Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bendris Noulg" data-source="post: 1543156" data-attributes="member: 6398">True, but it would be the basis of actual case discussion instead of hypotheticals. The beauty of hypotheticals is that, with enough thought, any outcome can be determined as the logical result. Probably, yes. I can see where you're getting at, but (from my perspective) the problem is a little different. Let's say that C2 is the minimum (i.e., not a lot of quality, but an effort is made), than C2s are acceptable. Granted, I would prefer B1s and As, as they tend to help keep the game flowing, but I can and will work with C2s. B2s would worry me slightly. At the very least, I'd see someone that was a B becoming a C and would be worried that the individual isn't enjoying the game. Thus, I would try to figure out what was wrong and, hopefully, get the guy back up to B. Now, what worries me about the rules is that they tell C1 that not only should he stay, but that his effort is equal to A, which is untrue, and that his lack of effort should be equally rewarded, which is patently untrue. I certainly hope that this doesn't over-strain your metaphore too much, but I think this does, indeed, tackle the issue as I see it. Ah, but here's the contradiction. I'm all for "easing" them in; gawds know that most of us didn't become "A"s during our first game. However, how do we do this? By the individual groups? Well, that lets me know that new players I meet are being eased in. But does that say anything about the rest of the community? Does that tell me that you are easing them in? Does it tell me that S'mon, Zappo, or Umbran are easing them in? (Note: I'm actually fairly sure all of you are to some extent, but that's just a guess and thus I used your names as an example...) Thus, I can only consider the facts as I know them. And they are: 1. The rules as written.2. The perception by some that this is how the rules are meant are used.3. The posts of at least one of the main designers of 3E indicating that #2 is indeed true. Now, I posted earlier in the thread that 3E not requiring RP was good for the industry (no, really, check on page 1); I only jumped back into the fray, as it were, because the issue of what the rules inspire has become the topic. And, given the three points above, I can only deduct that the answer is indeed "no". As such, it does fall on us, the "upper echelon" players (hmmm... I like that.), to indeed stand up and say, "this is how it's done." And, hopefully, to do it without getting a bunch of grief from folks that like it the other way.</blockquote>

Verification