthulhu more or less. Each adventure
for this setting should contain at least one major event that could be affected
by the PCs' intervention. They may include real-life figures and events, or
just be specific to the fictional aspects of the game. The outcome is
determined by how many PC groups succeed in their task at the premiere
convention where the tourney first runs; if at least 50% of the tables
succeed, all is well. Otherwise there is a lasting negative impact.
Example (taken from Poly #112): The President of the United States is
kidnapped and replaced with an evil doppleganger. If the PC groups running
through the adventure don't rescue him at least 50% of the times that the
adventure is run, then the doppleganger remains the President in future
tournaments!!!
Of course, we'd need a guide to the Living City to make this
approach truly effective (HINT!! HINT!! HINT!!), but I think it could
spice up the Living City a bit. Most of the modules I've played of late
have been rather--ehh...
BTW, to implement these changes only takes a chort Q&A for the judge to
report on the party's success/failure at the end of the module. Then the
Living Death Coordinator at HQ tallies the results and determines the effect
on the campaign.
-quistar <:-(}
Moiner
In article <47lppe$3...@inet-nntp-gw-1.us.oracle.com>, nri...@us.oracle.com
(Anne B. (Nonie) Rider) wrote:
>J...@kenjo.demon.co.uk wrote:
>>> The last time we had this discussion (on r.g.frp.misc, I believe)
>Sarah Kahn
>>> argued convincingly and chillingly that this distinction is to define women
>>> in exclusively sexual terms
(NEW SNIP)
>
>moi...@io.com (Moiner) responded:
>
>> I'd say that this depends on whether in a given campaign, the crime of
>> rape is perpetrated on women only.
Here I meant simply that rape can only rationally be defined as defining
women (as opposed to men) in sexual terms, if it is perpetrated on women
only.
>As long as you assume that the player's emotions should have NO effect
>on the character's reactions, then sure, it would affect the CHARACTERS
>the same in a rape-egalitatian world. (Yuck!)
>
>But as long as us players live in the real world, we're going to react
>based on our own experience as well.
Your dichotomy here is false. We live in a real world in which real rape
is really perpetrated on both men and women. It seems to be true that
women are victims of this crime more often than men are. This does not
mean that they are the only victims, however. Nor do I wish for the kind
of egalitarianism to which you refer-- I was merely pointing out what I
perceived as sloppy thinking that referred to women's experience of rape
as though it was the only one, and as though they were the only victims,
when in fact they are not. That was all that I was saying.
It may be true that more women then men fear being raped. It is not,
however, true that all women fear this, nor that all men do not fear it.
>Any GM who uses rape as a plot device while aware that it is
>extremely hurtful to one of his players is being cruel. No amount
>of rationalizing changes that.
No argument there; I've already discussed this when responding to this, or
a similar, thread quite recently. A story which includes this type of
incident should definitely be a "negotiated scene", as the less vanilla of
us call it.
--
Moiner
"nobody knows everything, SO use everything you know!"
Larry Smith
In article <47mg4r$o...@bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au>, s31...@student.uq.edu.au (Travis Hall) writes:
>Of course, many would argue that rape is better than death (there are
>rape victims who would disagree, I am sure, but it is still a valid
>point, I believe) but nobody has to roleplay the experience of being
>truely dead. Why? Because the character is dead, he can't do anything.
You've never been in one of _my_ games. On a couple occasions, with
the whole party dead, instead of injecting new characters into the
previous plotline, I instead simply followed the dead characters
through whatever the afterlife had in store for them. Admittedly,
some did find their way back to life - but others did not. Sorry.
ObGaming trivia. Back to the rape-angst thread already in progress.
--
Larry Smith - My opinions only. Killfile slac...@ix.netcom.com, tau...@ni.net
The attempt to justify an evil deed has perhaps more pernicious consequences
than the evil deed itself. The justification of a past crime is the planting
and cultivation of future crimes. -- Eric Hoffer Digital Unix: 64 bit _now_.
Steven Howard
>Any GM who uses rape as a plot device while aware that it is
>extremely hurtful to one of his players is being cruel. No amount
>of rationalizing changes that.
I'm not sure if this is an analogous situation or not.
Several years ago, a friend and I were writing for a public-access
cable TV series. (It was an anthology show, and we wrote the
framing stories, in which the writers of the individual pieces
portrayed fictional writers who had written the pieces which they
had actually written, if you follow me.) In one script, we had a
character discuss his failed suicide attempt, in a darkly humorous
vein. While we were working on the script, one of the other writers
informed us that the writer/actor who played this part had in fact
once tried to kill himself in the same general way.
What should we have done? Taken the suicide reference out
completely? Kept it, but changed the method? Made it funnier, or
more serious? Does any of this have any impact on the topic at
hand?
What we actually did was to cut the bit altogether and substitute
a story about a wildly dysfunctional family Thanksgiving. It told
us pretty much the same things about the character, and was
funnier as well.
--
Steven Howard
bl...@cloverleaf.com or bl...@quick.net
Kerry E. Nelson
> I've been searching around newsnet, and so far I haven't found anyplace to
> discuss the city of Raven's Bluff, also known as the Living City.
>
> Have I just missed it, or is there no such place?
I've never seen anything like it.
>
> If there isn't anywhere appropriate, I would be willing to create a newsgroup
> for this purpose, assuming of course, there's interest.
Yes! I've always wanted a place for both in and out of character
discussion of the Living City. You have my support.
>
> Call it...alt.living.city or alt.games.living.city
>
> Or perhaps the topic seems a bit to confining. We could broaden it and
> include all con events, making it a newsgroup about gaming cons and what goes
> on there.
Sounds good. I personally would like to know more about Living Death.
>
> alt.gaming.cons
> (.gaming would need to be there, since there's already one for SF cons)
>
> Responses?
>
You have my attention.
Kerry Nelson
**************************************************************************
(: :)
(: I am not conceited. Conceit is a fault. I have no faults. :)
(: :)
(: k...@spruce.evansville.edu :)
(: :)
**************************************************************************
Bruce Sheffer
most players are in the games for control purposes, they dislike anything
happening to them that they cannot control. When it is something like
rape they go ballistic. I have come to the conclusion that no matter how
"naturalistic" a rape would be (based on culture, character's, etc.), I
will not include it in my games except as inflicted on NPC's and only if
I cannot come up with a superior plot mechanism. It causes untold grief
to the player, irrational responses, and is generally reduces group
cohesion for the near future.
Jeffery J Craigmile
Tracey Reilly <stgt...@acs3.bu.edu> wrote:
>I've been searching around newsnet, and so far I haven't found anyplace to
>discuss the city of Raven's Bluff, also known as the Living City.
>
>Have I just missed it, or is there no such place?
No, you haven't missed it. It just isn't discussed here much, except to
berate it or blow smoke up the RPGA's butt. It seems to go one of two ways.
>If there isn't anywhere appropriate, I would be willing to create a newsgroup
>for this purpose, assuming of course, there's interest.
Yes, I think it's appropriate here. Out of all the traffic on this
newsgroup, I can think of fewer subjects that belong here more.
>Call it...alt.living.city or alt.games.living.city
Oh, please NO! Like the Living City doesn't get enough air time in
Polyhedron. I'd rather we discussed it in one place and only one place. It's
bad enough I have to sort through all of that Living nonsense in the
damned magazine every month. The RPGA has gone to hell in a handbasket
enough as it is. I don't want to see more of it until they improve on the
stuff they've got.
>Or perhaps the topic seems a bit to confining. We could broaden it and
>include all con events, making it a newsgroup about gaming cons and what goes
>on there.
>
>alt.gaming.cons
>(.gaming would need to be there, since there's already one for SF cons)
Excuse me. Far beit for me to accuse the RPGA or any of it's members of
being pretentious, but you need to realize that there is more to gaming
conventions than RPGA events. Some of us actually go to conventions and
participate in non-RPGA events. They do exist. It can happen to you, too.
You don't have to do everything through T$R.
>Responses?
Sorry. I can't agree with you on this. Go ahead. Discuss Living Whatever
here, where it belongs. Just be sure to put something like LC in the subject
of every post so my killfile can sort that crud out.
>--
>Tracey Reilly Theatrical Lighting Design stgt...@acs.bu.edu
>
>"Huh! You're right!"
>"Of course I am. I've had coffee." --Spider Robinson, _Time Pressures_
--
"Take me down to Parardize City,
Where the girls are green
And the grass is pretty" --Old Ork expression.
mor...@iastate.edu
RPGA HQ
product, intended to be available to members for purchase, and provided to
new members in the new member packet.
We're still up in the air as to if and when.
In addition, we're going to try to assemble just such a "bible" as Cisco
describes it, available for purchase directly from HQ, more for authors
than anything else.
One thing is clear... Cisco is quite correct in saying that there are no
easy answers. All the best and most logical answers take time and/or
money, both of which are problematical, given our workload.
Scott Douglas
RPGA Network Coordinator
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
RH> The LC5 product referred to, is really an introduction and informational
RH> product, intended to be available to members for purchase, and provided to
RH> new members in the new member packet.
RH> In addition, we're going to try to assemble just such a "bible" as Cisco
RH> describes it, available for purchase directly from HQ, more for authors
RH> than anything else.
Any hits on what is going to be in it?
Travis Hall
: >->RPG characters die all the time, and I'd rather be raped than die. In
: > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: > I hope you're talking about RPG here. I don't really think
: >you know what you're talking about when you speak of being raped.
: The chances are high that neither of you has been raped. But it is
: certain that neither of you has been killed.
I have been looking for somewhere appropriate to insert this (and a modem
connection which will last long enough to do it) and while I am beginning
to think such a place does not exist, this seems as good as any and
better than most. It is quite difficult finding the best way to say this,
so please, bear with me. Without a subtle means to do this, it may become
quite blunt.
As a result of my first posting to this thread, I recieved e-mail from
someone who felt that he could talk to me further about this subject.
This person is a man who was raped by a woman. Yes, this is possible and
does happen. He and I have been discussing this subject for several days
via e-mail and he has given me permission to relay some of his comments
to the group. He is unwilling to do this himself, as he wishes his
identity kept secret, a request which I think is quite understandable.
My friend (I hope I may call him such) has described some of his
reactions to his experience. One point that he has made is that he
believes that the experience of rape is worse than that of death. He
certainly has more grounds for his arguement than you or I, although he
admits that, not having experienced death, there is still that hole in
his arguement. I know it is hard to comprehend (since I cannot fully
understand myself) but it seems that rape is an experience so horrible
that death may well be preferable.
I have asked my friend (perhaps I should ask him about the posibility of
a pseudonym...) about whether he considers it possible for rape to be
included in a roleplaying game in such a way as to educate the players. I
have played in a game which dealt with blindness in such a manner, and I
know that there have been games which treated other disabilities
similarly. But could rape, which is much less physical in its effects,
also be dealt with. My friend believes that this may be possible, but the
GM and the players would all have to take the matter seriously. It would
have to be dealt with in an extremely mature manner, and the players
would have to be prepared to deal with the psychological and emotional
aspects of the event in the game. Also, the GM would need to work
extremely hard, first to understand the event and then to describe it in
such a way as to enable the players to understand it also. (I'm talking
about actually including the act as part of the game, here, not an
off-camera occurance concerning NPCs.)
What else should I be saying here? I have come to understand rape a
little better from my conversations with my friend, but that
understanding is very difficult to put into words, to convey to everyone
else.
Certainly the effects of rape are extreme. My friend has reported how
terribly angry he was (he said he wanted to kill his attacker), how
much the event scared him. I can't remember every reaction he described,
probably because I have come too close to maintain the neutrality
required for best recall. Perhaps hardest of all was the fact that nobody
believed, nobody understood what had happened to him. His experience
occurred years ago, and yet it seems that nobody in all that time has
given him the support and understanding he needs to help him but the
experience behind him. I don't know the intimate details of his life,
perhaps there have been some people who did understand, but he has told
me of how most would not even believe him, and many who did would pass
judgement on him, rather than his attacker. This is truely a damning
condemnation of modern - no, not just modern, human society.
Unless a better understanding than this exists in a gaming group, how
could the subject be properly dealt with in a game? And how can we say
that rape is so much better than death for our characters, when we don't
even begin to know what we are talking about?
I should stop now, this is turning into a tirade. Perhaps I will post
more thoughts on this later, both relayed from my friend and my own.
Thanks to him I have come to understand this subject a little better.
Perhaps what I say here, with the help that he gives, may help others to
understand a little better too. And I hope that his willingness to talk
may help him too.
Or then again, perhaps I am just getting over emotional. Sorry if that
seems the case, but I think it is possibly better to feel overmuch than
to make the victims of this horible crime outcasts.
Travis Hall (pseudonym
dropped as a mark of respect)
Neil Barnes
: games... I don't strive for realism.. what I want is heroic fantasy.. in my
: games people even bathe almost daily.. not realistic for the time period,
: but it's fantasy.. I like to keep things picture perfect.
My campaign world also contains soft toliet tissue for similar reasons.
: As far as my personal beliefs go, this kind of logic is getting way out of
: hand.. but enough about that.. that's not the purpose of this group.. the
: purpose is the game.. the number 1 rule for any DM, GM, Storyteller, etc..
: is Be Fair... if you don't let a paralysing injury happen to a handicapped
: player's character, but you allow it to happen to other PC's, then you are
: simply not being fair... I personally prefer leaving permanent injuries out
: of the game unless I'm feeling very generous one day and throw one in in
: place of death... and if a PC becomes crippled in a game of heroic fantasy,
: the way I see it there are only two things to be done..
: a) Allow the player to make a new character or
: b) Have the PC's seek out a way to heal injured PC.
As a GM I'd be very wary of doing _anything_ permenant to a PC without
discussing it with them first.
: >I have two Germans in my Tuesday night game. Therefore if we were playing Space
: >1889 I'd certainly tone down the caricature Germans...
: I don't know the people who you know or what you're like, but in my game
: group, we laugh at ourselves.. especially the stereotypes applied to us...
: we even add to them. The gaming atmosphere should be a loose, casual, and
: fun one.. if we were so uptight about offending people, I don't think we'd
: have as much fun as we do.. my gaming groups consists of quite the blend of
: ethnic backgrounds, intelligence, musical tastes, and moral beliefs... but
: we understand that the game is nothing more than a game.. just a story and a
: system to provide an excuse for rolling dice.. that's what it all really
: comes down to.
But would you do that sort of things with players you don't know well?
With the Korean friend I've known for seven years I'd have no problem
making a few jokes (of course it would be easier if the Koreans had any
personality traits to parody <<<very major smilies please>>>) if it came
up in a game (say oriental adventures) and I'd also expect to get as
good as I gave but I wouldn't stretch things in order to include elements
to make such jokes, 'cause then it gets personal. (I hope everyone follows
my logic there).
However if I was running a 40's super hero campaign with my present
players I'd discuss it much more carefully with the german player, because
I know him comparatively less well.
neil
Tranquility
This reply makes a lot of sense, but remember the circumstances of the
original post:
1. There wasn't enough time for it to have occured.
2. It was WHFP.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Warhammer world is pretty damn
depressing. It embraces a lot of aspects of life that AD&D doesn't even
mention, like primitive (and downright scary) cures for illnesses,
rampant alcoholism, and worse. Then there are the other aspects of it,
like Skaven throwing poison in city wells (for the hell of it), followers
of Nurgle spreading a very nasty plague to everyone around (for the hell
of it), Chaos warbands decimating towns (for the hell of it), and orcs
trying to take over the world. (Yes, for the hell of it.) It's a brutal
game, at least in theme.
Do I condone that particular GM's actions? No...but only because there
wasn't enough time for it to happen. Do I condone him bowing under to
change the ruling? Yes...but ONLY because of the time factor.
Everything else made enough sense. The game world is a nasty one (I'm
assuming he was using the standard world and not a totally different
variation), and orcs are disorganized enough to do something like that.
(In fact, just about any irregular force, and a few regular ones to boot,
would. Cohesion ends when the fighting begins.)
However, I don't think this is proper for ALL campaign worlds. Not by a
long shot. High chivalry, high fantasy, anything like that...it wouldn't
fit. Same with Ravenloft, I'd think, and probably a few of the others I
haven't played yet. But Dark Sun? Good possibility there, even the
halflings are psychotic little thugs. Planescape? Another
possibility...while the patrons of Sigil are generally well-behaved,
there are a LOT of planes out there, and the inhabitants have different
rules (or lack of) to follow when they're at home. Warhammer?
Definitely. If you're familiar with the game, you'll know what I mean.
************************************************************************
* Finger bl...@raven.cybercomm.net for the standard disclaimer and *
* more useless information. Unsolicited commercial email will be *
* subject to a $500 US archival fee. Mailing denotes acceptance of *
* these terms. You have been warned. People who know, choose *
* Tranquility. *
************************************************************************
Will G. Austin
Travis Hall said:
>Unless a better understanding than this exists in a gaming group, how
>could the subject be properly dealt with in a game? And how can we say
>that rape is so much better than death for our characters, when we don't
>even begin to know what we are talking about?
This got me thinking. . . I don't think that rape is a better fate
for a character than death in a game. I think it's too much of an
oversimplification of rape. Death in any game is a part of the mindset of
the game--as PCs, we expect that we may risk our very lives in any given
scenario, and we accept this implicitly. Most PCs die as a result of
combat; some fairly, some not so fairly. Oh, as players, we'll do our
damndest to avoid death, even to bending and stretching the game rules
beyond all recognition. Furthermore, even if Pcs die, in more cases than
not option exsist in the gameworld or due to GM fiat to reverse/nullify the
effects of death. IOW, death is at best a special effect, at worst an
inconvenience much of the time.
Rape, however, is problematic because it's a fate that not all of
us will experience, and so not all of us are sensitive to it. Rape is too
complex, pushes too many emotional/psychological/social buttons to be as
conveniently trivialized to a plot device for a game, especially when it
involves a PC.
--
"When the candles are out, all women are fair." --Plutarch
Travis Hall
Tranquility (bl...@raven.cybercomm.net) wrote:
: This reply makes a lot of sense, but remember the circumstances of the
: original post:
: 1. There wasn't enough time for it to have occured.
: 2. It was WHFP.
: Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Warhammer world is pretty damn
: depressing. It embraces a lot of aspects of life that AD&D doesn't even
: mention, like primitive (and downright scary) cures for illnesses,
: rampant alcoholism, and worse. Then there are the other aspects of it,
: like Skaven throwing poison in city wells (for the hell of it), followers
: of Nurgle spreading a very nasty plague to everyone around (for the hell
: of it), Chaos warbands decimating towns (for the hell of it), and orcs
: trying to take over the world. (Yes, for the hell of it.) It's a brutal
: game, at least in theme.
: Do I condone that particular GM's actions? No...but only because there
: wasn't enough time for it to happen. Do I condone him bowing under to
: change the ruling? Yes...but ONLY because of the time factor.
: Everything else made enough sense. The game world is a nasty one (I'm
: assuming he was using the standard world and not a totally different
: variation), and orcs are disorganized enough to do something like that.
: (In fact, just about any irregular force, and a few regular ones to boot,
: would. Cohesion ends when the fighting begins.)
Do you have even the faintest inkling of what rape is like for the
victim? Sure, it may be realistic for such an event to occur in the game
world, but that doesn't mean that it is possible to simulate that in the
game. Would you force a player to, say, play a thief when you know full
well that the player does not want to play a thief? When you know that
the player could not play a thief to save his life? So why force the
player to play a rape victim? 99% of players will not want to play a rape
victim. Probably a similar percentage wouldn't have the faintest idea how
to express the sheer horror of the occurance, and so could not play a
rape victim even if they wanted to. The experience of being raped often
produces fundamental changes in the victim, at least for a while, though
sometimes forever. These changes are often far more damaging to the
character's personality than being assaulted, or robbed, or even maimed.
It is incredibly difficult for anyone who has not experienced this to
understand, and even harder for the player to roleplay, both in terms of
roleplaying technique and the emotional response of the player.
: However, I don't think this is proper for ALL campaign worlds.
It isn't a question of whether it is proper for the game world. It is a
question of whether it is proper for the game and for the players. It
seems obvious to me that the DM of the game in question does not
understand the issue well enough at this time to deal with it in his
game, nor does Lorene (the player) want to participate in such a game.
While we all expect to have characters die, or even sometimes be maimed,
when playing in roleplaying games, we are prepared to deal with that. We
are not normally prepared to deal with the rape of our characters.
The Wraith
Tracey Reilly
>However, I must also point out that a lot of gaming convention-related
>material is covered in other groups, such as rec.games.board. What would
>make this newsgroup unique, if is going to be general?
Hmm. I had planned to propose the idea of a convention newsgroup in a couple
of weeks, so this isn't fully thought out yet. However, I do think it would
be worthwhile to have a newsgroup to discuss cons in general. It would be
there to help people become involved in convention gaming, help word of
various conventions go out to those who might be interested (how many small
cons have died because no-one knew about them? How many conventions have you
not gone to because you found out about them too late or not at all?), and to
help people who are trying to run cons get help and advice from others who
have done the same. It would also help to identify problems at various cons
and help to find solutions to them, instead of just uselessly bitching. It
would get word out about which events are worth playing and which are not,
potentially improving everyone's good time and the quality of games, in the
long run.
It would do...a lot of things. Whatever we made out of it. But I think
that's enough for a start.
Tracey Reilly
>>I've been searching around newsnet, and so far I haven't found anyplace to
>>discuss the city of Raven's Bluff, also known as the Living City.
>>Call it...alt.living.city or alt.games.living.city
>Oh, please NO! Like the Living City doesn't get enough air time in
>Polyhedron. I'd rather we discussed it in one place and only one place. It's
>bad enough I have to sort through all of that Living nonsense in the
>damned magazine every month. The RPGA has gone to hell in a handbasket
>enough as it is. I don't want to see more of it until they improve on the
>stuff they've got.
Wouldn't a new newsgroup solve part of that problem? Wouldn't RPGA stuff tend
to gravitate to the new newsgroup, which you, not being interested, would not
read? Get it out of your face entirely?
Solving this problem was exactly my point. Get Living City stuff out of here
where it tends to get lost, and over to where it is only read by people who
care about it and are interested an reading about it.
>>Or perhaps the topic seems a bit to confining. We could broaden it and
>>include all con events, making it a newsgroup about gaming cons and what goes
>>on there.
>Excuse me. Far beit for me to accuse the RPGA or any of it's members of
>being pretentious, but you need to realize that there is more to gaming
>conventions than RPGA events. Some of us actually go to conventions and
>participate in non-RPGA events. They do exist. It can happen to you, too.
>You don't have to do everything through T$R.
Whoever said it would be limited to RPGA events? The point was to widen it to
include all con events and discuss cons in general as well. Please don't fly
off so quickly, sir, and read what I mean before jumping on me.
>>Responses?
>Sorry. I can't agree with you on this. Go ahead. Discuss Living Whatever
>here, where it belongs. Just be sure to put something like LC in the subject
>of every post so my killfile can sort that crud out.
You wouldn't have to killfile it if it was in another newsgroup.
Tracey Reilly
>>On 7 Nov 1995, Tracey Reilly wrote:
(alt.living.city)
>Yes! I've always wanted a place for both in and out of character
>discussion of the Living City. You have my support.
Actually, as the vote stands, I have 15 votes for newsgroup creation and 2
against.
So, you may be seeing it rather soon.
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
>> mor...@iastate.edu (Jeffery J Craigmile) writes:
>>> Tracey Reilly <stgt...@acs3.bu.edu> wrote:
>>> Or perhaps the topic seems a bit to confining. We could broaden it and
>>> include all con events, making it a newsgroup about gaming cons and what goes
>>> on there.
>> Excuse me. Far beit for me to accuse the RPGA or any of it's members of
>> being pretentious, but you need to realize that there is more to gaming
>> conventions than RPGA events. Some of us actually go to conventions and
>> participate in non-RPGA events. They do exist. It can happen to you, too.
>> You don't have to do everything through T$R.
TR> Whoever said it would be limited to RPGA events? The point was to widen it to
TR> include all con events and discuss cons in general as well. Please don't fly
TR> off so quickly, sir, and read what I mean before jumping on me.
So what would it be called? It can't really be alt.living.city any more,
if it has been opened up to gaming in general, can it? I would suggest
rec.games.conventions.
Travis Hall
: -=> Quoting Travis Hall to All <=-
:: >->RPG characters die all the time, and I'd rather be raped than die. In
:: > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:: > I hope you're talking about RPG here. I don't really think
:: >you know what you're talking about when you speak of being raped.
:TH>
:TH> Unless a better understanding than this exists in a gaming group, how
:TH> could the subject be properly dealt with in a game? And how can we say
:TH> that rape is so much better than death for our characters, when we
:TH> don't even begin to know what we are talking about?
Before I go on to discuss your statements, I would like to point out that
your quotations of me are taken somewhat out of context. Quite a lot of
text has been cut between my quotes of someone else and your quotes of
me, and the questions in that first paragraph from my posting did not
refer directly to the quotes immediately before, as seems to be the case
after being cut down. Please be careful not to alter meaning and
implication when quoting. It is incorrect, inconsiderate and compromising
to the discussion.
: One of the issues seems to be which is better, being raped or being
: killed? In cases of suicide, a person does not want to die, they
: simply do not have any desire to keep on living. For someone raped,
: they may not want to keep on living and instead view death as
: a better option...I would guess that survivors of a nuclear attack
: might think the same way.
Quite correct, in many cases it is more a desire not to live than a
desire to die that these people display, if you view that as making a
difference. However, Gamer101 (as my friend to whom my previous post
referred has chosen as a pseudonym, to facilitate ease of discussion) has
told me that he believes that if he was given the choice between being
raped again and death, he would choose death. Rape is that horrific. It
is not just that rape victims lose their will to live. It is sometimes
the case that they would kill themselves before letting it happen again.
: I believe that you can incorporate rape into a campaign, and that
: it should be viewed from that of the attacker as well as that of
: the victim...it would make for a more interesting storyline.
I agree with the idea that rape could be incorporated into a campaign,
but I think it should be dealt with far more carefully than you realize.
As for looking at the issue from the attacker's point of view, I'll
comment a little further down.
: Interestingly enough, the attacker always believes they are doing
: something good and that they are a good person...ie, subconsciously
: the other person really wanted it or needed to be put into his
: place.
I think that this may sometimes be the case, but not all the time.
Usually rape is a crime anger, not lust. In other words, the crime is not
committed because the rapist desires to have sex with the victim. Rather,
the rapist desires to hurt the victim, and rape is simply the most
hurtful thing that the rapist can do to the victim. In some of these
cases, I suppose, the rapist might think the victim needed to be put in
her place through the pain of rape, but I think in many other cases even
the rapist realizes that deliberately causing such pain is not the
correct way to act. (Note once again that I use female pronouns for rape
victims, because they are more common than male rape victims, but my
comments still apply in general to cases in which the victim is male.)
: I know that the basis for sexual harassment is the feeling of power,
: and the perception of power...I suppose that you could partially
: blame the desire for feeling power over another person for the
: act of raping another person. Men rape other men in prison, and it
: would not seem obvious why a previously heterosexual man would
: rape another man simply for sex, unless you considered the
: implied power rape holds over another person or you think all
: rapists in jail are really homosexuals.
Right. We are agreed on this. Rape is not usually committed to fulfill
mere sexual desires.
: As to the actual ways of introducing rape into a campaign so that
: the players understand, simply tell one of the players that they
: replaced by a doppleganger and want to rape another player. The rapist
: gets the opportunity to exercise some power and the victims can
: try to fight back, but will eventually get a taste of what it is
: like to be helpless and feel victimized by someone they trusted.
: Power or the lack of it, and the loss of trust in other people...
: especially when the victim looks for emotional support (ie, make it
: look like the situation is doubtful or that the victim was asking
: for it )
Merely making the situation plausible in the context of the game is not
enough, assuming that what you suggest is even enough to do this, which I
doubt. There are depths of emotion involved with rape which reach far
deeper than what is normally felt in a roleplaying game. While our
characters would feel the same depths of emotion that we do in our lives,
it is only very rarely that any player allows himself to take the part of
the character enough to feel those emotions himself. What is more, the
emotions provoked if the player does react with any sort of empathy for
the player would cause many players to reject the very notion of such
happening in the game. Just as a rape victim would rather die than be
raped, a player would rather break character than feel like she has been
raped. And just how do you propose to evoke those emotions in the first
place? There is far more to this than just handing it over to a player
and telling him to rape the other character. And there is far more to
understanding rape than just putting a character in a situation where
they can't do anything about it. I don't believe that any group could
create a successful portrayal of a rape without the consent and
cooperation of all concerned, not to mention a lot of hard work and
extremely good roleplaying. To treat it as you suggest would merely
trivialize the issue, while in many cases losing the respect of the players.
As for playing a rapist and committing the crime in the game - to focus
on the rapist would be to detract from the experience from the point of
view of the victim. The effect of rape on the perpetrator is much simpler
and less soul-destroying than on the victim. What is the point of such a
focus in the game? How would you do this without trivializing the crime?
I don't think having another player play the rapist would increase the
feeling of helplessness of the victim, or contribute to the game in any
other way.
Once again, I think your approach to the problem lacks the insight and
understanding necessary to deal with the issue properly.
Travis Hall
Bryan J. Maloney
> TR> Whoever said it would be limited to RPGA events? The point was to
widen it to
> TR> include all con events and discuss cons in general as well. Please
don't fly
> TR> off so quickly, sir, and read what I mean before jumping on me.
>
> So what would it be called? It can't really be alt.living.city any more,
> if it has been opened up to gaming in general, can it? I would suggest
> rec.games.conventions.
"rec.games.cons" would fit better--there are already precedents in the SF
groups. However, there's bleedin' little traffic on game cons, anyway.
Too little goes on at a game con compared to an SF con. No filking, no
booze, no lime jello bathtub room. I've NEVER seen a proper con suite at
a gaming con. There just isn't a real gaming subculture like there is for
fandom.
ekb
> Do you have even the faintest inkling of what rape is like for the
> victim?
No, and with all due respect I don't think that you do either - not even if
you've been raped yourself. Based on all I've read and heard, I'd have to
say that one can't make blanket statements about "what rape is like for
the victims." We all agree that it's bad, but just how bad varies wildly
depending on the circumstances and the individual victim. For some, it is
such a shattering experience that they'd rather die (and may commit
suicide afterwards); for others it is "merely" a nasty, unpleasant
experience without any redeming qualities.
*That*, IMHO, is what makes rape so dangerous and difficult to use in a
roleplaying game: That it is *not* uniformly horrific, that the depth of
response to it varies so much from person to person, and that, therefore,
it is easy to badly misjudge just how much an episode of rape will affect
an individual player.
Erol K. Bayburt
Evil Genius for a Better Tomorrow
Travis Hall
: I've been avoiding the issue of rape for the most part, but
: I did feel like I should comment here...
: Travis Hall <s31...@student.uq.edu.au> wrote:
: >Do you have even the faintest inkling of what rape is like for the
: >victim? [...] So why force the player to play a rape victim? 99%
: >of players will not want to play a rape victim. Probably a similar
: >percentage wouldn't have the faintest idea how to express the sheer
: >horror of the occurance, and so could not play a rape victim even if
: >they wanted to.
: Hmmmm. I've seen lots of players who have wanted to play rape
: victims, holocaust survivors, abused children, and many more. Traumatic
: events are very common in PC backgrounds, I find. Personally, I've
: played an agent raised (i.e. brainwashed) from birth in a scientific
: environment, and a man who uncontrollably killed and ate his family.
Sorry. I got a bit incensed at the insensitivity of Tranquility. Perhaps
I should have been a little more specific. What I meant was, most players
would not want to play through the rape of their characters. Playing a
character with a traumatic background is different to playing a character
through trauma. I don't think I have ever met a gamer who wanted to play
a victim being raped, or dealing with the immediate aftereffects of that
experience. It doesn't sound particularly enjoyable to me. Do you really
think you want to try this? Do you want to feel the way a rape victim does?
: Now, it's true that I haven't the faintest inkling of what
: either of these are like. Whether I "could" play them or not is
: irrelevant, however -- I did play them, and regardless of whether
: I realistically represented the experience, they were interesting
: characters to play.
But nobody forced you to play them. I have stated before that it is my
opinion that rape could be used in such a way to allow the players to
understand what it is like, given enough work and an extremely good GM
and players, but I don't believe that this should be done unless the
players concerned agree to it.
: -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
: >
: >: However, I don't think this is proper for ALL campaign worlds.
: >
: >It isn't a question of whether it is proper for the game world. It
: >is a question of whether it is proper for the game and for the players.
: >It seems obvious to me that the DM of the game in question does not
: >understand the issue well enough at this time to deal with it in his
: >game, nor does Lorene (the player) want to participate in such a game.
: Well, I agree that the GM really should consider the player's
: feelings in these cases. As others have pointed out, one can offend
: or hurt people in some cases - especially since you can never really
: tell who has been a victim of rape.
: Still, I'm not sure the conclusion is that obvious. First of
: all, WHFRP really is not a game for those who want sanitized violence.
: Anyone reading it and joining into the game should have some
: understanding of the brutality it portrays. If the players agree
: to this sort of thing, then I don't think one should avoid it just
: because you can't portray is "deeply" or "realistically" enough.
But the player in the original case obviously has not agreed to this. The
WHFRP rules cover many forms of combat in detail, not to mention many
forms of brutality, but I don't believe there are rules in the books
covering rape. I doubt that at any time the GM in this game mentioned or
implied that rape could be a part of the game.
Incidentally, if the players of WHFRP are of the type who do not want
"sanitized violence", why should they try to sanitize rape for inclusion
in the game? Or if the rape is not to be sanitized, do you think WHFRP
players in general would be prepared to spend several sessions dealing
with the aftereffects of the rape, the raped character being highly
emotional, to say the least, all this time? (Noting, of course, that
generalities concerning the players of a particular game system could
potentially be very bad.)
Honestly, I don't care what a group of roleplayers whom I have never met
do late at night during a game about which I am never likely to learn,
and which do not result in harm to anybody. But I do find myself caring
about players like Lorene who are forced into situations which are
distressing, unfair and unwanted. It is wrong to put these players into
such a situation without their knowing of the possibility beforehand.
The Wraith
Ed Gibson
>>Ed Gibson:
>(the Living City)
>>So does anyone have a topic in mind or do we want to discuss the old
>>favorites, complaints about modules and character generation.
>Hmm. Perhaps it might make more sense to stop uselessly complaining, and
>start sharing information and see where that takes us. We could start sharing
>things that have been created in modules (a bit like Polyhedron has been
>doing, but on a wider scale, and much more quickly), sharing tactics, and
>module information (which are hack-n-slash, which are much more heavily
>role-playing oriented--not details, just reviews. Doncha just hate it when
>your favorite character blunders into a module he/she is totally unequipped to
>handle?).
You apparently didn't recognize my sarcasm. I would prefer people to write
modules the way that would like to see them run, than complain about the ones
that people have put the time into writing.
Sharing NPC and business information is possible, but a bit dicey. The RPGA
tournament contract gives all rights to TSR, so you may run into copyright
disputes, depending on how detailed you are.
I'd like to see brief reviews if they don't spoil the event. I wrote a LC
column for the Players Guild of Central Oklahoma's newsletter for a few months
and one of the things I talked about was modules to play and ones to avoid. I
frequently have the problem with the wrong character for an event, since I
have a fighter and a cleric/match and choose one depending on who else is at
the table.
>You could bring magic item trading to a wider range of people, as
well. I>know several characters who wound up with magicitems that are useless
to them>that they would love to unload.
>If all else fails, characters could meet each other. More than a few times
>I've met a player and charater late into the con, and realized that the
>interaction between us two would be really interesting. It would be useful to
>meet such people/characters beforehand, and perhaps register for the same
>events and adventure together. It would lessen the randomness a bit, and
>maybe foster a bit more cooperation among charaters. Some modules can get
>pretty chaotic when characters don't fit together at all.
This sounds like a good idea and I'd be willing to give it a try. Are you
going to be at Winter Fantasy?
Ed
*** I apologize if you receive two versions of this posting, my newsreader
barfed and I don't think the first was transmitted.
Lorene Turner
Update time: I had decided to stop playing, because I realized that if
the game wasn't fun for me, why bother. However, I had a discussion with
the GM of the Warhammer game, wherein he agreed that it was no fun for me
to play a raped character, and wherein I reiterated that I would have the
same reaction the next time it happened, and I also stated that I was
going to take my fellow players' statements toward my character as if
their characters had said them. And if the person playing the halfling
mentioned "Polishing his shield" again, the halfling was going to be used
to plug the entrance to a skunk's den after I'd tossed a smoky torch into
the den. Or maybe a wolverine's den, I haven't decided. :)
I made it clear (I hope) that I will roleplay the effect of rape, and it
might result in my character dying. So if he really wants to include
rape, it's up to him. And he seemed to feel that that aspect would be
toned way down.
Anyway, I'm willing to give the game another shot, having made clear that
it wasn't a simple issue. Thanks again to everyone who shared their opinions!
Lorene "Say that again, halfling... oh wait, that's right, while I'm
holding you underwater you can't..."
Travis Hall
: >Tranquility (bl...@raven.cybercomm.net) wrote:
: >: Do I condone that particular GM's actions? No...but only because there
: >: change the ruling? Yes...but ONLY because of the time factor.
: >: Everything else made enough sense. The game world is a nasty one (I'm
: >: assuming he was using the standard world and not a totally different
: >: variation), and orcs are disorganized enough to do something like that.
: >
: >victim? [...] So why force the player to play a rape victim? 99%
: >of players will not want to play a rape victim. Probably a similar
: >percentage wouldn't have the faintest idea how to express the sheer
: >horror of the occurance, and so could not play a rape victim even if
: >they wanted to.
: Hmmmm. I've seen lots of players who have wanted to play rape
: victims, holocaust survivors, abused children, and many more. Traumatic
: events are very common in PC backgrounds, I find. Personally, I've
: played an agent raised (i.e. brainwashed) from birth in a scientific
: environment, and a man who uncontrollably killed and ate his family.
Perhaps I didn't make myself entirely clear. Very few roleplayers would
want to play rape victims through the trauma and aftereffects of the act
itself, nor would they want to feel the way that a rape victim does
during and after the event. The great majority of roleplaying gamers
roleplay for entertainment. I can think of few things less entertaining
than being raped, or simulating that. I would agree that there are most
likely players who would like to play characters whose background
includes rape. This is not the same as playing through that rape, as the
responses of the character will since have been muted by time and the
fact that they are no longer in that situation - although if the
character was again put in a similar situation, the reactions of the
character could well be quite extreme, once again.
: Now, it's true that I haven't the faintest inkling of what
: either of these are like. Whether I "could" play them or not is
: irrelevant, however -- I did play them, and regardless of whether
: I realistically represented the experience, they were interesting
: characters to play.
But you were not forced to play them, nor was your beloved character
forcibly turned into one. I have stated previously that I think it would
be possible to use rape in a thought-provoking and acceptable way in a
roleplaying game, but I do not think that anybody should be forced to
roleplay through such an experience. Unfortunately, this is normally the
way that GM's probably introduce the issue of rape into their campaigns -
by forcing the event not just on the character (if it wasn't forced on
the character, it wouldn't be rape) but also on the player.
: >: However, I don't think this is proper for ALL campaign worlds.
: >
: >It isn't a question of whether it is proper for the game world. It
: >is a question of whether it is proper for the game and for the players.
: >It seems obvious to me that the DM of the game in question does not
: >understand the issue well enough at this time to deal with it in his
: >game, nor does Lorene (the player) want to participate in such a game.
: Well, I agree that the GM really should consider the player's
: feelings in these cases. As others have pointed out, one can offend
: or hurt people in some cases - especially since you can never really
: tell who has been a victim of rape.
: Still, I'm not sure the conclusion is that obvious. First of
: all, WHFRP really is not a game for those who want sanitized violence.
: Anyone reading it and joining into the game should have some
: understanding of the brutality it portrays. If the players agree
: to this sort of thing, then I don't think one should avoid it just
: because you can't portray is "deeply" or "realistically" enough.
If WHFRP players do not want sanitized violence, why should they desire
sanitized rape? Because that is what you have once you start portraying
rape unrealistically. Rape is a truely horrifying experience. Take away
that very real horror, and what goes with it, and what you have is violent
sex - a very different proposition. And if the GM does include rape in
his game, how can he expect his players not to treat it with the
horror that real rape evokes?
Also, I don't believe that there is anything in the WHFRP rules which
cover rape. Why should reading those rules give players the idea that
rape will be a part of the game? This is not a issue of rules. It is
about whether in a particular gaming environment rape is an acceptable
part of the game. In most cases, it is not acceptable to have a player's
character raped, because that player will not enjoy it. Other than, in
some cases, a cheap thrill, the other players will not enjoy it either.
Only if the player considers that such an event will be beneficial,
either in terms of entertainment (I sincerely hope not) or for other
reasons (such as attaining a greater understanding of rape, something
which many people in our world can do well to attain), would I have that
player's character raped.
Now, if the entire group agreed that rape would be one of the risks run
by the player characters, along with the standard death and sometimes
desmemberment, then I would agree that none of the players would have any
cause to complain if their characters were raped. But I have never heard
of such an agreement, and I doubt I would want to take part in such a
game. I think most other roleplayers would agree with me here.
The Wraith
Mark Baker
ci...@src.honeywell.com "Cisco Lopez-Fresquet" writes:
> So what would it be called? It can't really be alt.living.city any more,
> if it has been opened up to gaming in general, can it? I would suggest
> rec.games.conventions.
>
I'm puzzled by the need to have a newsgroup at all, especially considering
it would likely be very low traffic. What's wrong with a mailing list?
Given the number of people interested, and the volume of postings, I'd have
considered that a better option.
Roleplaying conventions just don't seem to hold the degree of enthusiasm in
people that SF of other fandom cons do; or perhaps it's just that the latter
are better organised and better advertised when it comes to the net.
--
Mark Baker
http://www.io.com/~lange/
Jeffery J Craigmile
been a little hard on the original poster, I think the idea of a convention
newsgroup is a sound one as long as it is devoted to the broader spectrum of
convention gaming, not just the RPGA. This is not to say that the RPGA
should be left out entirely, but remember it does get a lot of airplay here
and some on r.g.f.m.
Sorry if I offended you, Tracey. You'll have to pardon me, I've become
disillusioned with the RPGA and especially the Living City as of late.
Anyone who frequents this newsgroup knows how I feel about that. Rant mode
off.
Travis Hall
: Travis Hall (s31...@student.uq.edu.au) wrote:
: > Do you have even the faintest inkling of what rape is like for the
: > victim?
: No, and with all due respect I don't think that you do either - not even if
: you've been raped yourself.
No, I don't think I do know what it is truely like for the victim. And I
have never claimed to. But I do know that the issue should be treated
with more understanding and sensitivity than often seems to the be case
here. That is what prompted my rhetorical question, not some uppity
belief that I know more about it than anyone else.
: Based on all I've read and heard, I'd have to
: say that one can't make blanket statements about "what rape is like for
: the victims." We all agree that it's bad, but just how bad varies wildly
: depending on the circumstances and the individual victim. For some, it is
: such a shattering experience that they'd rather die (and may commit
: suicide afterwards); for others it is "merely" a nasty, unpleasant
: experience without any redeming qualities.
You are right. Reactions can vary. But for the majority, it seems that
they consider it the worst thing that could ever happen to them. For just
some of the range of possible responses, see my much earlier post, if it
is still around, which I doubt. I have been assured that it is fairly
accurate.
: *That*, IMHO, is what makes rape so dangerous and difficult to use in a
: roleplaying game: That it is *not* uniformly horrific, that the depth of
: response to it varies so much from person to person, and that, therefore,
: it is easy to badly misjudge just how much an episode of rape will affect
: an individual player.
There is an easy way around the variability of responses. Ask the player.
That is, if you really want to do this to a character. Most players will
say no, I believe. But again, if you make the scene in the game at all
realistic, most players will not enjoy it, for no matter what you think
of other blanket statements, you must agree with this one: Rape is not an
enjoyable experience.
Travis Hall
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
MB> I'm puzzled by the need to have a newsgroup at all, especially considering
MB> it would likely be very low traffic. What's wrong with a mailing list?
MB> Given the number of people interested, and the volume of postings, I'd have
MB> considered that a better option.
MB> Roleplaying conventions just don't seem to hold the degree of enthusiasm in
MB> people that SF of other fandom cons do; or perhaps it's just that the latter
MB> are better organised and better advertised when it comes to the net.
Two comments:
1) Who said it was going to be just for roleplaying? I think the intention
was for it to cover all aspects of gaming, from miniatures to wargames
to roleplaying to LARP.
2) There are a LOT of small gaming conventions/game fairs. The SF
conventions have more of a critical mass factor, but 20 people can have
a fine gaming convention all by themselves. For example, here in
Minneapolis, there is one SF convention, but two major gaming
conventions, and a monthly 'game day'. The SF convention may be bigger
as a single event, but if you add up the total attendance of the gaming
events, I bet we have them beat.
ekb
Distribution:
Travis Hall (s31...@student.uq.edu.au) wrote:
> ekb (e...@io.com) wrote:
> : Travis Hall (s31...@student.uq.edu.au) wrote:
>
> : > Do you have even the faintest inkling of what rape is like for the
> : > victim?
>
> : No, and with all due respect I don't think that you do either - not even if
> : you've been raped yourself.
>
> No, I don't think I do know what it is truely like for the victim. And I
> have never claimed to. But I do know that the issue should be treated
> with more understanding and sensitivity than often seems to the be case
> here. That is what prompted my rhetorical question, not some uppity
> belief that I know more about it than anyone else.
Thanks for the clarification. I *did* read your previous post as
reflecting an "uppity belief that I know more about it than anyone else"
- which is what prompted my uppity response.
>
> : Based on all I've read and heard, I'd have to
> : say that one can't make blanket statements about "what rape is like for
> : the victims." We all agree that it's bad, but just how bad varies wildly
> : depending on the circumstances and the individual victim. For some, it is
> : such a shattering experience that they'd rather die (and may commit
> : suicide afterwards); for others it is "merely" a nasty, unpleasant
> : experience without any redeming qualities.
>
> You are right. Reactions can vary. But for the majority, it seems that
> they consider it the worst thing that could ever happen to them. For just
> some of the range of possible responses, see my much earlier post, if it
> is still around, which I doubt. I have been assured that it is fairly
> accurate.
I don't think that it is fairly accurate - I think what you have been
presented with, and what you in turn presented to us, has a strong
selection bias. IMO they are the worst cases, not "typical" cases. And
presenting them as being "typical" weakens your argument in the long run
and thus does a diservice to all rape victims.
But this is way off topic. With your permission, I'd like to drop this
(or at least take it to e-mail).
> : *That*, IMHO, is what makes rape so dangerous and difficult to use in a
> : roleplaying game: That it is *not* uniformly horrific, that the depth of
> : response to it varies so much from person to person, and that, therefore,
> : it is easy to badly misjudge just how much an episode of rape will affect
> : an individual player.
>
> There is an easy way around the variability of responses. Ask the player.
> That is, if you really want to do this to a character. Most players will
> say no, I believe.
The same can be said of any other atrocity. Most players will not want
such things to happen to their characters, and will particularly object
to having the event described in detail, while in character. My point is
that people's different reactions is what makes rape dangerous to use as
a "standard evil atrocity" in a rpg - not the fact that it's a horrible
thing to happen to a person.
But again, if you make the scene in the game at all
> realistic, most players will not enjoy it, for no matter what you think
> of other blanket statements, you must agree with this one: Rape is not an
> enjoyable experience.
Agreed.
Lydia Leong
Will G. Austin <w...@po.CWRU.Edu> wrote:
> This got me thinking. . . I don't think that rape is a better fate
>trivialized to a plot device for a game, especially when it involves a PC.
Yet another topic that's come up many a time before, but:
It's not merely rape that can be problematic in games, I think; it's
any situation in which a PC is essentially completely helpless/powerless.
Roleplaying is a sort of escapism for most people. Even in games which
are heavily "story" driven, players like to feel like they have some
control over the destiny of the story, and the destinies of their
characters. Most people deal with the frustration of being powerless
against the forces of everyday life, and don't want to repeat it in
their recreation time. As heroes -- or even anti-heroes -- our
charaters have the power to Make A Visible Difference in the
universe, and there is, I think, a certain attraction to that.
Players tend to dislike having their characters used in the GM's own
little personal narrative -- this is why railroading is usually frowned
upon, for example. There are logical consequences to certain things, but
players should get the benefit of the doubt; unnecessarily traumatizing
a character is generally a good way to lose players.
The extent to which someone wants a "safety net" will vary from player
to player. I tend to have a real hatred of character death; knowing
this, if I value a character, I make him someone who doesn't wander
blithely into danger, in-character. Therefore, I usually expect that
the GMs of campaigns I'm in will respect the fact that I _am_ being
cautious and not blow me away with random die rolls or unfair
situations. For certain characters, I don't really _want_ to deal
with them being raped/tortured/whatever; for other characters, I
might not really care, or find that the experience would be good
for character development. Different people are looking for different
things, which may vary from character to character. If you're planning
on introducing elements into the campaign which might make some people
uncomfortable, it might be wise to Talk It Over with the other players.
Amber campaigns, for example, tend to deal with a lot of mental and/or
physical torture of characters -- and, in fact, situations where the
characters are indeed helpless or have the wind taken out of their
sails by Elder Amberites. It's part of the genre -- having an Amber
character beaten down and confused is more or less a part of playing
the game. Expectations in other game systems, however, will probably
vary quite a lot.
-- Lydia
Mark Baker
> 1) Who said it was going to be just for roleplaying? I think the intention
> was for it to cover all aspects of gaming, from miniatures to wargames
> to roleplaying to LARP.
>
Even covering the full range of 'gaming' related con activities, personally
I still think a simple mailing list would be better. The traffic would still
be relatively low (except just before and after big cons). There is in fact
a British Roleplaying Convention mailing list which receives approximately
one post every two months; and that's an automated one just to let you know
you're still subscribed. I doubt that outside of these threads there is much
public discussion anywhere elsewhere on Usenet (including the board games
groups) of cons in general, the one possible exception being r.g.f.l
> 2) There are a LOT of small gaming conventions/game fairs. The SF
> conventions have more of a critical mass factor, but 20 people can have
> a fine gaming convention all by themselves. For example, here in
> Minneapolis, there is one SF convention, but two major gaming
> conventions, and a monthly 'game day'. The SF convention may be bigger
> as a single event, but if you add up the total attendance of the gaming
> events, I bet we have them beat.
>
I honestly wish there was more discussion of, and publicity for, these
events on the Internet. I spend a large part of my time trying to track
down details of gaming events covering the board-games to LARP range for my
Conventions Diary. The gaming folks _might_ make up a larger total attendance
over the year than any single sf con, but there doesn't seem to be much
interest in expanding on that. I'd like to have the details of every con
large or small, but it seems to my mind that the small con folk like their
gatherings to stay that way; so no publicity, no discussing it outside the
small group of attendees lest others might want to broaden the group.
Hmmmm. I'm being too cynical here I think.
Wayne Morris
Here is a formula for the Living City. Get a bunch of Power Gamers
together, throw together a really piss poor module, and there you have a
living city event.
I do play Living City, and yes I do like some of the people there, but
lets face it, the game is a power gamers dream. The biggest problem
with LC is the fact that magic items are given out like they're candy.
How many magic items do you think are in a module on average? On
average, about 4 major items (permanent magic) are in a module, not to
mention about 4 potions or other type of non permanent magic.
In a real campaign, things are controlled by the DM and player
characters are groomed to be the way that they are.
I don't think that LC is all that wonderful, and even with the rule
changes that they made recently, there is no change. The problem with
the LC is the ammount of magic in it. If that could be taken care of,
then it would make the game all the better. Until it is done, I will
loathe it with all my heart!
Wayne Morris
---
* OLX 2.1 TD * Chicken heads are the chief food of captive alligators.
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
WM> Living City Hmmm,
WM> Here is a formula for the Living City. Get a bunch of Power Gamers
WM> together, throw together a really piss poor module, and there you have a
WM> living city event.
I agree that some of the modules are rather low standard. I also agree
that there are power gamers out there. but the beauty of Living City (and
the other Living Campaigns) is that you almost always get to form your own
team. Don't play with the power gamers, if that is not your style.
The question of module quality is a difficult issue. It is hard to get
consistent quality for (essentially) volunteer work. This isn't confined
just to Living City events, though. I have found horid modules in all
types of events (including ouside the RPGA).
WM> I do play Living City, and yes I do like some of the people there, but
WM> lets face it, the game is a power gamers dream. The biggest problem
WM> with LC is the fact that magic items are given out like they're candy.
WM> How many magic items do you think are in a module on average? On
WM> average, about 4 major items (permanent magic) are in a module, not to
WM> mention about 4 potions or other type of non permanent magic.
WM> In a real campaign, things are controlled by the DM and player
WM> characters are groomed to be the way that they are.
Living City does have too much magic. I have two comments to this:
1) most DM's are WAY too nice to players. If they made the players save
for items whenever they failed a save vs. spell, this would start
removing items quickly.
2) this is a recognized problem, and has been adressed in the other Living
Campaigns. My living jungle character, for example, has NO magic items.
WM> I don't think that LC is all that wonderful, and even with the rule
WM> changes that they made recently, there is no change. The problem with
WM> the LC is the ammount of magic in it. If that could be taken care of,
WM> then it would make the game all the better. Until it is done, I will
WM> loathe it with all my heart!
But you stated above that you play it. If you loathe it so much, why play?
Obviously it must still have some attraction.
Ed Gibson
>Living City Hmmm,
>Here is a formula for the Living City. Get a bunch of Power Gamers
>together, throw together a really piss poor module, and there you have a
>living city event.
Hi Wayne,
Let's have a quick quiz. How many Living City modules have YOU written?
You say you haven't written any. ::looking shocked::
Well, at least the piss poor modules were written by someone who was willing
to put a little effort into the Living City, instead of bitching and moaning.
Ed
Is
>The question of module quality is a difficult issue. It is hard to get
>consistent quality for (essentially) volunteer work. This isn't confined
>just to Living City events, though. I have found horid modules in all
>types of events (including ouside the RPGA).
>
most and the fastest will produce the majority of the modules. Quality is not
necessarily a factor here. There is a nominal $35 per round fee paid for
writers, though. Nothing to really make it all worthwhile financially, but
great for getting published by TSR.
-quistar <:-(}
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
MB> I honestly wish there was more discussion of, and publicity for, these
MB> events on the Internet. I spend a large part of my time trying to track
MB> down details of gaming events covering the board-games to LARP range for my
MB> Conventions Diary. The gaming folks _might_ make up a larger total attendance
MB> over the year than any single sf con, but there doesn't seem to be much
MB> interest in expanding on that. I'd like to have the details of every con
MB> large or small, but it seems to my mind that the small con folk like their
MB> gatherings to stay that way; so no publicity, no discussing it outside the
MB> small group of attendees lest others might want to broaden the group.
MB> Hmmmm. I'm being too cynical here I think.
Yes, I think you are <g>. I do RPGA events for most of the local cons, and
every one of them is happy to give me a bunch of flyers to send to my out
of state friends, and is overjoyed when I mention them in our newsletter.
Now, if my advertising was actually effective in bringing in more than an
additional 20-30 people, they might not be so eager. If I could dump 500
people on a normally 100 person convention, they would probably squawk a
lot, but adding an additional 20 just makes them happy.
I'll put you on my list of people to notify of upcoming events.
Tracey Reilly
>Here is a formula for the Living City. Get a bunch of Power Gamers
>together, throw together a really piss poor module, and there you have a
>living city event.
Ouch. C'mon. It's not that bad, and they're continually trying to make it
better. Yes, there are a lot of power gamers. Yes, some of the modules are
less than stellar. But some of the modules are quite good, and there are
living city players who are there to really role-play.
BTW, if the modules are so bad...how many have you written? Or are you just
willing to complain and not to do anything about it?
>I do play Living City, and yes I do like some of the people there, but
>lets face it, the game is a power gamers dream. The biggest problem
>with LC is the fact that magic items are given out like they're candy.
>How many magic items do you think are in a module on average? On
>average, about 4 major items (permanent magic) are in a module, not to
>mention about 4 potions or other type of non permanent magic.
So don't accept the magic items. There are fighters out there who are
uncomfortable with magic. There are clerics who won't touch items that hacve
power not granted by their god, or who think that things like magical swords
have no purpose but destruction and should be destroyed whenever possible.
No-one ever said you *had* to take the magic items.
>In a real campaign, things are controlled by the DM and player
>characters are groomed to be the way that they are.
Isn't your Living City character growing? Hasn't he/she been changed by
recent experience? If your character isn't maturing, that's hardly the RPGA's
fault. Or maybe I'm just misunderstanding you.
>I don't think that LC is all that wonderful, and even with the rule
>changes that they made recently, there is no change. The problem with
>the LC is the ammount of magic in it. If that could be taken care of,
>then it would make the game all the better. Until it is done, I will
>loathe it with all my heart!
Again, if you feel that strongly about it, don't accept the magic items. Find
yourself a group of players who feel as you do and register for events
together. Write some modules that are low-magic and are up to your standards.
In other words, don't just complain. Find ways to make it more fun for
yourself and the people you game with.
Tracey Reilly
>>ci...@src.honeywell.com (Cisco Lopez-Fresquet) wrote:
>>So what would it be called? It can't really be alt.living.city any more,
>>if it has been opened up to gaming in general, can it? I would suggest
>>rec.games.conventions.
>rec.games.frp.conventions would probably work, as well, but then there'd be
>confusion by newbies over whether announcements of coming cons go in
>rgf.announce (where they belong) or rgfc (where they wouldn't)
I don't think we have enough interest to make a Big 8 vote.
How about alt.games.frp.cons instead?
Why shouldn't news about upcoming cons go in the new group as well? That
would be part of the point, wouldn't it?
Tracey Reilly
>Ed Gibson:
>>(the Living City)
>Sharing NPC and business information is possible, but a bit dicey. The RPGA
>tournament contract gives all rights to TSR, so you may run into copyright
>disputes, depending on how detailed you are.
Hmm. Hadn't thought of it. I can't see why they'd have a huge problem with
it, though. I don't think anyone would be giving so much detail on modules so
as to infringe the copyright. Good point, though.
>I'd like to see brief reviews if they don't spoil the event. I wrote a LC
>column for the Players Guild of Central Oklahoma's newsletter for a few
>months and one of the things I talked about was modules to play and ones to
>avoid. I frequently have the problem with the wrong character for an event,
>since I have a fighter and a cleric/match and choose one depending on who
>else is at the table.
Exactly. Some modules run better with cleric-heavy parties, some need more
magical force, some are pure hack-n-slash, some need more fast thinking and
finesse. It's nice to know more of what you're getting into. Con brochures
don't really say much.
(people finding characters to run together in an event.)
>This sounds like a good idea and I'd be willing to give it a try. Are you
>going to be at Winter Fantasy?
It's a little far away for me, unfortunately. My next two are Dreamation and
TotalCon.
Ed Gibson
>(people finding characters to run together in an event.)
>>This sounds like a good idea and I'd be willing to give it a try. Are you
>>going to be at Winter Fantasy?
>It's a little far away for me, unfortunately. My next two are Dreamation and
>TotalCon.
What about Conn Con? It's in your neck of the woods and I hope I can afford
to make it the again this year.
Ed
Ed
Jeffery J Craigmile
Ed Gibson <edgi...@erinet.com> wrote:
>In article <95112603...@goldeneagle.com> wayne....@goldeneagle.com (Wayne Morris) writes:
>
>>Living City Hmmm,
>
>>together, throw together a really piss poor module, and there you have a
>>living city event.
Agreed.
>Hi Wayne,
>Let's have a quick quiz. How many Living City modules have YOU written?
>You say you haven't written any. ::looking shocked::
Do you know for sure that he hasn't?
>Well, at least the piss poor modules were written by someone who was willing
>to put a little effort into the Living City, instead of bitching and moaning.
Now, it seems to me that the man had a valid complaint. A more proper
question to ask might be "How many Living City events have you read?
Participated in?" See a spade, call a spade. Don't ask the man to
participate in something he detests.
>Ed
Ed Gibson
>In article <edgibson.2...@erinet.com>,
>Ed Gibson <edgi...@erinet.com> wrote:
>>In article <95112603...@goldeneagle.com> wayne....@goldeneagle.com (Wayne Morris) writes:
>>
>>>Living City Hmmm,
>>
>>>Here is a formula for the Living City. Get a bunch of Power Gamers
>>>together, throw together a really piss poor module, and there you have a
>>>living city event.
>Agreed.
>>Hi Wayne,
>>Let's have a quick quiz. How many Living City modules have YOU written?
>>You say you haven't written any. ::looking shocked::
>Do you know for sure that he hasn't?
I have played and/or judged about 90% of the LC modules and I didn't recognize
the name. Admittedly, he could have written one in the last few months
that I haven't encountered, but I don't believe anyone who had written
an LC module would say that they are all bad. There are good ones and
there are bad ones, but HQ is being a lot stricter about the modules they
sanction.
My personal experience is that I've had a great time in some lousy modules and
a miserable time in some good modules, resulting from the group or DM I
was playing the event with. You don't have much choice about the DM,
but you can try and choose a compatible party. If you are a power gamer who
wants to get to the end of the module to gain the most treasure and experience
points, and you are in with a group who just wants to role-play and doesn't
care what they gain out of the module, someone is going to be unhappy. This
isn't the fault of the module.
>>Well, at least the piss poor
modules were written by someone who was willing >>to put a little effort into
the Living City, instead of bitching and moaning.
>Now, it seems to me that the man had a valid complaint. A more proper
>question to ask might be "How many Living City events have you read?
>Participated in?" See a spade, call a spade. Don't ask the man to
>participate in something he detests.
I don't have the original post available, but the impression I got was that he
continued to play LC even while he complained about it.
Ed
Jeffery J Craigmile
Tracey Reilly <stgt...@acs3.bu.edu> wrote:
>>wayne....@goldeneagle.com (Wayne Morris) writes:
>
>
>>Here is a formula for the Living City. Get a bunch of Power Gamers
>>together, throw together a really piss poor module, and there you have a
>>living city event.
Maybe this generalization is a little broad. The basic premise still stands,
however. It comes from the idea of customizing your own character. As for
the module quality...
>Ouch. C'mon. It's not that bad, and they're continually trying to make it
>better. Yes, there are a lot of power gamers. Yes, some of the modules are
>less than stellar. But some of the modules are quite good, and there are
>living city players who are there to really role-play.
How many Living City players are there to play, and how many are there to
rack up points on their memberships? As for the module quality...
>BTW, if the modules are so bad...how many have you written? Or are you just
>willing to complain and not to do anything about it?
Once again, you don't have to write a module to have the right to complain.
The fact that Wayne is, I'm assuming, an RPGA member who has played in
and/or DMed a Living City event qualifies him to complain. Why should he
write for a campaign that he hates. Further, as the Living City proves, some
people just shouldn't write modules.
Let's face it. The writers bear the burden of producing so much for the
RPGA, are so unappreciated, and get blamed for damned near everything it's a
wonder anyone will write for it at all. Further, after having seen so many
editing errors, who in their right mind would send a module in?
Wayne can complain all he likes. He is a consumer. He paid his dues, he
actually plays in these events, reads the newsletter, etc. If he or I don't
like the Living City, it is our right to complain. Or doesn't T$R care that
they are losing customers? There is the possibili y that we represent a
large number of gamers that either don't have Internet access or haven't
said anything yet.
>>I do play Living City, and yes I do like some of the people there, but
>>lets face it, the game is a power gamers dream.
This also says a lot about the general attitude that the RPGA created with
their Experience-Points-for-the-Players system. It tends to make a person
look out more for themselves than cooperate with the group. So ya, make the
characters as bad-ass as possible, or you'll get left by the wayside.
>>The biggest problem
>>with LC is the fact that magic items are given out like they're candy.
>>How many magic items do you think are in a module on average? On
>>average, about 4 major items (permanent magic) are in a module, not to
>>mention about 4 potions or other type of non permanent magic.
Depends on the DM. Just be sure to have all the proper forms filled out.
Waitaminute...Forms! Aren't we taking this just a little too seriously,
folks?
>So don't accept the magic items.
That wouldn't be very competitive now, would it?
>There are fighters out there who are
>uncomfortable with magic. There are clerics who won't touch items that hacve
>power not granted by their god, or who think that things like magical swords
>have no purpose but destruction and should be destroyed whenever possible.
>No-one ever said you *had* to take the magic items.
Well said. I do happen to agree with this from a role-playing perspective.
However, Living City tends to devolve into rules lawyering, so grab all you
can. A couple of the adventures I have played were trompled on by myself or
someone else who had the sense enough to use something they had gained in
another adventure. Why? Because writers can't or don't coordinate magic
items. Even then, it is an uphill battle because not every player plays in
every LC event. There is no way to know what a player is going to bring to
the table with him. However, the magic items given out at character creation
do tend to keep some wizards alive just a little longer.
>>In a real campaign, things are controlled by the DM and player
>>characters are groomed to be the way that they are.
Living City is a real campaign. There is a certain amount of grooming at
character creation. (Not much) You can even expect to keep the character the
same in the way of personality. However, if you want points on your
membership then you need to do whatever the module demands of you, do it
first, suck up to the DM as much as possible, and convince all of the other
players that you are absolutely correct in doing so.
>Isn't your Living City character growing? Hasn't he/she been changed by
>recent experience? If your character isn't maturing, that's hardly the RPGA's
>fault. Or maybe I'm just misunderstanding you.
It's entirely possible that his Kit was retired. It's not a matter of
character growth. I have yet to see a LC module that encouraged character
growth from a personality/role-playing point of view. I've seen characters
grow in XP, in wealth and in treasure values. Character growth is otherwise
something that takes place between a player and his character sheet between
sessions in Living anything.
>>I don't think that LC is all that wonderful, and even with the rule
>>changes that they made recently, there is no change.
Talk about the lack of character growth! When they removed kits they altered
half the characters they didn't retire! What was that all about? It was,
again, another cheezy rules lawyering maneuver that eliminated a bunch of
characters that will now have to start over for no good reason. When you
remove a kit, you make the character into another cookie-cutter (Fighter,
thief, whatever) with the same stats, abilities and reason for being as half
a dozen other characters in the Living City.
>>The problem with
>>the LC is the ammount of magic in it. If that could be taken care of,
>>then it would make the game all the better. Until it is done, I will
>>loathe it with all my heart!
Remember, send those complaints to: RPG...@aol.com
>Again, if you feel that strongly about it, don't accept the magic items.
I agree, if it bothers you that much, don't accept them. Just remember, you
may regret having turned the stuff down later on. Living City is a
competition to see who can retire first with the most powerful goodies. The
RPGA is a competition to see who can become Grand Paragon Lord and Master of
the Universe first, with the bestest Living City character ever created.
>Find
>yourself a group of players who feel as you do and register for events
>together. Write some modules that are low-magic and are up to your standards.
I think we've discussed this before on this newsgroup. Personally, I
wouldn't want to see my gaming group break up over a disagreement regarding
a voting sheet.
Also, when writing for the RPGA Living whatever, I think it would be wise to
target a larger audience than your local gaming club. Somebody that lives
hundreds of miles away is likely to not agree with something you did. Take
heart, everything you write is probably going to tick someone off,
somewhere.
Further, a low magic module, even written for low levels, won't compete with
some of the munchier stuff that is already out there. The RPGA's editors
would likely add something to make it more popular. Wayne and the RPGA
probably don't have the same sets of standards and, let's face it, the RPGA
is in control here.
>In other words, don't just complain.
Complain all you want. It's your given right as a consumer. If McDonald's
gives you a rotten cheeseburger, do you not complain? Heck Ya! If the RPGA
were truly in the hands of the players, it would be possible to do something
other than complain. (BTW, Quitting the RPGA won't change anything, either.)
>Find ways to make it more fun for
>yourself and the people you game with.
Well, you can't single handedly topple the Living City, but if you and
enough of your friends complain directly to the RPGA, sooner or later they
have to at least acknowledge your side of the argument, and it goes on from
there. Don't give up.
As far as sending them anything, well, you're taking your own chances there.
Good luck. If it turns out the way you sent it in, let me know, I'd be happy
to run it.
>
>--
>Tracey Reilly Theatrical Lighting Design stgt...@acs.bu.edu
>
>"Huh! You're right!"
>"Of course I am. I've had coffee." --Spider Robinson, _Time Pressures_
Ed Gibson
>>>(people finding characters to run together in an event.)
>>What about Conn Con? It's in your neck of the woods and I hope I can afford
>>to make it the again this year.
>Isn't that after TotalCon? I remember I couldn't make it last year, but got
>really good reports on it from friends. But it's in April, right?
Conn Con is usually the last weekend in March.
>It looks like the next few months will be Arisia/Dreamation (I haven't really
>decided which one), TotalCon, Pentacon, ConnCon, Icon, ConMan, DexCon, AGE,
>and then DireCon.
I may be at DexCon as well, I was there the last two years.
>Tracey Reilly Theatrical Lighting Design stgt...@acs.bu.edu
Ed
Ed Gibson
>In article <49j3qi$6...@news.bu.edu>,
>Tracey Reilly <stgt...@acs3.bu.edu> wrote:
>>>wayne....@goldeneagle.com (Wayne Morris) writes:
>>
>>
>>>Here is a formula for the Living City. Get a bunch of Power Gamers
>>>together, throw together a really piss poor module, and there you have a
>>>living city event.
>Maybe this generalization is a little broad. The basic premise still stands,
>however. It comes from the idea of customizing your own character. As for
>the module quality...
>>Ouch. C'mon. It's not that bad, and they're continually trying to make it
>>better. Yes, there are a lot of power gamers. Yes, some of the modules are
>>less than stellar. But some of the modules are quite good, and there are
>>living city players who are there to really role-play.
>How many Living City players are there to play, and how many are there to
>rack up points on their memberships? As for the module quality...
IMHO, the LC players are less likely to be concerned about points on their
memberships. There are a lot of people who are joining the RPGA because they
want to keep playing their characters. They are not concerned about player
and judge levels. In addition, many of the higher (RPGA) level people would
like to see less LC because, they believe that working with pre-generated
characters is more of a challenge to role-playing skills.
<Snip>
>Let's face it. The writers bear the burden of producing so much for the
>RPGA, are so unappreciated, and get blamed for damned near everything it's a
>wonder anyone will write for it at all. Further, after having seen so many
>editing errors, who in their right mind would send a module in?
I have personal experience with this and IMO Robert Wiese (current
coordinator) has a far more delicate touch as an editor than Kevin Melka
(former coordinator) did.
>Wayne can complain all he likes. He is a consumer. He paid his dues, he
>actually plays in these events, reads the newsletter, etc. If he or I don't
>like the Living City, it is our right to complain. Or doesn't T$R care that
>they are losing customers? There is the possibili y that we represent a
>large number of gamers that either don't have Internet access or haven't
>said anything yet.
Constructive criticism is one thing, denouncing all modules as "piss poor" is
not going to encourage anyone to listen to your complaints, even if there is
some merit to them.
>>>I do play Living City, and yes I do like some of the people there, but
>>>lets face it, the game is a power gamers dream.
>This also says a lot about the general attitude that the RPGA created with
>their Experience-Points-for-the-Players system. It tends to make a person
>look out more for themselves than cooperate with the group. So ya, make the
>characters as bad-ass as possible, or you'll get left by the wayside.
I think you overestimate the number of players who are concerned about their
experience points and winning events. There are some, but not very many.
What you do have are players who have designed their own characters so they
have something they feel comfortable role-playing. So instead of a pre-gen
character games where only a couple of players may take an active role, all
six (7,8 or 9) players are clamoring for their share of the DMs attention.
>>>The biggest problem
>>>with LC is the fact that magic items are given out like they're candy.
>>>How many magic items do you think are in a module on average? On
>>>average, about 4 major items (permanent magic) are in a module, not to
>>>mention about 4 potions or other type of non permanent magic.
>Depends on the DM. Just be sure to have all the proper forms filled out.
>Waitaminute...Forms! Aren't we taking this just a little too seriously,
>folks?
You would hope so, but since there have been several instances of certificates
being counterfeited or sold (by the judge), something needs to be done. There
are some items which were in older modules which don't have certificates which
could have a major effect on play, if they were "cloned". And without a
certificate, there is no way to prevent this. I'd like to think that no one
cheats, but I have run into it at LC events at conventions.
>>So don't accept the magic items.
>That wouldn't be very competitive now, would it?
>>There are fighters out there who are
>>uncomfortable with magic. There are clerics who won't touch items that hacve
>>power not granted by their god, or who think that things like magical swords
>>have no purpose but destruction and should be destroyed whenever possible.
>>No-one ever said you *had* to take the magic items.
>Well said. I do happen to agree with this from a role-playing perspective.
>However, Living City tends to devolve into rules lawyering, so grab all you
>can. A couple of the adventures I have played were trompled on by myself or
>someone else who had the sense enough to use something they had gained in
>another adventure. Why? Because writers can't or don't coordinate magic
>items. Even then, it is an uphill battle because not every player plays in
>every LC event. There is no way to know what a player is going to bring to
>the table with him. However, the magic items given out at character creation
>do tend to keep some wizards alive just a little longer.
The writers can't. One thing which was suggested in the author guidelines
by the LC Consortium was a list of allowable magic items, but author
guidelines have still not been released.
This is a problem. When I write an event, I consider the magic items I've
seen from some of the more powerful players, especially at the higher
tiers. However, the module treasure is not nearly as bad as some of the
things which were released by Chemcheaux (now defunct).
>>>In a real campaign, things are controlled by the DM and player
>>>characters are groomed to be the way that they are.
>Living City is a real campaign. There is a certain amount of grooming at
>character creation. (Not much) You can even expect to keep the character the
>same in the way of personality. However, if you want points on your
>membership then you need to do whatever the module demands of you, do it
>first, suck up to the DM as much as possible, and convince all of the other
>players that you are absolutely correct in doing so.
Sucking up to the DM and other players won't get you any extra points on your
membership. The DM doesn't care if you get to the second encounter. If you
are truly interested in role-playing, find a similarly inclined group of
people and play together. However, your character's experience and magic will
suffer for not doing what the module intended.
>>Isn't your Living City character growing? Hasn't he/she been changed by
>>recent experience? If your character isn't maturing, that's hardly the RPGA's
>>fault. Or maybe I'm just misunderstanding you.
>It's entirely possible that his Kit was retired. It's not a matter of
>character growth. I have yet to see a LC module that encouraged character
>growth from a personality/role-playing point of view. I've seen characters
>grow in XP, in wealth and in treasure values. Character growth is otherwise
>something that takes place between a player and his character sheet between
>sessions in Living anything.
My character's personality changed due to a LC module. He died and was
reincarnated, which had a profound effect on his outlook on life. However,
even before that I periodically modified my adjectives to account for his
changing perspective.
>>>I don't think that LC is all that wonderful, and even with the rule
>>>changes that they made recently, there is no change.
>Talk about the lack of character growth! When they removed kits they altered
>half the characters they didn't retire! What was that all about? It was,
>again, another cheezy rules lawyering maneuver that eliminated a bunch of
>characters that will now have to start over for no good reason. When you
>remove a kit, you make the character into another cookie-cutter (Fighter,
>thief, whatever) with the same stats, abilities and reason for being as half
>a dozen other characters in the Living City.
There are 3 to 4 thousand LC characters. There are not that many kits. The
problem with having so many kits is the DM doesn't understand their
hindrances. A kit without hindrances is unbalancing. When I run LC events, I
make sure I know what the PCs hindrances are (the players will tell me the
benefits :). As an example, there was at least one PC who took the witch kit.
A witch can not settle down in one area, because the townsfolk mistrust her
and eventually kill or drive her away. This kit never should have been
allowed in LC, but it was, and this was a mistake which needed to be
corrected.
<Snip>
Ed
Tracey Reilly
>>(people finding characters to run together in an event.)
>>>This sounds like a good idea and I'd be willing to give it a try. Are you
>>>going to be at Winter Fantasy?
>>It's a little far away for me, unfortunately. My next two are Dreamation
>>and TotalCon.
>What about Conn Con? It's in your neck of the woods and I hope I can afford
>to make it the again this year.
Isn't that after TotalCon? I remember I couldn't make it last year, but got
really good reports on it from friends. But it's in April, right?
It looks like the next few months will be Arisia/Dreamation (I haven't really
decided which one), TotalCon, Pentacon, ConnCon, Icon, ConMan, DexCon, AGE,
and then DireCon.
(sigh) I do this too much. :-)
--
Tracey Reilly Theatrical Lighting Design stgt...@acs.bu.edu
"Huh! You're right!"
RPGA HQ
"In other words, don't just complain. Find ways to make it more fun for
yourself and the people you game with."
Amen. There are several people who post this newsgroup who regularly make
such a positive contribution to the Network (Ed Gibson, Quistar, Cisco,
etc.). When those people have a criticism of the campaign, the scoring
system, judges, and such, I feel compelled to take that criticism
seriously.
There are other posters (I'll show the courtesy of not mentioning those
names) who make no attempt to contribute. These are often the first to
find fault with the attempts of the contributors.
It comes down to exactly what Tracey recommends: do something affirmative,
or stop whining about those who do.
Of course, that's just my opinion...
Scott Douglas
RPGA Network Coordinator
Is
lack of role-playing and character development in LC modules,
perhaps what we need to figure out are a set of guidelines for
writing modules that will do just that. I had a great time
once in a non-LC module where we got through the entire module
without a single combat and no treasure acquired! If that were
an LC module I'm sure the XP awards would have been based on
our actions and role-playing--or rather, should have been. The
module was "Death and Taxes" which I do recommend if anyone has
a chance to play in it.
If anyone else is interested in developing said
guidelines, post back here and we'll open a dialogue.
-quistar <:-(}
"That was shallow, cheap, and wholly based on hormones. Works
for me!" -- Freakazoid!
Aardy R. DeVarque
>>jh...@nslsilus.org (Aardy R. DeVarque) writes:
>>>ci...@src.honeywell.com (Cisco Lopez-Fresquet) wrote:
>
>>>So what would it be called? It can't really be alt.living.city any more,
>>>if it has been opened up to gaming in general, can it? I would suggest
>>>rec.games.conventions.
>
>>rec.games.frp.conventions would probably work, as well, but then there'd be
>>confusion by newbies over whether announcements of coming cons go in
>>rgf.announce (where they belong) or rgfc (where they wouldn't)
>
>I don't think we have enough interest to make a Big 8 vote.
Probably not.
>How about alt.games.frp.cons instead?
Sounds interesting.
>Why shouldn't news about upcoming cons go in the new group as well? That
>would be part of the point, wouldn't it?
Since rec.games.frp.announce already deals with ads for upcoming cons, it
would be wise to take that into account when considering a new group--
my suggestion would be to either:
Keep all "Con Advertisements" in rgf.announce (which is moderated; and IIRC,
cons make up most of the traffic on rgf.announce), and discuss coming cons
and various con events on a new (unmoderated) group, agf.cons
or
Split off con announcements from rgf.announce and make a new (unmoderated)
group, agf.cons, for all aspects of cons, including advertising for upcoming
cons.
My personal preference would be for the former, as plain old announcements
of upcoming cons don't add much in the way of discussions of cons, and it
also keeps the idea of a central place for people to go for all roleplaying
announcements, without wading through pages of discussions to get to the
plain con announcements.
Aardy R. DeVarque
Feudalism: Serf & Turf
Ed Gibson
> Just a thought here. If players are complaining about the
>lack of role-playing and character development in LC modules,
>perhaps what we need to figure out are a set of guidelines for
>writing modules that will do just that.
Writing and DM guidelines are supposed to be coming out for LC over the next
couple of months. Once those are released, we can look at what can be down in
the guidelines to improve character development and continuity. One of my
suggestions to the LC Consortium author guidelines was to assign codes for
various things (say P1 = met Rolf Sunriver, R1 = worked for temple of Selune,
etc). Then authors could adjust NPC reactions based on these codes. There
were two main problems, what to do with experiences in previous modules, and
how to many a comprehensive list. This eventually was distilled down to a
reaction roll, where based on level and other things, an NPC could recognize a
character from his past deeds (may be good or bad). This is similar to the
reaction modifier given to knights in the current rules.
>I had a great time
>once in a non-LC module where we got through the entire module
>without a single combat and no treasure acquired! If that were
>an LC module I'm sure the XP awards would have been based on
>our actions and role-playing--or rather, should have been. The
>module was "Death and Taxes" which I do recommend if anyone has
>a chance to play in it.
I've played and judged it and it is a fun module
> If anyone else is interested in developing said
>guidelines, post back here and we'll open a dialogue.
If Scott Douglas reads this maybe he can put the guidelines in downloadable
format on aol. I can download them and e-mail them to interested parties.
> -quistar <:-(}>
>"That was shallow, cheap, and wholly based on hormones. Works
>for me!" -- Freakazoid!
Ed
Is
or so (pending approval and sanctioning by HQ, which I do not
see as being a problem here) is "The Waterbabies" by Rick
Silva, which is written in such a way that just about any style
of player or group will enjoy the module (not everyone, but
most). It should be premiering at Pentecon VIII in Ithaca, NY
April 12-14th. Be there or be Pentagonal!
Mark Baker
Gaming Cons, and that this group is for discussion covering the whole
spectrum from LARP to board games, there's still the totally underused
alt.gaming.cons group that already exists.
--
Mark Baker An employer? No, I'm between those at
http://www.io.com/~lange/ the moment so no need for a Disclaimer
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
Ed Gibson <edgi...@erinet.com>
mor...@iastate.edu (Jeffery J Craigmile)
Tracey Reilly <stgt...@acs3.bu.edu>
wayne....@goldeneagle.com (Wayne Morris)
And keeping track of who said what is impossible, and frankly, not essential.
Therefore, assume one of the four said it, and I am responding to it....
>> How many Living City players are there to play, and how many are there to
>> rack up points on their memberships? As for the module quality...
EG> IMHO, the LC players are less likely to be concerned about points on their
EG> memberships. There are a lot of people who are joining the RPGA because they
EG> want to keep playing their characters. They are not concerned about player
EG> and judge levels. In addition, many of the higher (RPGA) level people would
EG> like to see less LC because, they believe that working with pre-generated
EG> characters is more of a challenge to role-playing skills.
I don't think I know ANY LC players who really care about their membership level.
I have noticed, however, that granmaster and above (level 5+) players are
VERY concerned with it when I play in their events.
>> Let's face it. The writers bear the burden of producing so much for the
>> RPGA, are so unappreciated, and get blamed for damned near everything it's a
>> wonder anyone will write for it at all. Further, after having seen so many
>> editing errors, who in their right mind would send a module in?
>> Wayne can complain all he likes. He is a consumer. He paid his dues, he
>> actually plays in these events, reads the newsletter, etc. If he or I don't
>> like the Living City, it is our right to complain. Or doesn't T$R care that
>> they are losing customers? There is the possibili y that we represent a
>> large number of gamers that either don't have Internet access or haven't
>> said anything yet.
He's a consumer? Excuse me, but I thought the RGAP was a *FAN*
organization? As in something that you get out of what you put into it?
Sure, TSR subsidises Scott Douglas's salary, but ultimately if we do not
contribute, it is our fault if the RPGA events 'suck.' I certainly don't
expect TSR to write the 30+ events I play in every year all on my measly
$24 membership.
>>>> I do play Living City, and yes I do like some of the people there, but
>>>> lets face it, the game is a power gamers dream.
A power gamer will be a power gamer regardless of the system he is in.
Unless given his character at the moment he sits down at the table, he will
spend the campaign accumilating power. This is a player thing, not a
campaign thing. Yes, there can be power DM's as well (and the power
players LOVE these guys), but if he has it, you can't take the power out of
the player. For example, in Living Jungle there are no magic items. Funny
how EVERY Saru that I have played with (except one - Monkey boy, you were
great, _I_ respect you for your mind) has had an 18/00 strength. Funny how
Tiger tananga outnumber ALL other katanga by something like a 2-1 margin.
>> This also says a lot about the general attitude that the RPGA created with
>> their Experience-Points-for-the-Players system. It tends to make a person
>> look out more for themselves than cooperate with the group. So ya, make the
>> characters as bad-ass as possible, or you'll get left by the wayside.
I don't think these are all that revealing. All to often when I talk to
strange AD&D players, I get the "I have a XX level XXXXX" story. Tell me
that AD&D (and role-playing in general) has a large percentage of power
gamers, I'll agree. Say that LC and the RPGA have more than their share, and
I will argue with you. That doesn't mean I don't wish there were fewer.
>>> There are fighters out there who are
>>> uncomfortable with magic. There are clerics who won't touch items that hacve
>>> power not granted by their god, or who think that things like magical swords
>>> have no purpose but destruction and should be destroyed whenever possible.
>>> No-one ever said you *had* to take the magic items.q
>> Well said. I do happen to agree with this from a role-playing perspective.
>> However, Living City tends to devolve into rules lawyering, so grab all you
>> can. A couple of the adventures I have played were trompled on by myself or
>> someone else who had the sense enough to use something they had gained in
>> another adventure. Why? Because writers can't or don't coordinate magic
>> items. Even then, it is an uphill battle because not every player plays in
>> every LC event. There is no way to know what a player is going to bring to
>> the table with him. However, the magic items given out at character creation
>> do tend to keep some wizards alive just a little longer.
This is a DM's faul, and only partially the modules. A poor DM will _let_
you walk allover the module. A good DM will know the module well enough to
adjust on the fly, so that it will still be a challenge for all concerned.
A similar, and somewhat tougher, problem is what to do with parties of
wildly varying experience. What do you do with a group of four 7th level
fighters, a 2nd level bard, and a 1st level mage? This is the true test of
a DM's skills....
>> Living City is a real campaign. There is a certain amount of grooming at
>> character creation. (Not much) You can even expect to keep the character the
>> same in the way of personality. However, if you want points on your
>> membership then you need to do whatever the module demands of you, do it
>> first, suck up to the DM as much as possible, and convince all of the other
>> players that you are absolutely correct in doing so.
How would this differ from any other RPGA module, considering all RPGA
events are scored the same way? You can't lay the blame for this one at
the feet of the LC.
>>> Isn't your Living City character growing? Hasn't he/she been changed by
>>> recent experience? If your character isn't maturing, that's hardly the RPGA's
>>> fault. Or maybe I'm just misunderstanding you.
>> It's entirely possible that his Kit was retired. It's not a matter of
>> character growth. I have yet to see a LC module that encouraged character
>> growth from a personality/role-playing point of view. I've seen characters
>> grow in XP, in wealth and in treasure values. Character growth is otherwise
>> something that takes place between a player and his character sheet between
>> sessions in Living anything.
Hmn. I have seen such things as sex changes, were-rat society inductions,
and permanent loss of all body hair happen to my character's adventuring
companions. A certain dwarf's inability to keep herself armored for any
length of time without its destruction has become the stuff of legend.
My character has permanently shrunk by 6" in height, is stuck
in the body of a 13 year-old, opened a private bank (current deposits
80,000gp and growing), and gained a life-long quest to end slavery. Those
aren't role-playing and character growth opportunities?
>>>> I don't think that LC is all that wonderful, and even with the rule
>>>> changes that they made recently, there is no change.
>> Talk about the lack of character growth! When they removed kits they altered
>> half the characters they didn't retire! What was that all about? It was,
>> again, another cheezy rules lawyering maneuver that eliminated a bunch of
>> characters that will now have to start over for no good reason. When you
>> remove a kit, you make the character into another cookie-cutter (Fighter,
>> thief, whatever) with the same stats, abilities and reason for being as half
>> a dozen other characters in the Living City.
Apparently this poster has a problem perceiving the difference between any
two fighters, two thieves, whatever. Somehow I think it is still quite
possible to make unique characters. In fact, consider it a freeing
experience - you no loger have to be bound by the stereotype of your kit.
EG> There are 3 to 4 thousand LC characters. There are not that many kits. The
EG> problem with having so many kits is the DM doesn't understand their
EG> hindrances. A kit without hindrances is unbalancing. When I run LC events, I
EG> make sure I know what the PCs hindrances are (the players will tell me the
EG> benefits :). As an example, there was at least one PC who took the witch kit.
EG> A witch can not settle down in one area, because the townsfolk mistrust her
EG> and eventually kill or drive her away. This kit never should have been
EG> allowed in LC, but it was, and this was a mistake which needed to be
EG> corrected.
It is a rare DM indeed that remembers to heap abuse on the swashbuckler. I
try and always give them extra. ;)
Living City is what we make of it. If there is something you don't like
about it, work to change the system - constructively. The Great Character
Change (tm) was such an event. Yes, it effected my characters, but I
had no problem with it, as I knew it was for the betterment of the system
as a whole.
Erik Robbins
My character was an Wood Elven Archer.....
I was pissed at first at the removal of the kits, but -
He's still an elf. I can even call him a wood elf, though now I use the
general elf abilites from the PG.
He's still an archer. He still uses a bow, he's still specialized in the
bow, and I hope they allow Combat & Tactics. He'll get Weapon Mastery
eventually.
He is vastly different than an elf (high) fighter who uses a sword as his
choice weapon.
Erik
Is
>wildly varying experience. What do you do with a group of four 7th level
>fighters, a 2nd level bard, and a 1st level mage? This is the true test of
>a DM's skills....
>
adventure. We had two 6th level characters, two 4th, one 3rd and one first-time
player with a 1st level character. At the average level for that party, they
went into situations that would have meant INSTANT, UNAVOIDABLE DEATH for the
weakest characters. I felt this unnecessary and cruel, not to mention
discouraging, so naturally they took a lot of hits, but survived.
One practice that Jean Rabe recommended (often used by more experienced
DMs in the Living City) is to mix creatures of varying levels to suit the
mix of levels in the party.
Quick note for those unfamiliar with the LC tournament structure:
LC encounters are scaled on tiers based on the total experience level of the
party. This more or less guarantees a decent but fair fight for any
given group of PCs. This system breaks down a bit when you have a great
disparity between the highest and lowest-level characters in the group.
This happened to me my first game when I got put into a group of high-level
power players who basically told me to sit back and watch--which I had to,
there was really nothing my character could so, aside from soil himself...
For example, a Tier I group might encounter orcs, Tier II some orogs,
Tier III some ogres, and Tier IV some hill giants. This is oversimplified but
gets the point across.
The trick when running a mixed group (getting back to the point) is
to borrow a mix of creatures from different Tiers to match the given party.
This way the high-level characters are busy with the hill giants while the new
1st-level characters fight an even battle with the orcs.
In case I haven't already said it, I highly recommend this method for
DMs everywhere. It worked for me.
-quistar <:-(}
Jeffery J Craigmile
>Cisco Lopez-Fresquet <ci...@src.honeywell.com> writes:
>
>>wildly varying experience. What do you do with a group of four 7th level
>>fighters, a 2nd level bard, and a 1st level mage? This is the true test of
>>a DM's skills....
>>
>
>adventure. We had two 6th level characters, two 4th, one 3rd and one first-time
>player with a 1st level character. At the average level for that party, they
>went into situations that would have meant INSTANT, UNAVOIDABLE DEATH for the
>weakest characters. I felt this unnecessary and cruel, not to mention
>discouraging, so naturally they took a lot of hits, but survived.
But it is a realistic. It is in the scenario. If the players are worthy of
all the praise I've been hearing, they should be able to get around it.
It's a DM adjustment thing, granted. The writer couldn't have seen it
coming, but he might want to dull the claws the next time around.
> One practice that Jean Rabe recommended (often used by more experienced
>DMs in the Living City) is to mix creatures of varying levels to suit the
>mix of levels in the party.
> Quick note for those unfamiliar with the LC tournament structure:
>LC encounters are scaled on tiers based on the total experience level of the
>party. This more or less guarantees a decent but fair fight for any
>given group of PCs. This system breaks down a bit when you have a great
>disparity between the highest and lowest-level characters in the group.
>This happened to me my first game when I got put into a group of high-level
>power players who basically told me to sit back and watch--which I had to,
>there was really nothing my character could so, aside from soil himself...
> For example, a Tier I group might encounter orcs, Tier II some orogs,
>Tier III some ogres, and Tier IV some hill giants. This is oversimplified but
>gets the point across.
> The trick when running a mixed group (getting back to the point) is
>to borrow a mix of creatures from different Tiers to match the given party.
>This way the high-level characters are busy with the hill giants while the new
>1st-level characters fight an even battle with the orcs.
I still don't see where this solves the problem. PC's are a funny lot. They
might:
A. See the big nasties, get scared and run off. Level doesn't matter.
B. Decide to let the higher level characters deal with the little creatures
after the group has dispatched the bigger threat.
C. Murphy's laws of melee combat. What if a low level weenie finds himself
in the wrong place at the wrong time.
D. Due to some personality flaw (racial enemy, etc) a powerful character
goes after a lesser opponent.
E. Inexperienced PC fires into a melee with a second level character (Or, as
I have seen, throws flaming oil,) thereby wounding a higher level character
which combined with the creature results in the death of a higher level PC.
See C above.
I see an unbalance situation as a challenge. You aren't supposed to win
every battle all of the time. Things don't always have to work out, either.
Some things are meant to be discouraging. It serves the plot and just plain
makes sense. For example; no king in his right mind puts a sign on his
castle saying "come loot my treasury." He's going to get the biggest,
nastiest bad-asses available to guard his castle. Screw fairness.
> In case I haven't already said it, I highly recommend this method for
>DMs everywhere. It worked for me.
I'm glad it worked for you. How many others can say the same? How many leave
unbalances alone and let the players try to deal with it?
> -quistar <:-(}
--
A famous Ork general once said--
"A mortal hurty is no excuse to abandon your post.
Stop bleeding all over me and get back out on the line."
mor...@iastate.edu
Jeffery J Craigmile
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet <ci...@src.honeywell.com> wrote:
>There are at least four different people being quoted here:
> Ed Gibson <edgi...@erinet.com>
> mor...@iastate.edu (Jeffery J Craigmile)
> Tracey Reilly <stgt...@acs3.bu.edu>
> wayne....@goldeneagle.com (Wayne Morris)
>And keeping track of who said what is impossible, and frankly, not essential.
>Therefore, assume one of the four said it, and I am responding to it....
We're all one big happy family here.
>>> How many Living City players are there to play, and how many are there to
>>> rack up points on their memberships? As for the module quality...
> I don't think I know ANY LC players who really care about their membership level.
>I have noticed, however, that granmaster and above (level 5+) players are
>VERY concerned with it when I play in their events.
I've notice lots of players obsessed with their membership levels. I guess
it depends on where you are and how many cons are in that area.
>>> Wayne can complain all he likes. He is a consumer. He paid his dues, he
>>> actually plays in these events, reads the newsletter, etc. If he or I don't
>>> like the Living City, it is our right to complain. Or doesn't T$R care that
>>> they are losing customers? There is the possibili y that we represent a
>>> large number of gamers that either don't have Internet access or haven't
>>> said anything yet.
>
> He's a consumer? Excuse me, but I thought the RGAP was a *FAN*
>organization?
Hell, yes he's a consumer. He pays his membership dues. He pays to go to
cons. In some places he pays to be in the event. It's a service. He paid for
it. He's a consumer.
Further, the belief that the RPGA is a "fan" organization is wishful
thinking at best. T$R owns it. There is no doubt of that. If it was a fan
organization, they should at least get the "fan's" opinion before they hack
up the Living City rules. Notice the submission guideline that everything
must go to the parent company and the RPGA, except T$R material. Where is
the RPGA advertised the most? You can't tell me this isn't a TSR product.
>As in something that you get out of what you put into it?
Oh, so running and playing in events doesn't count? Guess I'll stop being a
DM and just concentrate on writing, now. As a DM, I don't see why I should
submit anything, after some of the no-brainers I've been handed. As a
writer, I don't like being constrained be cheezy ethics guidelines and rules
lawyering that makes everything I do look like comedy. The RPGA has problems
distinguishing between enjoyable and funny.
>Sure, TSR subsidises Scott Douglas's salary, but ultimately if we do not
>contribute, it is our fault if the RPGA events 'suck.' I certainly don't
>expect TSR to write the 30+ events I play in every year all on my measly
>$24 membership.
You're right. I don't want T$R writing every event. I also agree in that the
RPGA should be thankful to everyone who does write in. However, I think they
should be more grateful to every GM they get. While a most of the burden
falls on the writer, the DM has to answer to the players. I wouldn't wish
that on anyone.:)
Some of us play in 10 or fewer events per year. The RPGA is now working to
compensate for that. (Thank Heavens!) This means that we expect a lot from
those events because the next con is likely to be a long ways off.
>>>>> I do play Living City, and yes I do like some of the people there, but
>>>>> lets face it, the game is a power gamers dream.
>
> A power gamer will be a power gamer regardless of the system he is in.
>Unless given his character at the moment he sits down at the table, he will
>spend the campaign accumilating power. This is a player thing, not a
>campaign thing.
Actually, it's a game thing. We're playing AD&D, here. Powergaming is a
topic best discussed elsewhere. I still think the RPGA system makes this
environment worse and this style of play more popular and the LC style of
character generation makes it easier.
>Yes, there can be power DM's as well (and the power
>players LOVE these guys), but if he has it, you can't take the power out of
>the player. For example, in Living Jungle there are no magic items. Funny
>how EVERY Saru that I have played with (except one - Monkey boy, you were
>great, _I_ respect you for your mind) has had an 18/00 strength. Funny how
>Tiger tananga outnumber ALL other katanga by something like a 2-1 margin.
They've placed restrictions to prevent things like this before, why not do
it again?
>>> This also says a lot about the general attitude that the RPGA created with
>>> their Experience-Points-for-the-Players system. It tends to make a person
>>> look out more for themselves than cooperate with the group. So ya, make the
>>> characters as bad-ass as possible, or you'll get left by the wayside.
>
>I don't think these are all that revealing. All to often when I talk to
>strange AD&D players, I get the "I have a XX level XXXXX" story. Tell me
>that AD&D (and role-playing in general) has a large percentage of power
>gamers, I'll agree.
I'm glad we agree.
>Say that LC and the RPGA have more than their share, and
>I will argue with you. That doesn't mean I don't wish there were fewer.
Well, I hate to argue with anyone, but... Living City events tend to have
mostly RPGA players, who are competing for points on their memberships. It
becomes a battle to see who can accumulate the most votes and get the most
attention. I've seen it as a DM, I've been hurt by it as a player. Frankly,
in most cases it is really hard to say one player is a better role-player
than someone else. (I've posted on this before.) There are a few players on
the extremes of good and bad, but it's mostly a shade of gray. This petty
competitiveness tends to overshadow all other things in the games I've
attended.
>>> Well said. I do happen to agree with this from a role-playing perspective.
>>> However, Living City tends to devolve into rules lawyering, so grab all you
>>> can. A couple of the adventures I have played were trompled on by myself or
>>> someone else who had the sense enough to use something they had gained in
>>> another adventure. Why? Because writers can't or don't coordinate magic
>>> items. Even then, it is an uphill battle because not every player plays in
>>> every LC event. There is no way to know what a player is going to bring to
>>> the table with him. However, the magic items given out at character creation
>>> do tend to keep some wizards alive just a little longer.
>This is a DM's faul, and only partially the modules. A poor DM will _let_
>you walk allover the module.
I'll tell Tom Prusa you said that if I see him again.:)
Actually, you've got a point here. I don't think it's necessarily a poor DM,
though. One of the worst problems with LC magic items is that characters
carry them from one game to the next. It may have been issued in one module,
where it was moderately useful, but carries over to one where it is
extremely useful, if not unbalancing.
>A good DM will know the module well enough to
>adjust on the fly, so that it will still be a challenge for all concerned.
Oh, no. Here we go with this again. It's nice for a DM to be able to do
that, almost a requisite ability. However, having had modules thrust at me
an hour before I ran them, it is ridiculous to have to memorize a module.
Further, there's this thing called editing that is supposed to be looking
for some of these types of situations. We won't even get into the writing
angle on this. Needless to say it is very hard for most DM's to adjust for
everything all of the time. We're not gods, you know.
The other thing that bugs me is that GMs are supposed to be ranked on this
sort of crap. I get really annoyed when every convention I go to becomes a
contest to see who the best GM is. I don't think a lot of players realize
what a DM puts up with, especially in the RPGA. I sure don't think they have
much of a right to judge them. Of course, I have yet to see what my rank as
a GM actually does, too. (Do I get the power to legally slay any player at
tenth level, no saves?) [Ooops, there's that word.]
>A similar, and somewhat tougher, problem is what to do with parties of
>wildly varying experience. What do you do with a group of four 7th level
>fighters, a 2nd level bard, and a 1st level mage? This is the true test of
>a DM's skills....
This is truly a LC problem. Couple this with modules written for levels
above and below that of the players. "I've got a headache this big..." It's
taxing not to cause casualties in this situation. We're looking at a lot of
variables, here.
>>> Living City is a real campaign. There is a certain amount of grooming at
>>> character creation. (Not much) You can even expect to keep the character the
>>> same in the way of personality. However, if you want points on your
>>> membership then you need to do whatever the module demands of you, do it
>>> first, suck up to the DM as much as possible, and convince all of the other
>>> players that you are absolutely correct in doing so.
>
>How would this differ from any other RPGA module, considering all RPGA
>events are scored the same way? You can't lay the blame for this one at
>the feet of the LC.
Once again, the Living City has, on the average, more RPGA players due to
the fact that non-members are only supposed to play once. Like I said
before, it leads to a lot of petty competitiveness. It happens in other
games, no doubt about it. If you think players have it bad, GM's have it
worse on voting. Personally, I think if the true goal of the RPGA and the
Living City are to have fun and role-play, then we shouldn't need a level
system for players or DMs.
>>> It's entirely possible that his Kit was retired. It's not a matter of
>>> character growth. I have yet to see a LC module that encouraged character
>>> growth from a personality/role-playing point of view. I've seen characters
>>> grow in XP, in wealth and in treasure values. Character growth is otherwise
>>> something that takes place between a player and his character sheet between
>>> sessions in Living anything.
>
> Hmn. I have seen such things as sex changes, were-rat society inductions,
>and permanent loss of all body hair happen to my character's adventuring
>companions. A certain dwarf's inability to keep herself armored for any
>length of time without its destruction has become the stuff of legend.
Legendary, like Abbot and Costello or Jack Benny or Steve Allen.
> My character has permanently shrunk by 6" in height, is stuck
>in the body of a 13 year-old, opened a private bank (current deposits
>80,000gp and growing), and gained a life-long quest to end slavery. Those
>aren't role-playing and character growth opportunities?
Ya, if this was a Saturday morning cartoon. What ever happened to "Slay the
dragon, grab the goodies, save the girl?" Ooops. I can't say "slay." in a
module, that might encourage violence. And "grabbing the goodies" is
stealing. I can't encourage that, either. With my luck, the girl didn't want
to be rescued, either. I'm probably going to get sued for wrongful death by
the dragon's love ones. May as well take a pie in the face while I'm at it.
Does anyone else see a problem with the RPGA's writer's guidelines?
>>>>> I don't think that LC is all that wonderful, and even with the rule
>>>>> changes that they made recently, there is no change.
>
>>> Talk about the lack of character growth! When they removed kits they altered
>>> half the characters they didn't retire! What was that all about? It was,
>>> again, another cheezy rules lawyering maneuver that eliminated a bunch of
>>> characters that will now have to start over for no good reason. When you
>>> remove a kit, you make the character into another cookie-cutter (Fighter,
>>> thief, whatever) with the same stats, abilities and reason for being as half
>>> a dozen other characters in the Living City.
>
> Apparently this poster has a problem perceiving the difference between any
>two fighters, two thieves, whatever. Somehow I think it is still quite
>possible to make unique characters. In fact, consider it a freeing
>experience - you no loger have to be bound by the stereotype of your kit.
There ain't that much diference between two fighters, two theives, two elven
rangers with bows, whatever. My kit was all that separated me from being a
stereotype. I'll grant you that small differences make the character, but
removing a kit is not a "freeing experience." Why do you think kits exist in
the first place? Mathematically speaking, what are the chances, out of three
or four thousand players that two characters are going to look very similar?
Especially using Living City character creation rules.
They should have either said "no kits" or allowed all kits right from the
start. We shouldn't even be discussing this.
>EG> There are 3 to 4 thousand LC characters. There are not that many kits. The
>EG> problem with having so many kits is the DM doesn't understand their
>EG> hindrances. A kit without hindrances is unbalancing. When I run LC events, I
>EG> make sure I know what the PCs hindrances are (the players will tell me the
>EG> benefits :). As an example, there was at least one PC who took the witch kit.
>EG> A witch can not settle down in one area, because the townsfolk mistrust her
>EG> and eventually kill or drive her away. This kit never should have been
>EG> allowed in LC, but it was, and this was a mistake which needed to be
>EG> corrected.
That's why all players must bring the book or a photocopy of the kit to the
DM to look at. A DM can reinterpret the above into -- All witches, when
their true nature is revealed, will receive a very negative reaction from
the local townsfolk (and paladins or any other LG's) will attempt to run the
witch out of town, slay her, whatever. (oops. I said "slay" again)
> Living City is what we make of it. If there is something you don't like
>about it, work to change the system - constructively. The Great Character
>Change (tm) was such an event. Yes, it effected my characters, but I
>had no problem with it, as I knew it was for the betterment of the system
>as a whole.
I have a problem with it. It's going to take me years to rebuild my
character. I ain't happy.
> - cisco
>--
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>ci...@src.honeywell.com lope...@maroon.tc.umn.edu
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>An employer? Oh yeah - I do have one of those. I guess that
>means I have to use this space for a disclaimer. *sigh*
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ed Gibson
>In article <RjOlsus...@delphi.com>, Is <qui...@delphi.com> wrote:
>>Cisco Lopez-Fresquet <ci...@src.honeywell.com> writes:
>>
>>>wildly varying experience. What do you do with a group of four 7th level
>>>fighters, a 2nd level bard, and a 1st level mage? This is the true test of
>>>a DM's skills....
>>>
<Snip>
>> The trick when running a mixed group (getting back to the point) is
>>to borrow a mix of creatures from different Tiers to match the given party.
>>This way the high-level characters are busy with the hill giants while the new
>>1st-level characters fight an even battle with the orcs.
<Snip>
>> In case I haven't already said it, I highly recommend this method for
>>DMs everywhere. It worked for me.
>I'm glad it worked for you. How many others can say the same? How many leave
>unbalances alone and let the players try to deal with it?
I do it all the time. It is much easier when you have humans with a range of
levels and hit points, since they all look the same on the outside. You
can also have a couple more monsters than standard for the level and send the
spares to the higher level people.
There are only two cautions. First, if you are going to wipe out the PCs due
to the additonal foes you threw in, you need to back down a little. Second,
you don't want to tell the players what you're doing, since they may get upset
that your combat took too long and they didn't breeze through the module.
>> -quistar <:-(}
>mor...@iastate.edu
Ed
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
>> He's a consumer? Excuse me, but I thought the RGAP was a *FAN*
>> organization?
JJC> Hell, yes he's a consumer. He pays his membership dues. He pays to go to
JJC> cons. In some places he pays to be in the event. It's a service. He paid for
JJC> it. He's a consumer.
JJC> Further, the belief that the RPGA is a "fan" organization is wishful
JJC> thinking at best. T$R owns it. There is no doubt of that. If it was a fan
JJC> organization, they should at least get the "fan's" opinion before they hack
JJC> up the Living City rules. Notice the submission guideline that everything
JJC> must go to the parent company and the RPGA, except T$R material. Where is
JJC> the RPGA advertised the most? You can't tell me this isn't a TSR product.
RPGA *is* a fan organization. Sure, it is subsidized by TSR, but if they
didn't, it wouldn't exist. Just like Deulist Convocation (I think I got
that right) is subsidized by WoC, and AADA is subsidized by SJ games.
These kinds of situations are ideal for both parties. The fans get their
group, and the sponsoring organization gets extra exposure. This doesn't
change the fact that ultimately the organizations live or die on fan
involvement.
They did get 'fan' input on the LC changes. Scott was at 6-7 different
conventions talking to people about this before it happened. He didn't
just wake up one morning and say "hey, I'll make everyone change their
characters!"
Now, I admit that some of the changes I don't agree with. I thought that
there were some kits that could have been kept, and I would have dumped a
few of the ones they did keep, but overall the changes were for the better.
>> As in something that you get out of what you put into it?
JJC> Oh, so running and playing in events doesn't count? Guess I'll stop being a
JJC> DM and just concentrate on writing, now. As a DM, I don't see why I should
JJC> submit anything, after some of the no-brainers I've been handed. As a
JJC> writer, I don't like being constrained be cheezy ethics guidelines and rules
JJC> lawyering that makes everything I do look like comedy. The RPGA has problems
JJC> distinguishing between enjoyable and funny.
Have you actually submitted anything? Or have you just read all the
self-proclaimed experts posting on the TSR ethics policy? (Let me state
that no, I don't especially agree with it myself, more because I think it
would have been smarter to have an *unwritten* ethics policy, rather than
publishing some stupid list. That way someone who does something with
*taste* and *tact* doesn't get shown the door because some watchdog saw
rule 1.2.6 being violated ) The reality is that the ethics policy is
95% there to cover them, and only 5% of the time does it actually have to
get used.
>> Sure, TSR subsidises Scott Douglas's salary, but ultimately if we do not
>> contribute, it is our fault if the RPGA events 'suck.' I certainly don't
>> expect TSR to write the 30+ events I play in every year all on my measly
>> $24 membership.
JJC> You're right. I don't want T$R writing every event. I also agree in that the
JJC> RPGA should be thankful to everyone who does write in. However, I think they
JJC> should be more grateful to every GM they get. While a most of the burden
JJC> falls on the writer, the DM has to answer to the players. I wouldn't wish
JJC> that on anyone.:)
You seem to contradict yourself here. First I hear you saying that it is
harder to be a DM than a writer, but then that the writer has more of a burden?
>> A power gamer will be a power gamer regardless of the system he is in.
>> Unless given his character at the moment he sits down at the table, he will
>> spend the campaign accumilating power. This is a player thing, not a
>> campaign thing.
JJC> Actually, it's a game thing. We're playing AD&D, here. Powergaming is a
JJC> topic best discussed elsewhere. I still think the RPGA system makes this
JJC> environment worse and this style of play more popular and the LC style of
JJC> character generation makes it easier.
I agree that the character generation system for LC leads to min-max
characters. I do agree that it is one of the poorer part of the LC system.
>> Yes, there can be power DM's as well (and the power
>> players LOVE these guys), but if he has it, you can't take the power out of
>> the player. For example, in Living Jungle there are no magic items. Funny
>> how EVERY Saru that I have played with (except one - Monkey boy, you were
>> great, _I_ respect you for your mind) has had an 18/00 strength. Funny how
>> Tiger tananga outnumber ALL other katanga by something like a 2-1 margin.
JJC> They've placed restrictions to prevent things like this before, why not do
JJC> it again?
What kind of restrictions do you mean?
JJC> Well, I hate to argue with anyone, but... Living City events tend to have
JJC> mostly RPGA players, who are competing for points on their memberships. It
JJC> becomes a battle to see who can accumulate the most votes and get the most
JJC> attention. I've seen it as a DM, I've been hurt by it as a player. Frankly,
JJC> in most cases it is really hard to say one player is a better role-player
JJC> than someone else. (I've posted on this before.) There are a few players on
JJC> the extremes of good and bad, but it's mostly a shade of gray. This petty
JJC> competitiveness tends to overshadow all other things in the games I've
JJC> attended.
I'm not convinced that this is an RPGA problem. I have been going to
conventions since before there was an RPGA, and I play in lots of non-RPGA
events. In both cases, there were still gamers who liked to hog the
limelight.
>> This is a DM's fault, and only partially the modules. A poor DM will _let_
>> you walk allover the module.
JJC> I'll tell Tom Prusa you said that if I see him again.:)
Not sure what the Prusa reference is for (walking over modules? Tom hasn't
let us do it the times I've had him for a DM.), but I would bet he will be
at Winter Fantasy in February, and he will be in town here (Minneapolis)
for TwinCon at the end of May. Come on up, we think we throw a good
convention...
JJC> Actually, you've got a point here. I don't think it's necessarily a poor DM,
JJC> though. One of the worst problems with LC magic items is that characters
JJC> carry them from one game to the next. It may have been issued in one module,
JJC> where it was moderately useful, but carries over to one where it is
JJC> extremely useful, if not unbalancing.
My personal pet peeve <g> - I want to see more magic item saving throws.
>> A good DM will know the module well enough to
>> adjust on the fly, so that it will still be a challenge for all concerned.
JJC> Oh, no. Here we go with this again. It's nice for a DM to be able to do
JJC> that, almost a requisite ability. However, having had modules thrust at me
JJC> an hour before I ran them, it is ridiculous to have to memorize a module.
JJC> Further, there's this thing called editing that is supposed to be looking
JJC> for some of these types of situations. We won't even get into the writing
JJC> angle on this. Needless to say it is very hard for most DM's to adjust for
JJC> everything all of the time. We're not gods, you know.
I don't see how editing can prepare for the unexpected. By definition, you
can't. If something unusual occurs, it is up to the DM to deal with it.
This is wghy I don't play open events at GENCON any more. They leave no
room for the DM to do so.
JJC> The other thing that bugs me is that GMs are supposed to be ranked on this
JJC> sort of crap. I get really annoyed when every convention I go to becomes a
JJC> contest to see who the best GM is. I don't think a lot of players realize
JJC> what a DM puts up with, especially in the RPGA. I sure don't think they have
JJC> much of a right to judge them. Of course, I have yet to see what my rank as
JJC> a GM actually does, too. (Do I get the power to legally slay any player at
JJC> tenth level, no saves?) [Ooops, there's that word.]
If you are role-playing (either DM'ing or playing) in order to get the
trophy at the end of the 'Con, I think you are in it for the wrong
reasons.... I have never won such a trophy, and don't really care. In my
gaming group, we use the $5 certificates for placing 1st in RPGA events to
pay the $10 fee for requesting events for our own tournaments.
Your rank as a GM is merely an indicator of how much you ahve given to the
RPGA (just like writers get service points, players get player points,
etc). Since the RPGA is a *fan* organization, it can't afford to pay GM's
so it has to think of cretive ways to show appreciation. Just like most
cons offer reduced or free admission to GM's.
In my experience, most players are grateful that you were willing to DM,
and will give you scores accordingly. I have never received a less than
average score as a DM, and I have only given them out 2-3 times ever.
>> A similar, and somewhat tougher, problem is what to do with parties of
>> wildly varying experience. What do you do with a group of four 7th level
>> fighters, a 2nd level bard, and a 1st level mage? This is the true test of
>> a DM's skills....
JJC> This is truly a LC problem. Couple this with modules written for levels
JJC> above and below that of the players. "I've got a headache this big..." It's
JJC> taxing not to cause casualties in this situation. We're looking at a lot of
JJC> variables, here.
I would say it takes a DM a cut above to be a good LC DM. It isn't as easy
as running a pre-gen character module.
JJC> Once again, the Living City has, on the average, more RPGA players due to
JJC> the fact that non-members are only supposed to play once. Like I said
JJC> before, it leads to a lot of petty competitiveness. It happens in other
JJC> games, no doubt about it. If you think players have it bad, GM's have it
JJC> worse on voting. Personally, I think if the true goal of the RPGA and the
JJC> Living City are to have fun and role-play, then we shouldn't need a level
JJC> system for players or DMs.
Not entirely a bad idea <G>. The problem is I think enough people like to
be able to brag about their 'player rank' that you would get a lot of
opposition on this. Also, some people do like the prizes, and without a
scoring system, it would be tough to award them.
>> Hmn. I have seen such things as sex changes, were-rat society inductions,
>> and permanent loss of all body hair happen to my character's adventuring
>> companions. A certain dwarf's inability to keep herself armored for any
>> length of time without its destruction has become the stuff of legend.
JJC> Legendary, like Abbot and Costello or Jack Benny or Steve Allen.
I don't understand this comment. It would seem you are laboring under the
mistaken belief that all LC events devolve into comedy skits?
Of my listed examples, only one was comic. The others were quite
serious, both from a role-playing and a character point of view.
JJC> Ya, if this was a Saturday morning cartoon. What ever happened to "Slay the
JJC> dragon, grab the goodies, save the girl?" Ooops. I can't say "slay." in a
JJC> module, that might encourage violence. And "grabbing the goodies" is
JJC> stealing. I can't encourage that, either. With my luck, the girl didn't want
JJC> to be rescued, either. I'm probably going to get sued for wrongful death by
JJC> the dragon's love ones. May as well take a pie in the face while I'm at it.
JJC> Does anyone else see a problem with the RPGA's writer's guidelines?
Sarcasm doesn't work well when one is trying to argue a point. What is
next, name-calling?
JJC> There ain't that much diference between two fighters, two theives, two elven
JJC> rangers with bows, whatever. My kit was all that separated me from being a
JJC> stereotype. I'll grant you that small differences make the character, but
JJC> removing a kit is not a "freeing experience." Why do you think kits exist in
JJC> the first place? Mathematically speaking, what are the chances, out of three
JJC> or four thousand players that two characters are going to look very similar?
JJC> Especially using Living City character creation rules.
JJC> They should have either said "no kits" or allowed all kits right from the
JJC> start. We shouldn't even be discussing this.
Fighter one: Str 13, Dex 18. Studded leather + shield (AC 2, i think).
Specialized in spear, NWP in swimming, endurance, running.
Fighter two: Str 18/10, Dex 12. Field Plate (AC 2 also) Specialized in
two-handed sword. NWP in riding, land based
No difference? I would certainly role-play these two differently...
I think kits create stereotypes. Originally, I think they were introduced
to try to encourage players to move a bit away from the 'generic' character
types, but I don't see the idea working terribly well.
No kits wouldn't have been a bad idea either. I don't have one any of my
characters.
EG> There are 3 to 4 thousand LC characters. There are not that many kits. The
EG> problem with having so many kits is the DM doesn't understand their
EG> hindrances. A kit without hindrances is unbalancing. When I run LC events, I
EG> make sure I know what the PCs hindrances are (the players will tell me the
EG> benefits :). As an example, there was at least one PC who took the witch kit.
EG> A witch can not settle down in one area, because the townsfolk mistrust her
EG> and eventually kill or drive her away. This kit never should have been
EG> allowed in LC, but it was, and this was a mistake which needed to be
EG> corrected.
JJC> That's why all players must bring the book or a photocopy of the kit to the
JJC> DM to look at. A DM can reinterpret the above into -- All witches, when
JJC> their true nature is revealed, will receive a very negative reaction from
JJC> the local townsfolk (and paladins or any other LG's) will attempt to run the
JJC> witch out of town, slay her, whatever. (oops. I said "slay" again)
Who wants to have to sit while the DM reads a 1-2 page blurb on each
character at the table, and then tries to remember all that during the
game? This was one of the primary reasons the Great Change occured, to
make it easier on the DM's.
>> Living City is what we make of it. If there is something you don't like
>> about it, work to change the system - constructively. The Great Character
>> Change (tm) was such an event. Yes, it effected my characters, but I
>> had no problem with it, as I knew it was for the betterment of the system
>> as a whole.
JJC> I have a problem with it. It's going to take me years to rebuild my
JJC> character. I ain't happy.
Rebuild? What on earth did you have that merely tweaking a few things
wouldn't keep roughly the same?
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
>> I had pretty much this situation when I ran my first 3-round LC
>> adventure. We had two 6th level characters, two 4th, one 3rd and one first-time
>> player with a 1st level character. At the average level for that party, they
>> went into situations that would have meant INSTANT, UNAVOIDABLE DEATH for the
>> weakest characters. I felt this unnecessary and cruel, not to mention
>> discouraging, so naturally they took a lot of hits, but survived.
JJC> But it is a realistic. It is in the scenario. If the players are worthy of
JJC> all the praise I've been hearing, they should be able to get around it.
JJC> It's a DM adjustment thing, granted. The writer couldn't have seen it
JJC> coming, but he might want to dull the claws the next time around.
How is this the writer's fault? If the encounter is balanced for 6 4th
level characters, and 5 5th and 1 1st level character are being run
through the event, he couldn't have predicted that.
This problem mostly arises when the tournament marshall wants to shoehorn
in an extra (usually late-arriving) player at each table, and simply
assigns them, with no care about level at all. When players are allowed to
pick their own parties, they are pretty good about playing with comperable
level characters.
This is also one of the reasons I have several characters. When I wind
up at a table with a bunch of low-level characters, I play my low level.
When it is a high level party, I play high.
JJC> I see an unbalance situation as a challenge. You aren't supposed to win
JJC> every battle all of the time. Things don't always have to work out, either.
JJC> Some things are meant to be discouraging. It serves the plot and just plain
JJC> makes sense. For example; no king in his right mind puts a sign on his
JJC> castle saying "come loot my treasury." He's going to get the biggest,
JJC> nastiest bad-asses available to guard his castle. Screw fairness.
I agree. There should be some fights PC's can't win. The problem is that
most players *will not* admit that they are outclassed, and will fight even
when it is obvious that they will get their butt's kicked.
Now, when the PC's are supposed to win, but are outlcassed for whatever
reason, I make a judgement call: I have no compunction about pounding the
snot out of poor-playing player's characters. It is when someone is
playing to the best of their ability that I give them a break.
JJC> How many leave unbalances alone and let the players try to deal with it?
I will begin the module at the recommended level. As the module
progresses, I will begin to get a 'feel' for the *actual* (as opposed to
calculated) party power, and will begin adjusting the module toughness to
fit.
Daniel Llewellyn
I don't wish to reitterate everything that has already been said, but I
would like to comment on RPGA's ethics guidelines and how they pertain to the
atmosphere of the living city.
All I can say is that it is obvious that this is "fantasy" role-playing.
The ethics guidelines that are set up are ludicrous. According to RPGA:
No one has sex.
No one drinks.
Their are no corrupt officials of any type.
All villians are truly evil and must be apprehended. (Heaven forbid that
the NPC villian have a personality and not be truly diabolical).
All these things are unacceptable in modules that are to be submitted to RPGA.
It is because of this one dimensional view of AD&D that I will not submit
anymore modules to RPGA. Why should I waste my time putting together a well
rounded, in-depth, module that has interesting NPC's so that RPGA can tell me
it doesn't meet with their ethical guidelines.
Jeffery J Craigmile
Erik Robbins <ars...@holly.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> wrote:
>As for the cookie-cutter classes comment -
>
>My character was an Wood Elven Archer.....
Mine was a High Elf Archer, join the club.
>I was pissed at first at the removal of the kits, but -
>
>He's still an elf. I can even call him a wood elf, though now I use the
>general elf abilites from the PG.
Generalizing.
>He's still an archer. He still uses a bow, he's still specialized in the
>bow,
Yes, with no ROF bonuses, regains the ability to use a sword at +1 and
loses a lot of bonuses associated with the kit. You also have none of the
stigmas and reputation you once had. Any fool elf can pack a bow, but
an Archer is a special force to be reckoned with.
> and I hope they allow Combat & Tactics. He'll get Weapon Mastery
>eventually.
My impression is that they are NOT going to allow C&T or any of the Weapon
Mastery therein. Read the Polyhedron article that came with all of these
changes. If they were going to switch to PO rules, they should have done so
by now. Otherwise, we're going to be going through all of this again.
>He is vastly different than an elf (high) fighter who uses a sword as his
>choice weapon.
Yes, but he is not that different from any elf fighter who uses a Bow as his
choice weapon. Or damned near any elf Ranger I've ever seen.
See, this proves the point I had about two characters being a lot alike, one
way or the other. The only difference, I'm guessing was in character
history and personality, something most LC DMs don't spend a lot of time
worrying about before the game.
>Erik
Jeffery J Craigmile
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet <ci...@src.honeywell.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "JJC" == Jeffery J Craigmile <mor...@iastate.edu> writes:
>RPGA *is* a fan organization. Sure, it is subsidized by TSR, but if they
>didn't, it wouldn't exist. Just like Deulist Convocation (I think I got
>that right) is subsidized by WoC, and AADA is subsidized by SJ games.
>These kinds of situations are ideal for both parties. The fans get their
>group, and the sponsoring organization gets extra exposure. This doesn't
>change the fact that ultimately the organizations live or die on fan
>involvement.
I see, the RPGA is a fan organization that just happens to have a lot of
stuff Trademarked by TSR, staffed by TSR and just happens to be advertised
in every other product that TSR sells. If it was truly a fan organization, I
think it would be run by fans, there would be no corporate label anywhere.
If it is a fan organization, why do they buy submissions? Why don't I get to
keep my copyright when I send them something? Look at who's in charge.
>They did get 'fan' input on the LC changes. Scott was at 6-7 different
>conventions talking to people about this before it happened. He didn't
>just wake up one morning and say "hey, I'll make everyone change their
>characters!"
Oooh all of six or seven cons. I don't care if it was Gen Con, they didn't
get enough opinions.
>Now, I admit that some of the changes I don't agree with. I thought that
>there were some kits that could have been kept, and I would have dumped a
>few of the ones they did keep, but overall the changes were for the better.
Let's leave this at that level of agreement and be happy, OK?
>>> As in something that you get out of what you put into it?
>Have you actually submitted anything?
Just these two things sitting here that I'm thinking about sending out. Now,
I don't know.
>Or have you just read all the
>self-proclaimed experts posting on the TSR ethics policy?
No, I've read the Ethics policy, I've been in the RPGA. Further, the RPGA's
ethics guidelines are based on TSR's, with little difference between the
two. Some of those guys aren't self-proclaimed, either.
>(Let me state
>that no, I don't especially agree with it myself, more because I think it
>would have been smarter to have an *unwritten* ethics policy, rather than
>publishing some stupid list. That way someone who does something with
>*taste* and *tact* doesn't get shown the door because some watchdog saw
>rule 1.2.6 being violated ) The reality is that the ethics policy is
>95% there to cover them, and only 5% of the time does it actually have to
>get used.
I'll buy that. Thank you. Since we are actually sort of seeing eye to eye on
this, let's leave it alone.
>
>You seem to contradict yourself here. First I hear you saying that it is
>harder to be a DM than a writer, but then that the writer has more of a burden?
You're right. I am contradicting myself slightly. Let me clear the air on
this one. I think that writers have a rough time getting stuff that
functions, is playable, enjoyable and ethical figured out and sent in. The
real problems seem to occur after it has been edited. The DM's are the guys
that have to deal with this stuff. In a lot of the events that I have run, I
have been blamed for errors that were inherent to the module, not me. A DD
should be expected to adjust, not rewrite an entire event on the spur of the
moment. If this is the policy, then I'm going to encourage our local club
to stop purchasing events.
There is a very powerful relationship between RPGA writers and GM's. I see a
problem with GM's getting punished for bad material they did not write, or
did not get all of. The problem is that there is no feedback to correct
things. If there is something terribly wrong with the module, there is
little that can be done about it and everyone who gets that packet is going
to encounter the problem. Overall, the DM is the one who must answer for it.
Actually, I think players have it the easiest, all they have to do is show
up and play.
>I agree that the character generation system for LC leads to min-max
>characters. I do agree that it is one of the poorer part of the LC system.
I think this was the original point. Problem solved!
>>> Yes, there can be power DM's as well (and the power
>>> players LOVE these guys), but if he has it, you can't take the power out of
>>> the player. For example, in Living Jungle there are no magic items. Funny
>>> how EVERY Saru that I have played with (except one - Monkey boy, you were
>>> great, _I_ respect you for your mind) has had an 18/00 strength. Funny how
>>> Tiger tananga outnumber ALL other katanga by something like a 2-1 margin.
>
>JJC> They've placed restrictions to prevent things like this before, why not do
>JJC> it again?
>
>What kind of restrictions do you mean?
Well, it would probably involve changing character generation around to make
an 18/00 less appealing than it is now. Something like Percentile strengths
cost double.
>I'm not convinced that this is an RPGA problem. I have been going to
>conventions since before there was an RPGA, and I play in lots of non-RPGA
>events. In both cases, there were still gamers who liked to hog the
>limelight.
Yes, but there's no voting form at the end of most RPGA events. And I'm not
really being rated on how I DM a regular event. I can afford to torc off a
player in a regular session, but an RPGA game can get real ugly if you try
to keep a glory hog down.
>>> This is a DM's fault, and only partially the modules. A poor DM will _let_
>>> you walk allover the module.
>
>JJC> I'll tell Tom Prusa you said that if I see him again.:)
>
>Not sure what the Prusa reference is for (walking over modules? Tom hasn't
>let us do it the times I've had him for a DM.), but I would bet he will be
>at Winter Fantasy in February, and he will be in town here (Minneapolis)
>for TwinCon at the end of May. Come on up, we think we throw a good
>convention...
It struck me as funny because Tom handed out a bunch of magic items in a LC
game to us that came back to haunt the GM we had two conventions later. It
wasn't really a shot at Tom, it just went to show that it was more of a
system error. Thanks for the invite, but I have another con the same weekend
as Winter Fantasy that I'm organizing, and a con at the end of April, so I
may not have a May budget. Sorry. But, hey, you never know.
>JJC> Actually, you've got a point here. I don't think it's necessarily a poor DM,
>JJC> though. One of the worst problems with LC magic items is that characters
>JJC> carry them from one game to the next. It may have been issued in one module,
>JJC> where it was moderately useful, but carries over to one where it is
>JJC> extremely useful, if not unbalancing.
>
>My personal pet peeve <g> - I want to see more magic item saving throws.
Once again, we agree. Let's leave it at that.
>I don't see how editing can prepare for the unexpected. By definition, you
>can't. If something unusual occurs, it is up to the DM to deal with it.
>This is wghy I don't play open events at GENCON any more. They leave no
>room for the DM to do so.
Editing is supposed to remove rules conflicts and conflicts with other LC
plots. I thought it should also take care of the afore-mentioned situation
with magic item overlap. Editing by the RPGA is also supposed to be looking
for playability problems. I've had a few problems come up where I had to
wonder if the module was ever playtested.
>JJC> The other thing that bugs me is that GMs are supposed to be ranked on this
>JJC> sort of crap. I get really annoyed when every convention I go to becomes a
>JJC> contest to see who the best GM is. I don't think a lot of players realize
>JJC> what a DM puts up with, especially in the RPGA. I sure don't think they have
>JJC> much of a right to judge them. Of course, I have yet to see what my rank as
>JJC> a GM actually does, too. (Do I get the power to legally slay any player at
>JJC> tenth level, no saves?) [Ooops, there's that word.]
>
>If you are role-playing (either DM'ing or playing) in order to get the
>trophy at the end of the 'Con, I think you are in it for the wrong
>reasons.... I have never won such a trophy, and don't really care.
I don't play for prizes and try to discourage it at cons. There are people
who do. When you go to contentions, you have to deal with them, especially
if you are a DM.
> In my
>gaming group, we use the $5 certificates for placing 1st in RPGA events to
>pay the $10 fee for requesting events for our own tournaments.
This is a great idea. I'll have to mention this the next time I talk to our
club-type officials.
>Your rank as a GM is merely an indicator of how much you ahve given to the
>RPGA (just like writers get service points, players get player points,
>etc).
I thought the writers were getting paid, too. I find this odd as I have GMed
a lot of events, dedicating my time and resources, had decent ratings...
hmmm. I still don't understand the need for all these points, anyway.
>Since the RPGA is a *fan* organization, it can't afford to pay GM's
>so it has to think of cretive ways to show appreciation.
I don't see the points as appreciation. I don't see prizes for the "best
roleplayer" as appreciation.
>Just like most
>cons offer reduced or free admission to GM's.
This policy was recently implemented at the last con I attended in Des
Moines. It was lovely. The only free admissions given at our other Des
Moines con is part of the "Best DM" competition. If I am truly appreciated
as a GM, they should be letting me in cheap/free regardless.
>In my experience, most players are grateful that you were willing to DM,
>and will give you scores accordingly. I have never received a less than
>average score as a DM, and I have only given them out 2-3 times ever.
I've had similar experiences, except for one that comes to mind.
Unfortunately I don't have the time or space to go into it here.
>I would say it takes a DM a cut above to be a good LC DM. It isn't as easy
>as running a pre-gen character module.
I wouldn't say better, I'd say more willing. Otherwise, we agree.
>JJC> Once again, the Living City has, on the average, more RPGA players due to
>JJC> the fact that non-members are only supposed to play once. Like I said
>JJC> before, it leads to a lot of petty competitiveness. It happens in other
>JJC> games, no doubt about it. If you think players have it bad, GM's have it
>JJC> worse on voting. Personally, I think if the true goal of the RPGA and the
>JJC> Living City are to have fun and role-play, then we shouldn't need a level
>JJC> system for players or DMs.
>
>Not entirely a bad idea <G>. The problem is I think enough people like to
>be able to brag about their 'player rank' that you would get a lot of
>opposition on this. Also, some people do like the prizes, and without a
>scoring system, it would be tough to award them.
Again, agreed. Why do they need to be awarded?
>>> Hmn. I have seen such things as sex changes, were-rat society inductions,
>>> and permanent loss of all body hair happen to my character's adventuring
>>> companions. A certain dwarf's inability to keep herself armored for any
>>> length of time without its destruction has become the stuff of legend.
>
>JJC> Legendary, like Abbot and Costello or Jack Benny or Steve Allen.
I dare the RPGA to present me with a truly serious scenario. Problem is, the
ethics guidelines tend to get in the way and I don't think players are
taking the Living City all that seriously.
>I don't understand this comment. It would seem you are laboring under the
>mistaken belief that all LC events devolve into comedy skits?
I see all of your previous examples as comedy. It doesn't necessarily have
to be written into the scenario to be a comedy. Darn near every scenario the
RPGA has ever handed me has devolved in this manner. I created a serious LC
character but I didn't last long next to the halfling chef who had a running
conversation with his horsey.
>Of my listed examples, only one was comic. The others were quite
>serious, both from a role-playing and a character point of view.
I can't take the loss of body hair or Acme armor seriously, sorry.
>Sarcasm doesn't work well when one is trying to argue a point. What is
>next, name-calling?
It's called trying to lighten up the situation a bit. I thought it was kinda
funny. Sorry you didn't. Two points here: It is possible that what one
person finds funny, others may not. This is true of RPGA games. Second, for
some reason, be it the ethics guidelines or whatever, RPGA games, especially
Living City tend to treat players like children. They rarely reach a scale
above light-hearted. I'm thinking real hard now about trying to submit a
dead-serious adventure. As I am told it will LC events are not in demand,
I'm thinking more of Cyberpunk or Call of Cthulhu.
>JJC> There ain't that much diference between two fighters, two theives, two elven
>JJC> rangers with bows, whatever. My kit was all that separated me from being a
>JJC> stereotype. I'll grant you that small differences make the character, but
>JJC> removing a kit is not a "freeing experience." Why do you think kits exist in
>JJC> the first place? Mathematically speaking, what are the chances, out of three
>JJC> or four thousand players that two characters are going to look very similar?
>JJC> Especially using Living City character creation rules.
>JJC> They should have either said "no kits" or allowed all kits right from the
>JJC> start. We shouldn't even be discussing this.
>
>Fighter one: Str 13, Dex 18. Studded leather + shield (AC 2, i think).
> Specialized in spear, NWP in swimming, endurance, running.
>Fighter two: Str 18/10, Dex 12. Field Plate (AC 2 also) Specialized in
> two-handed sword. NWP in riding, land based
>
>No difference? I would certainly role-play these two differently...
Whoa. I understand what you are saying. However, what I am referring to is
characters like Ftr #2 that belong to half a dozen other players. Sometimes,
not always, a kit can make the difference. (Knight as opposed to squire or
Beast Rider.)
>I think kits create stereotypes. Originally, I think they were introduced
>to try to encourage players to move a bit away from the 'generic' character
>types, but I don't see the idea working terribly well.
>
This is a good assumption. I think kits were introduced into the Living City
with the knowledge that not everyone would play one and the idea that it
would diversify things.
I had the shock of a lifetime today when someone else posted about his Elf
Archer for LC. While I see where the personality differences lay, I have to
agree that kits may be causing more overlap than they prevent. I stand
somewhat corrected.
>No kits wouldn't have been a bad idea either. I don't have one any of my
>characters.
>Who wants to have to sit while the DM reads a 1-2 page blurb on each
>character at the table, and then tries to remember all that during the
>game? This was one of the primary reasons the Great Change occured, to
>make it easier on the DM's.
They still have to do that, anyway. Further, I'd worry about any DM who
didn't at least look my character over beforehand. You don't have to
memorize squat before the game. The player will be happy to tell you about
all of his nifty advantages, and a brief list of basic hindrances, hastily
scrawled on a scrap of paper before the game will work.
Ex: Witch: bad reactions fr. townsfolk.
While this change has reduced the number of kits, it has not significantly
changed the DM's workload in the matter. It has also created more kit/
character overlaps.
>Rebuild? What on earth did you have that merely tweaking a few things
>wouldn't keep roughly the same?
The character's personality was constructed around the idea of the kit.
Further, our local RPGA coordinator said I'm going to have to start over. In
four years I may be up to 6th level again if I'm lucky.
Ratty
fans. The staff in TSR only handles the paperwork of membership and
Polyhedra. Also the staff provides meeting facilities for DMs and
runs European GenCon.
All the rest of the work is done by the fans. This includes:
* Writing modules, spending days discussing them, improving them
and producing them for European GenCon and other events.
* Answering any questions that come in (although many questions do go
directly to the manufacturers.
* Organising and running all the conventions except European GenCon.
* All the DMing to the public on "open days."
* All the points allocation.
> I see, the RPGA is a fan organisation that just happens to have a lot of
> stuff Trademarked by TSR, staffed by TSR and just happens to be
> advertised in every other product that TSR sells. If it was truly a fan
> organisation, I think it would be run by fans, there would be no
> corporate label anywhere.
From the fans point of view, TSR is simply sponsoring the RPGA by
providing products, cash, 10% discount and staff. We should be grateful
we are getting this for nothing (our money buying Polyhedron).
If it were run entirely by fans, someone would have to pay for these
resources. If membership were raised there is always the risk of losing
members due to the increased costs providing no additional facilities.
> I thought the writers were getting paid, too.
In Europe, any amount of money an adventure writer gets is negligible
compared to the amount of time he has put in to write the adventure.
Believe me, it takes a huge amount of work to write a good module that
may play in just 4 hours.
Ratty
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
We actually seem to be agreeing on more and more as we talk about this. I
think that is a rarity in newsgroup threads.
JJC> I see, the RPGA is a fan organization that just happens to have a lot of
JJC> stuff Trademarked by TSR, staffed by TSR and just happens to be advertised
JJC> in every other product that TSR sells. If it was truly a fan organization, I
JJC> think it would be run by fans, there would be no corporate label anywhere.
JJC> If it is a fan organization, why do they buy submissions? Why don't I get to
JJC> keep my copyright when I send them something? Look at who's in charge.
The better-organized fan organizations *do* pay for submissions.
Some of the problems you list are caused by the TSR lawyers. It is no
accident that finding D&D articles in non-TSR magazines is basically
impossible. TSR has the attitude that *all* D&D-related material is a
'derived work', and therefore belongs to them. Now, legally this isn't
defensible, but it is the attidue they are working under. Therefore, even
if you *did* build a completely independent fan organization, one of the
first things that would happen would be a phone call from the TSR lawyers....
JJC> Oooh all of six or seven cons. I don't care if it was Gen Con, they didn't
JJC> get enough opinions.
Scott can only attend so many conventions per year, he does have other
duties. I don't think you can reasonably expect to get the input of every
LC player. You have to try and get a reasonable sampling, and go from there.
JJC> Just these two things sitting here that I'm thinking about sending out. Now,
JJC> I don't know.
By all means, send them in!
JJC> You're right. I am contradicting myself slightly. Let me clear the air on
JJC> this one. I think that writers have a rough time getting stuff that
JJC> functions, is playable, enjoyable and ethical figured out and sent in. The
JJC> real problems seem to occur after it has been edited. The DM's are the guys
JJC> that have to deal with this stuff. In a lot of the events that I have run, I
JJC> have been blamed for errors that were inherent to the module, not me. A DD
JJC> should be expected to adjust, not rewrite an entire event on the spur of the
JJC> moment. If this is the policy, then I'm going to encourage our local club
JJC> to stop purchasing events.
Two things: 1) Yes, RPGA editing is overall very poor. This is mostly a
cost issue.
2) Modules are not set in stone. We do round-0 events (we
pre-run the event for the judges before the convention,
that way they get to play, and they get the chance to
experience how the module 'flows') and then the DM's
discuss the module as a group. We have sometimes made
extensive changes to the module due to the experiences in
these round-0 events.
JJC> There is a very powerful relationship between RPGA writers and GM's. I see a
JJC> problem with GM's getting punished for bad material they did not write, or
JJC> did not get all of. The problem is that there is no feedback to correct
JJC> things. If there is something terribly wrong with the module, there is
JJC> little that can be done about it and everyone who gets that packet is going
JJC> to encounter the problem. Overall, the DM is the one who must answer for it.
The lines on the judging form about the module ('what did you like best`,
and `what needs to be improved`, I think) really do have an impact.
Modules that consistently get rated low are the ones that get retired
quickly. The RPGA does listen to players and DM's on this.
JJC> Actually, I think players have it the easiest, all they have to do is show
JJC> up and play.
Heh. Agreed.
>> I agree that the character generation system for LC leads to min-max
>> characters. I do agree that it is one of the poorest parts of the LC system.
JJC> Well, it would probably involve changing character generation around to make
JJC> an 18/00 less appealing than it is now. Something like Percentile strengths
JJC> cost double.
Heck, I would go farther than that. I say use a gradiated point system,
something like:
Give each character 70 points, to spend as they wish. Costs are as
follows:
stat cost stat cost
6 -7 15 15
7 -4 16 21
8 -2 17 28
9 -1 18 36
10 0 18/01-50 45
11 1 18/51-75 55
12 3 18/76-90 65
13 6 18/91-99 75
14 10 18/00 85
Personally, I think the percentile strength idea was a bad experiment, and
if 3rd edition ever appears, it should be junked.
JJC> Yes, but there's no voting form at the end of most RPGA events. And I'm not
JJC> really being rated on how I DM a regular event. I can afford to torc off a
JJC> player in a regular session, but an RPGA game can get real ugly if you try
JJC> to keep a glory hog down.
Elsewhere you state that you think the point system should be dropped (not
an ignoble idea), so why don't you slap them down and damn the consequences.
I make no bones about putting players in their place. Yeah, I get bad
scores for it every once in a while, but the good scores from everyoe else
at the table (who usually appreciate what you did) makes up for it. Plus,
why DM if you aren't going to play god (*evil grin*)?
JJC> Actually, you've got a point here. I don't think it's necessarily a poor DM,
JJC> though. One of the worst problems with LC magic items is that characters
JJC> carry them from one game to the next. It may have been issued in one module,
JJC> where it was moderately useful, but carries over to one where it is
JJC> extremely useful, if not unbalancing.
Heh. This is a true problem, and basically impossible to prepare for.
Something that is basically useless 99% of the time can be a lifesaver the
other 1% of the time. I don't know how you deal with this from a
continuity point of view, as the LC is simply too large and dynamic to
control that closely. Also, who is to say that this isn't realistic?
Sometimes an adventure should be a walkthrough. Rest assured that
somewhere down the line there is one that is going to hit you *hard*.
At some point players need to accept some responsibility as well.
For example, my cleric doesn't use Divination or Commune (in fact, I don't
know any character clerics that do), becouse of the effect that it would
have on most modules. If the player understands the spirit of the game, and
is willing to live within its rules, a good time can be had by all.
JJC> Editing is supposed to remove rules conflicts and conflicts with other LC
JJC> plots. I thought it should also take care of the afore-mentioned situation
JJC> with magic item overlap. Editing by the RPGA is also supposed to be looking
JJC> for playability problems. I've had a few problems come up where I had to
JJC> wonder if the module was ever playtested.
I have my doubts about playtesting as well, and I have seen some horrible
editing problems. I have heard that this will be a bigger priority since
the tournament coordinator change, but I will wait judgement on that for now.
JJC> I thought the writers were getting paid, too. I find this odd as I have GMed
JJC> a lot of events, dedicating my time and resources, had decent ratings...
JJC> hmmm. I still don't understand the need for all these points, anyway.
Getting $10 for having written an RPGA module is pretty much peanuts, when for
the same number of words Dungeon magazine would pay some $600. If you
write for RPGA, you don't do it for money.
JJC> This policy was recently implemented at the last con I attended in Des
JJC> Moines. It was lovely. The only free admissions given at our other Des
JJC> Moines con is part of the "Best DM" competition. If I am truly appreciated
JJC> as a GM, they should be letting me in cheap/free regardless.
Agreed. I know some conventions that will even give free hotel rooms.
JJC> Again, agreed. Why do they [prizes] need to be awarded?
The question probably should be "Why did they begin awarding them?" Now
that they have started, I think there would be a lot of bitching if they
stopped, so they are sort of trapped into perpetuating it. I agree though,
they should just can the whole program.
JJC> I see all of your previous examples as comedy. It doesn't necessarily have
JJC> to be written into the scenario to be a comedy. Darn near every scenario the
JJC> RPGA has ever handed me has devolved in this manner. I created a serious LC
JJC> character but I didn't last long next to the halfling chef who had a running
JJC> conversation with his horsey.
>> Of my listed examples, only one was comic. The others were quite
>> serious, both from a role-playing and a character point of view.
JJC> It's called trying to lighten up the situation a bit. I thought it was kinda
JJC> funny. Sorry you didn't. Two points here: It is possible that what one
JJC> person finds funny, others may not. This is true of RPGA games. Second, for
JJC> some reason, be it the ethics guidelines or whatever, RPGA games, especially
JJC> Living City tend to treat players like children. They rarely reach a scale
JJC> above light-hearted. I'm thinking real hard now about trying to submit a
JJC> dead-serious adventure. As I am told it will LC events are not in demand,
JJC> I'm thinking more of Cyberpunk or Call of Cthulhu.
Its all in how the module is being run. I spnd >50% of my LC playing time
playing with people I already know, and whose playing style meshes with
mine. We tend to play them as serious events, if possible (I agree that
some of the events are written to be lighthearted, and must be played as
such or make no sense at all).
I think that the light-heartedness of LC can be traced to a myriad of
causes, from lack of continuity to player expectation. I also feel that
with the exception of a few outside influences, LC is a remarkably
free-form experiment that has evolved by itself. As such, it expresses
the consensus style of all the players and GM's. If it is light-hearted,
it is because a majority agree it should be so.
JJC> Whoa. I understand what you are saying. However, what I am referring to is
JJC> characters like Ftr #2 that belong to half a dozen other players. Sometimes,
JJC> not always, a kit can make the difference. (Knight as opposed to squire or
JJC> Beast Rider.)
Well, that would be a shortcoming in the player, I would say. A good
player can make almost any character unique. A charcter like Ftr #2 takes
no thought to come up with, and no thought to play -- unless you have some
other way of making him unique. Straight out of the box he is pretty
boring.
JJC> They still have to do that, anyway. Further, I'd worry about any DM who
JJC> didn't at least look my character over beforehand. You don't have to
JJC> memorize squat before the game. The player will be happy to tell you about
JJC> all of his nifty advantages, and a brief list of basic hindrances, hastily
JJC> scrawled on a scrap of paper before the game will work.
The player may be happy to tell you about any advantages, but without
reading the kit description it may be hard to understand how to interact
with the character appropriately, and to work in the kit disadvantages.
99% of kit modifications in the Great Change were for one of three reasons:
either to reduce the DM workload, to reduce the munchkinism potentials, or
because the kit didn't fit in with the LC concept (such as wu-jen, for
example).
>> Rebuild? What on earth did you have that merely tweaking a few things
>> wouldn't keep roughly the same?
JJC> The character's personality was constructed around the idea of the kit.
JJC> Further, our local RPGA coordinator said I'm going to have to start over. In
JJC> four years I may be up to 6th level again if I'm lucky.
You don't have to start over. If your local coordinator said you did, then
they were wrong. Make whatever changes are necessary to bring the
character into alignment with the changes (sounds like all you have to do
is drop the kit), and you are good to go. This is significantly less
modification than my characters had to go through, and I am still
playing them.
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
>> He's still an archer. He still uses a bow, he's still specialized in the
>> bow,
JJC> Yes, with no ROF bonuses, regains the ability to use a sword at +1 and
JJC> loses a lot of bonuses associated with the kit. You also have none of the
JJC> stigmas and reputation you once had. Any fool elf can pack a bow, but
JJC> an Archer is a special force to be reckoned with.
JJC> Yes, but he is not that different from any elf fighter who uses a Bow as his
JJC> choice weapon. Or damned near any elf Ranger I've ever seen.
I haven't seen very many characters specialized in the bow. Right there
that makes them rather unique.
JJC> See, this proves the point I had about two characters being a lot alike, one
JJC> way or the other. The only difference, I'm guessing was in character
JJC> history and personality, something most LC DMs don't spend a lot of time
JJC> worrying about before the game.
I think you are selling a lot of the players in the LC short (not all, but
a lot...), There are still plenty of ways to make characters different.
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
DL> I don't wish to reitterate everything that has already been said, but I
DL> would like to comment on RPGA's ethics guidelines and how they pertain to the
DL> atmosphere of the living city.
DL> All I can say is that it is obvious that this is "fantasy" role-playing.
DL> The ethics guidelines that are set up are ludicrous. According to RPGA:
DL> No one has sex.
More or less true. My personal opinion, however, is that it is much more
fun in real life. I prefer to roleplay the things I can't do normally, like
fighting evil beasties, or killing things.
DL> No one drinks.
Every other LC event seems to begin "You are all in a bar..." There is
even one module that takes place ENTIRELY within a bar.
DL> Their are no corrupt officials of any type.
Wrong. There are several examples to the contrary. The lord thief-taker
was actually running a thieves' guild, Lord Vernon Blacktree has been
involved in many unsavory activities, etc.
DL> All villians are truly evil and must be apprehended. (Heaven forbid that
DL> the NPC villian have a personality and not be truly diabolical).
Several modules I can think of (not just LC) have the bad guy escaping at
the end (Mostly because I think the writer is planning a sequel, but
hey...). This is especially common in conjunction with the 'corrupt
official'. The module "And the hero takes a fall", which ran at GenCon last
year (1994), had both the corrupt official getting away with it, and the
characters wrongly sentenced to 1 year at hard labor. Not exactly the
utopian paradise you are claiming for the LC.
DL> All these things are unacceptable in modules that are to be submitted to RPGA.
DL> It is because of this one dimensional view of AD&D that I will not submit
DL> anymore modules to RPGA. Why should I waste my time putting together a well
DL> rounded, in-depth, module that has interesting NPC's so that RPGA can tell me
DL> it doesn't meet with their ethical guidelines.
This statement implies that you have submitted modules, and they were
rejected. I would be interested in hearing more about what they found
objectionable, if you would be willing to share that info with us.
Erik Robbins
(arguments clipped)
So he doesn't have his bonuses anymore. So? I didn't choose an archer for
the bonuses, I choose it cause I wanted to play an elven archer.
And that doesn't take away from my argument against the person I was replying
to. He said that the removal of the kits made for "cookie-cutter characters"
Yes, there are other elfs that use bows, but I haven't played with any. Yet
there have been many fighters in my groups. And kits didn't stop there
from being "cookie-cutter characters." If anything, kits were more cookie
cutter. If our two elves were in a group together, it might have been
repetitive.
I'm still pissed a little bit, but I'll live. What really got me annoyed was
a comment by Jean Rabe in the Newzine a while before they made the changes.
Something about elf characters "hanging upside down from a tree and firing
eight shots a round." Yes, it was possible for the kit to do that, but the
penalties made such a feat not worth discussing.
Erik
aka Solonor, wood elf ranger with a bow
follower of Solonor Thelindira, and general racist jackass
(who says LC characters don't have personalities?)
Ed Gibson
>In article <4a39f3$74...@holly.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>,
>Erik Robbins <ars...@holly.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> wrote:
>>He's still an archer. He still uses a bow, he's still specialized in the
>>bow,
>Yes, with no ROF bonuses, regains the ability to use a sword at +1 and
>loses a lot of bonuses associated with the kit. You also have none of the
>stigmas and reputation you once had. Any fool elf can pack a bow, but
>an Archer is a special force to be reckoned with.
>>He is vastly different than an elf (high) fighter who uses a sword as his
>>choice weapon.
>Yes, but he is not that different from any elf fighter who uses a Bow as his
>choice weapon. Or damned near any elf Ranger I've ever seen.
>See, this proves the point I had about two characters being a lot alike, one
>way or the other. The only difference, I'm guessing was in character
>history and personality, something most LC DMs don't spend a lot of time
>worrying about before the game.
I've found very few opportunities to use a bow in LC campaigns (unless you
want to fire into melee). I can only recall using my bow three times in
modules and each time I was facing level draining undead. I've used my
bow more in interactive contests than in play.
One thing which will help to make your bow specialists different is the fact
that fighters are now limited to one weapon specialization. I think that
your attitude and approach in deciding to specialize in a bow would make your
characters distinctive.
>>Erik
Ed
Jeffery J Craigmile
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet <ci...@src.honeywell.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "JJC" == Jeffery J Craigmile <mor...@iastate.edu> writes:
>
>>> adventure. We had two 6th level characters, two 4th, one 3rd and one first-time
>>> player with a 1st level character. At the average level for that party, they
>>> went into situations that would have meant INSTANT, UNAVOIDABLE DEATH for the
>>> weakest characters. I felt this unnecessary and cruel, not to mention
>>> discouraging, so naturally they took a lot of hits, but survived.
>
>JJC> all the praise I've been hearing, they should be able to get around it.
>JJC> It's a DM adjustment thing, granted. The writer couldn't have seen it
>JJC> coming, but he might want to dull the claws the next time around.
>
>How is this the writer's fault?
Read this again, I didn't say it was the writer's fault, but it is something
that the writer in question should perhaps be thinking about for future LC
events that he or she submits. You're supposed to be watching for those
kinds of "instant death" situations when you write for the RPGA, right? A
lot of players do get a little upset by it.
>If the encounter is balanced for 6 4th
>level characters, and 5 5th and 1 1st level character are being run
>through the event, he couldn't have predicted that.
No, he couldn't have predicted it. You're right. But he can bear it in mind
when submitting the tournament and suggest an alternate, tamer version,
knowing that this might come up. Living City is darned hard to write for,
knowing that this problem is out there.
>This problem mostly arises when the tournament marshall wants to shoehorn
>in an extra (usually late-arriving) player at each table, and simply
>assigns them, with no care about level at all. When players are allowed to
>pick their own parties, they are pretty good about playing with comperable
>level characters.
Yes. Another thing I have noticed is that the 6 player limit that is usually
set around here has a tendency to get overlooked. I seem to recall an
article in an old issue of Poly that mentioned a bunch of convention
ettiquette guidelines for (mostly) players. I wish they'd reprint it about
every six months. I don't think most players want to get stuck in a party
where they are totally out-leveled.
One problem I've noticed locally is that we have one or two people who are
Grand Master level players with high level LC characters, while the rest of
us are not. It's the reverse of the poster's original point.
>This is also one of the reasons I have several characters. When I wind
>up at a table with a bunch of low-level characters, I play my low level.
>When it is a high level party, I play high.
This is a good thing. You've obviously been around a while. Some of us, who
only do three or less cons per year take a long time getting even one
character built up, and that's when the level difference becomes a factor.
>JJC> I see an unbalance situation as a challenge. You aren't supposed to win
>JJC> every battle all of the time. Things don't always have to work out, either.
>JJC> Some things are meant to be discouraging. It serves the plot and just plain
>JJC> makes sense. For example; no king in his right mind puts a sign on his
>JJC> castle saying "come loot my treasury." He's going to get the biggest,
>JJC> nastiest bad-asses available to guard his castle. Screw fairness.
>
>I agree. There should be some fights PC's can't win. The problem is that
>most players *will not* admit that they are outclassed, and will fight even
>when it is obvious that they will get their butt's kicked.
A. If someone is that brash, they deserve what they get, usually. Killing
them won't teach them a lesson. Let em suffer a little...
B. If someone or the entire group is that bull-headed, the DM either needs
to even up the fight :( or go the extra mile to further get his point
across. (Reinforcements, mortally wounding someone, etc.)
>Now, when the PC's are supposed to win, but are outlcassed for whatever
>reason, I make a judgement call: I have no compunction about pounding the
>snot out of poor-playing player's characters. It is when someone is
>playing to the best of their ability that I give them a break.
Usually, one mortal wound will get the party's attention long enough to
listen. I try not to take out the group's only cleric. I rarely distinguis
one player from another, otherwise. Wouldn't want anybody to take anything
personally.
>JJC> How many leave unbalances alone and let the players try to deal with it?
>
>I will begin the module at the recommended level. As the module
>progresses, I will begin to get a 'feel' for the *actual* (as opposed to
>calculated) party power, and will begin adjusting the module toughness to
>fit.
Great idea!
> - cisco
>--
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>ci...@src.honeywell.com lope...@maroon.tc.umn.edu
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>An employer? Oh yeah - I do have one of those. I guess that
>means I have to use this space for a disclaimer. *sigh*
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
RPGA HQ
start to mailbox. But Ed's suggestion that this sort of material might be
disseminated via TSR's Web Page (as yet still under construction) is
entirely appropriate.
Is
Con,
>>they didn't get enough opinions.
from giving your input to the RPGA? Jean Rabe and other RPGA
bigwigs always were glad to listen to our questions and
concerns at conventions. And even if you don't go to many
conventions, what's to stop you from WRITING to HQ and making
your views heard? Who's to stop you from sending an e-mail
post to HQ?
The fact is, rumors about impending re-evaluation and
changes in Living City character guidelines have been floating
around for about two or three years prior to the "Big Change".
Anyone who wanted to say something had the opportunity through
various channels.
Simply put, anyone who felt like talking, or writing, was
heard. Not everyone will be happy--with thousands of members,
it's unrealistic to expect that you will get everything you
want. And like it or not, I'll stand by HQ's right to make
decisions of this magnitude, since it's their responsibility to
make the games playable and fun for everyone. And speaking for
myself, despite a few minor objections I prefer the new
character guidelines to the old "anything goes" version we've
been living with all this time.
Jeffery J Craigmile
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet <ci...@src.honeywell.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "JJC" == Jeffery J Craigmile <mor...@iastate.edu> writes:
>
>We actually seem to be agreeing on more and more as we talk about this. I
>think that is a rarity in newsgroup threads.
It beats the hell out of having a flame war over it. It's also clearing up a
lot of misconceptions.
>JJC> I see, the RPGA is a fan organization that just happens to have a lot of
>JJC> stuff Trademarked by TSR, staffed by TSR and just happens to be advertised
>JJC> in every other product that TSR sells.
>The better-organized fan organizations *do* pay for submissions.
>
>Some of the problems you list are caused by the TSR lawyers. It is no
>accident that finding D&D articles in non-TSR magazines is basically
>impossible. TSR has the attitude that *all* D&D-related material is a
>'derived work', and therefore belongs to them. Now, legally this isn't
>defensible, but it is the attidue they are working under. Therefore, even
>if you *did* build a completely independent fan organization, one of the
>first things that would happen would be a phone call from the TSR lawyers....
Here's the separation as I see it. TSR owns and operates the RPGA from the
standpoint of staff, magazine and organization. The fan-submitted material
has to go through them. The DM's, players, and most of the writers are
strictly volunteer. But, one must accept the truth that TSR set this up
neatly, all that was needed were players. What do they get out of it? Free
Advertising! Free Publicity! It helps them sell more products, folks.
With all of this in mind I find it really amazing that they accept stuff for
other games at all.
>JJC> Oooh all of six or seven cons. I don't care if it was Gen Con, they didn't
>JJC> get enough opinions.
I'm being a little harsh again. Sorry.
>Scott can only attend so many conventions per year, he does have other
>duties. I don't think you can reasonably expect to get the input of every
>LC player. You have to try and get a reasonable sampling, and go from there.
Scott, along with the rest of us.
You can, however get more input than just six or seven cons. They have a
magazine at their disposal. They could have also slipped a poll in with the
voting packets. If they truly want to reach the members from RPGA hq, it
ain't hard. Look at all of the contest entries they receive.
>JJC> Just these two things sitting here that I'm thinking about sending out. Now,
>JJC> I don't know.
>
>By all means, send them in!
My Cthulhu might turn too many stomachs. I'm going to run it through one
more playtest. The other is getting mailed some time over Christmas break.
>JJC> You're right. I am contradicting myself slightly. Let me clear the air on
>JJC> this one. I think that writers have a rough time getting stuff that
>JJC> functions, is playable, enjoyable and ethical figured out and sent in. The
>JJC> real problems seem to occur after it has been edited. The DM's are the guys
>JJC> that have to deal with this stuff. In a lot of the events that I have run, I
>JJC> have been blamed for errors that were inherent to the module, not me. A DD
>JJC> should be expected to adjust, not rewrite an entire event on the spur of the
>JJC> moment. If this is the policy, then I'm going to encourage our local club
>JJC> to stop purchasing events.
>
>Two things: 1) Yes, RPGA editing is overall very poor. This is mostly a
> cost issue.
How much does the staff get paid for editing?:)
> 2) Modules are not set in stone. We do round-0 events (we
> pre-run the event for the judges before the convention,
> that way they get to play, and they get the chance to
> experience how the module 'flows') and then the DM's
> discuss the module as a group. We have sometimes made
> extensive changes to the module due to the experiences in
> these round-0 events.
I did not know that. Thanks.
>JJC> There is a very powerful relationship between RPGA writers and GM's. I see a
>JJC> problem with GM's getting punished for bad material they did not write, or
>JJC> did not get all of. The problem is that there is no feedback to correct
>JJC> things. If there is something terribly wrong with the module, there is
>JJC> little that can be done about it and everyone who gets that packet is going
>JJC> to encounter the problem. Overall, the DM is the one who must answer for it.
>
>The lines on the judging form about the module ('what did you like best`,
>and `what needs to be improved`, I think) really do have an impact.
>Modules that consistently get rated low are the ones that get retired
>quickly. The RPGA does listen to players and DM's on this.
I hope so.
>Heck, I would go farther than that. I say use a gradiated point system,
>something like:
> Give each character 70 points, to spend as they wish. Costs are as
> follows:
> stat cost stat cost
> 6 -7 15 15
> 7 -4 16 21
> 8 -2 17 28
> 9 -1 18 36
> 10 0 18/01-50 45
> 11 1 18/51-75 55
> 12 3 18/76-90 65
> 13 6 18/91-99 75
> 14 10 18/00 85
>Personally, I think the percentile strength idea was a bad experiment, and
>if 3rd edition ever appears, it should be junked.
It can be done. Like I said, why not just switch to a limited form of PO
rules? I like this, though.
>JJC> Yes, but there's no voting form at the end of most RPGA events. And I'm not
>JJC> really being rated on how I DM a regular event. I can afford to torc off a
>JJC> player in a regular session, but an RPGA game can get real ugly if you try
>JJC> to keep a glory hog down.
>
>Elsewhere you state that you think the point system should be dropped (not
>an ignoble idea), so why don't you slap them down and damn the consequences.
Because it (might) give the player an unfavorable impression of the RPGA and
also come back to haunt both me and other judges later. Not to mention the
impact it might have on other players within the RPGA. While I hate the
point system to the point of open defiance, I realize that others are still
quite attached to it. I do it more for them than myself. I also think
players catch on to who the problem players are, sometimes. If raising my
point total (urrk ack gulp) will help us get better quality modules around
here, seeing how I am one of the only RPGA GM's in this area, then I am
forced to try to maintain a decent standing.
>I make no bones about putting players in their place. Yeah, I get bad
>scores for it every once in a while, but the good scores from everyoe else
>at the table (who usually appreciate what you did) makes up for it. Plus,
>why DM if you aren't going to play god (*evil grin*)?
As I don't get around much, I see the same RPGA people on a bi-annual basis.
I don't want all of them honked at me. One player comes to mind that, if
slapped down, I'd never hear the end of it. Usually, but not always, do the
other players appreciate this sort of thing. In a non-RPGA event, the worst
someone can do is complain to the con organizers, who know me. In an RPGA
event, your name can get around. While I'm not overly worried about it...
>Heh. This is a true problem, and basically impossible to prepare for.
>Something that is basically useless 99% of the time can be a lifesaver the
>other 1% of the time. I don't know how you deal with this from a
>continuity point of view, as the LC is simply too large and dynamic to
>control that closely. Also, who is to say that this isn't realistic?
>Sometimes an adventure should be a walkthrough. Rest assured that
>somewhere down the line there is one that is going to hit you *hard*.
Agreed.
> At some point players need to accept some responsibility as well.
>For example, my cleric doesn't use Divination or Commune (in fact, I don't
>know any character clerics that do), becouse of the effect that it would
>have on most modules. If the player understands the spirit of the game, and
>is willing to live within its rules, a good time can be had by all.
>
I think we're back to Wayne's original point. There are some players who do,
and some who aren't willing to live within the rules.
>JJC> Editing is supposed to remove rules conflicts and conflicts with other LC
>JJC> plots. I thought it should also take care of the afore-mentioned situation
>JJC> with magic item overlap. Editing by the RPGA is also supposed to be looking
>JJC> for playability problems. I've had a few problems come up where I had to
>JJC> wonder if the module was ever playtested.
>I have my doubts about playtesting as well, and I have seen some horrible
>editing problems. I have heard that this will be a bigger priority since
>the tournament coordinator change, but I will wait judgement on that for now.
Let's hope.
>JJC> I thought the writers were getting paid, too. I find this odd as I have GMed
>JJC> a lot of events, dedicating my time and resources, had decent ratings...
>JJC> hmmm. I still don't understand the need for all these points, anyway.
>
>Getting $10 for having written an RPGA module is pretty much peanuts, when for
>the same number of words Dungeon magazine would pay some $600. If you
>write for RPGA, you don't do it for money.
I always thought it was $25. No matter. That's where the Fan portion of
things lies, I guess.
>JJC> This policy was recently implemented at the last con I attended in Des
>JJC> Moines. It was lovely. The only free admissions given at our other Des
>JJC> Moines con is part of the "Best DM" competition. If I am truly appreciated
>JJC> as a GM, they should be letting me in cheap/free regardless.
>
>Agreed. I know some conventions that will even give free hotel rooms.
>
FREE HOTEL ROOMS? If anyone in ACI is reading this, show it to Tammy.
>JJC> Again, agreed. Why do they [prizes] need to be awarded?
>
>The question probably should be "Why did they begin awarding them?" Now
>that they have started, I think there would be a lot of bitching if they
>stopped, so they are sort of trapped into perpetuating it. I agree though,
>they should just can the whole program.
I don't think they're that trapped. I also think that DemiCon is well
established enough now to go without prizes. We won't know unless we stop
for a year.
Going back to the RPGA's point system, I think there are a lot of people who
are very attached to it (more like obsessed.) I think canning it now would
likely cause rioting. However, I'd give a lot to see the snobbery and petty
bickering end. If we're going to play a rpg and have fun, let's not play for
points. If we're not going to fully cooperate and stab one another in the
back for points, might I suggest Warhammer 40k or Axis and Allies or MtG?
>Its all in how the module is being run. I spnd >50% of my LC playing time
>playing with people I already know, and whose playing style meshes with
>mine. We tend to play them as serious events, if possible (I agree that
>some of the events are written to be lighthearted, and must be played as
>such or make no sense at all).
I played in the LC game called Slugfest once. It seemed like a fairly serous
adventure, and would have been if not for the character (I don't want to
name names) who kept talking to her horse, as if it were a paladin. It could
have been a serious event otherwise. Now, I consider the player a good
friend, and would not want to offend. Before the business with the horse
started, I'd say the group could have gone either way. The DM had fairly
good control on the situation. I think a lot of the events are written to be
light-hearted. I wonder if they don't save the serious stuff for the "higher
level" players and DMs.
>I think that the light-heartedness of LC can be traced to a myriad of
>causes, from lack of continuity to player expectation. I also feel that
>with the exception of a few outside influences, LC is a remarkably
>free-form experiment that has evolved by itself. As such, it expresses
>the consensus style of all the players and GM's. If it is light-hearted,
>it is because a majority agree it should be so.
As long as most agree, I guess. I think we both hit on the myriad of causes
at the same time. I posted something about this earlier.
>JJC> Whoa. I understand what you are saying. However, what I am referring to is
>JJC> characters like Ftr #2 that belong to half a dozen other players. Sometimes,
>JJC> not always, a kit can make the difference. (Knight as opposed to squire or
>JJC> Beast Rider.)
>
>Well, that would be a shortcoming in the player, I would say. A good
>player can make almost any character unique. A charcter like Ftr #2 takes
>no thought to come up with, and no thought to play -- unless you have some
>other way of making him unique. Straight out of the box he is pretty
>boring.
You can make two class characters unique in the same way you can make two
kit characters unique. I don't think that's an issue in a regular campaign.
It would seem that as big as the Living City is, it would not be a problem,
but I don't think a lot of a character's nuances come out in one gaming
session, hence the cookie-cutter phenomenon.
How often, going back to the whole character development issue, do you get
to know more than the very basics about someone's Living City character?
I've also noticed some players tend to bend their character's personality to
fit the situation. Due to its nature, I think that the Living City
discourages the character depth that most other campaigns have.
>JJC> They still have to do that, anyway. Further, I'd worry about any DM who
>JJC> didn't at least look my character over beforehand. You don't have to
>JJC> memorize squat before the game. The player will be happy to tell you about
>JJC> all of his nifty advantages, and a brief list of basic hindrances, hastily
>JJC> scrawled on a scrap of paper before the game will work.
>
>The player may be happy to tell you about any advantages, but without
>reading the kit description it may be hard to understand how to interact
>with the character appropriately, and to work in the kit disadvantages.
>99% of kit modifications in the Great Change were for one of three reasons:
>either to reduce the DM workload, to reduce the munchkinism potentials, or
>because the kit didn't fit in with the LC concept (such as wu-jen, for
>example).
Not all of the character's advantages are going to come into play. Niether
are all of his disads. However, the notes are there in case you can fit
something in on the fly.
They weren't modifications as much as they were eliminations.
Although I don't have it in front of me, I seem to recall the Amazon stuff
was left in along with some of the Wilderness types. How do they fit, being
pretty exotic, where the other exotics don't? Further, I (thought at one
time) that Raven's Bluff was a port city. Even if it's not, what's to say A.
someone didn't travel to Kara Tur and become a Samurai or B. a samurai
didn't travel to Raven's Bluff. The same comments can be held for the weapon
and clerical restrictions. What, exactly, is the Living City concept?
As for the DM workload, players are still required, as always, to bring a
copy of the book in question with them. The DM still has to read over the
kits before play, there just aren't as many kits. (Some of the kits they
kept might work mechanically, but are pretty weak IMHO) There are always
going to be munchkins. Don't think that a munchkin kit character can't be
converted.
>You don't have to start over. If your local coordinator said you did, then
>they were wrong. Make whatever changes are necessary to bring the
>character into alignment with the changes (sounds like all you have to do
>is drop the kit), and you are good to go. This is significantly less
>modification than my characters had to go through, and I am still
>playing them.
I see two problems, as mentioned in another post. The first is that the
deadline for resubmission has passed. Second, and the reason I let it pass,
is that I was informed that my character, for one reason or another does not
appear in the Living City registry. (Unknown to me until recently) While it
never stopped me from playing before, it kinda puts a crimp in my plans now.
If I did resubmit, I'd still have to convince the RPGA that my character
does exist and always has. As my coordinator put it, I may as well start
over. It won't be a kit character this time around. Actually, I haven't
entirely decided on what it's going to be. I still have three or four months
to decide.
> - cisco
>--
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>ci...@src.honeywell.com lope...@maroon.tc.umn.edu
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>An employer? Oh yeah - I do have one of those. I guess that
>means I have to use this space for a disclaimer. *sigh*
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
JJC> In article <4aalhu$m...@moon.src.honeywell.com>,
JJC> Cisco Lopez-Fresquet <ci...@src.honeywell.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> "JJC" == Jeffery J Craigmile <mor...@iastate.edu> writes:
>>
>> We actually seem to be agreeing on more and more as we talk about this. I
>> think that is a rarity in newsgroup threads.
JJC> It beats the hell out of having a flame war over it. It's also clearing up a
JJC> lot of misconceptions.
In fact, I think we have gotten to the point where I have nothing left to
argue with you. We have cleared everything up!
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
"> The situation in Europe is that the RPGA is almost entirely run by
"> fans. The staff in TSR only handles the paperwork of membership and
"> Polyhedra. Also the staff provides meeting facilities for DMs and
"> runs European GenCon.
"> From the fans point of view, TSR is simply sponsoring the RPGA by
"> providing products, cash, 10% discount and staff. We should be grateful
"> we are getting this for nothing (our money buying Polyhedron).
"> If it were run entirely by fans, someone would have to pay for these
"> resources. If membership were raised there is always the risk of losing
"> members due to the increased costs providing no additional facilities.
Thanks for saying this better tahn I seemed to be able to.
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
JJC> Yes. Another thing I have noticed is that the 6 player limit that is usually
JJC> set around here has a tendency to get overlooked. I seem to recall an
JJC> article in an old issue of Poly that mentioned a bunch of convention
JJC> ettiquette guidelines for (mostly) players. I wish they'd reprint it about
JJC> every six months. I don't think most players want to get stuck in a party
JJC> where they are totally out-leveled.
The 6-player limit becomes a hard rule effective sometime soon. No
more 8 payer tables to wory about (yay!)
JJC> One problem I've noticed locally is that we have one or two people who are
JJC> Grand Master level players with high level LC characters, while the rest of
JJC> us are not. It's the reverse of the poster's original point.
>> This is also one of the reasons I have several characters. When I wind
>> up at a table with a bunch of low-level characters, I play my low level.
>> When it is a high level party, I play high.
JJC> This is a good thing. You've obviously been around a while. Some of us, who
JJC> only do three or less cons per year take a long time getting even one
JJC> character built up, and that's when the level difference becomes a factor.
Encourage those high-level types to start a second character. It
only takes 4-5 sessions total to make it to 4th level, while it can take 30
sessions for a 7th level character to make it to 8th. So this isn't much
of a sacrifice in the long term. So it takes one or two extra conventions
for your power character to make it to 8th, so what?
Cisco Lopez-Fresquet
EG> I've found very few opportunities to use a bow in LC campaigns (unless you
EG> want to fire into melee). I can only recall using my bow three times in
EG> modules and each time I was facing level draining undead. I've used my
EG> bow more in interactive contests than in play.
This brings up another thing - why is it that in LC monsters always appear
in melee with the party? As someone who has built a character that prefers
to avoid melee combat whenever possible, I find this rather annoying. To
go from merrily walking down the trail to in melee instantaneously is
stretching reality a bit. I can see it happening in the case of a
well-laid ambush, but it always semms to be the case. I would like a
chance to get off a bow shot or a magic missile before the enemy closes.
Maybe the enemy that is charging in should automatically lose initiative to
bow & spell attacks or something...