As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Petition for a Tabletop Gaming Subforum.

1567911

Posts

  • EinEin CaliforniaRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    I have class till roughly nine. If someone doesn't beat me to it, I'll come back here and write up all the rules in a comprehensive manner.

    Ein on
  • JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    must play magic the gathering



    maybe some Star Wars too...

    Jasconius on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Things That Will Get You Banned

    Posting pornographic images, fetish pictures, or disturbing medical photos
    This is a 13+ forum, and there are lots and lots of people to whom it is illegal to show that stuff. That means that you will be punished if you post something with the above content. This includes links posted in signatures.

    If something is borderline, LINK to it with a warning as to the content, or PM a mod before posting. If you're about to post something that could cause trouble for users browsing while at school or work, add a "NSFW" (Not Safe For Work) tag to the subject line. Particularly forbidden pictures include: goatse, lensman, tubgirl, lemon party, loopback, and harlequin baby. PMing these to another user without having been asked to or without warning about the content will result in removal of PM privileges.

    There will be no Ranger threads. Don't pester mods and/or try to start one.

    Trolling
    This has a working definition of "attempting to be as annoying as possible while still technically obeying the rules," and it's not the way to go about getting attention. Attempting to derail threads, posting off-topic bullshit, or flame-baiting are all strictly verboten. There also tends to be a thin line between being abusive and immature and being argumentative. Crossing it persistently will lead to a ban.

    Talking about the fine points of illegally downloaded books, ROMs, warez, or other bits of piracy
    This is not an arguable point; this rule comes from those who make the forums possible. It will be enforced, and it is not a point on which we have the luxury of being flexible. Keep in mind that this is not a ban on discussing the ethics of piracy or the economic forces at play.

    Participating in "forum raids"
    A "forum raid" is an invasion of a forum on another site.
    This will earn you, at the very least, a temporary ban. It will more likely be a permanent ban. This sort of thing reflects badly on the main site, and we take it very seriously.

    Consistently or egregiously doing Things That Will Get You In Trouble
    If you are constantly finding yourself jailed, take a moment and wonder why. If you are constantly disrupting things here, you'll be banned on either a temporary or permanent basis, depending on severity and frequency.

    ===========================================================

    Things That Will Get You in Trouble

    Making a "Hi, I'm New!" thread
    This forum sees a large number of new users every day, and there would be no actual discussions going on if each and every one of them made an introductory thread. Lurk for a while, get a feel for the place, find an active thread that interests you, and join the conversation. It would be a good idea to avoid hitting the new topic button for a few days. If you're making five new topics in your first hour YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING WRONG. It is also inadvisable to make your first post a new topic.

    Beginning redundant threads
    We are not a gaming news service, but many of us check them frequently. Before you make a topic specifically to bring us a link or story, do a quick forum search for the URL and related keywords. If the only thing you're posting is the link, you might want to consider posting it in Linksville.

    Failing to pay a modicum of attention to grammar and spelling Nobody here demands epic poetry from other users. That having been said, it is difficult to have a worthwhile discussion and/or play a game online with someone who cannot communicate clearly or coherently.

    Plugging your personal website or project
    This comes off rather badly if you do it too soon after joining. It is known as "site-whoring," and you will be flamed. If you want to plug your (or anyone else's) site, put a link in your sig. Exceptions to this are if something specific on the site is directly relevent to an existing conversation (and you clearly present it as being on your site) or if you have permission from a mod. If this rule is violated, you will be jailed and the link will be removed.

    Starting a new thread asking why another thread was locked
    PM a moderator if you don't understand why a thread was locked or would like to make a case for it being unlocked. Do not make a thread identical or nearly identical to a thread that has been locked. Also, do not make a thread solely for the purpose of referring to a thread that has been locked.

    Making alternate accounts, otherwise known as "alts"
    The mods do keep tabs on these things. Do not make a second account. If you are having trouble with your first account or would like to change your username, PM an admin.

    Engaging in thread assassination
    The most obvious things to avoid are posting "in before the lock" or any variant thereof. It's not clever, and no one appreciates it. If you feel that a thread truly needs to be locked, PM a mod.

    Quoting the rules if you do not know them
    Loudly and disruptively proclaiming a thread or post to be against the rules without being able to back up your accusation will come to no good.

    Having a gigantic sig
    Sigs should be no taller than 80 pixels (approximately four lines of text), no wider than 500 pixels and no bigger than 20 kb. This includes everything below the white line. If your sig is significantly bigger, it will be taken away.

    Failing to use spoiler tags or spoiler warnings
    This should be self-explanatory. If you're making a spoiler thread, include "SPOILERS" in the title. If you're posting a spoiler within an unlabeled thread, user the
    tags.

    Attempting to contact staff through threads
    Gabe reads the forum rarely at best; Tycho does not read it at all. If you wish to contact them, you will need to email them.

    Quid's Law:
    There is to be NO FUCKING WHINING in any thread about any jailings or bannings. If you think an action was unfair, PM a mod. If you want to know why someone was jailed, PM him. If all of us mods are being evil jail-happy ass-gnomes, PM an admin. Do not engage in a 3 page tangent in the chat thread about how Mr. Mod is abusing his power and needs to be fired/banned/anally raped/whatever. If you are jailed and you bitch publicly about it, you'll be jailed longer. If you bitch about someone else being jailed, you'll likely be jailed.

    Don't abuse REALSpoiler tags:
    Abusing spoiler tags can be amusing. Abusing REALSpoiler tags will get you jailed.

    ===========================================================
    What to Do

    Lurk
    Reading threads and announcements without posting will help give you an instinctive idea of what will and will not be tolerated by the forum and the mods.

    Behave like an adult
    We don't care if you are one yet or not, you will be expected to act like one in this forum. That means restricting your flames to posted points or opinions, not people. See also, no ad hominem attacks. Gloating is also frowned upon, and posting things like "OMG Pwned" or 0wned pics will result in a jailing.

    Stay on topic
    This should be self-explanatory.

    Read the whole thread before you post in it
    You are not special, you are not a beautiful snowflake, and if a thread is 20 pages long, someone has probably already posted whatever you were going to post. We don't need to go back over the same retarded discussions every 5th page. If the thread has become ridiculously long, read at least the first and last ten pages.

    Pay attention to thread prompts
    If the thread's creator has asked that the thread not devolve into a PnP vs. LARP debate, or asks that rules arguments be cited or backed up with links, comply to the best of your ability.
    ===========================================================

    Additional Things to Know

    These rules apply to regs just as much as they do to the most recent person to sign up.
    Just because you've been here a while doesn't give you free reign over Tabletop Gaming. In fact, regs should be setting a good example for others.

    "But Forumer X did it first" is not an excuse for breaking a rule. Mods can't be here 24/7 and we can't see everything. We do what we can, but just because you've seen someone else break the rules doesn't open the doors for you to do the same.

    TTG currently has X mods:
    PM any of us if there is a problem. You can see if we are online here.
    If none of us are online, you can contact another mod or admin.

    Thanatos on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Rules specific to TTG

    What we do: Tabletop Gaming is here for the discussion, creation, and playing of tabletop games. For our purposes, "tabletop games" includes:
    • traditional "pen and paper" Role-Playing Games (PnP RPGs), such as Dungeons & Dragons or Shadowrun;
    • board games such as chess or Settlers of Catan;
    • Live-Action Role-Playing games such as Mind's Eye Theatre;
    • miniature games such as Warhammer or Battletech;
    • strategy games such as the ones put out by Avalon Hill or Battlemasters;
    • card games such as poker or bridge;
    • collectible/trading card games (CCGs/TCGs) such as Magic: The Gathering or the Penny-Arcade CCG;
      and
    • other games that are generally played on a smooth surface, such as marbles, jacks, or pick-up sticks.
    In summary, if it's a game, and it's not a sport, and it's not a video/PC game, this is probably where you talk about it, play it, or make rules for it.

    *Each campaign, game, or tournament being run on the forums gets its own thread. Gamemasters are considered in control of those threads, and those not participating in the games shouldn't post in them without a damn good reason. Asshattery in the individual game threads will not be tolerated.

    *If you want to run a game, describe it well. This does not mean "who wants to play DnD?" Your description should include:
    • What game you are playing and what rules version you are using, e.g. ADnD 2nd Edition.
    • The general scenario for the campaign, e.g. "this will be a Star Wars Dark Side campaign, where the characters will play evil Jedi in service to the Sith during the Knights of the Old Republic era."
    • What style the campaign will be, e.g. pure role-playing, hack 'n' slash, mixed, diceless, low-power, high-power, etc.
    • Any substantial deviations from the rules set you are using.
    • How much experience and familiarity with the rules the players should/could have in order to play.
    • Times you want to play (this can be specific, or a range, but you should probably at least eliminate the times you work/sleep).
    • Any specific software you plan on using in order to play the game, e.g. Ventrilo, IRC, OpenRPG, etc.
    • Anything specific to the game the players should know, e.g. using the point-buy system for attributes in DnD 3.5, limiting players to 20 points of disadvanatages in GURPS, etc.
    This list is by no means exhaustive; you are encouraged to include more, but a first post for a game should contain at least the above.

    Thanatos on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    What did I screw up (I'm sure there's something)? What did I miss? What should be changed?

    Thanatos on
  • Premier kakosPremier kakos Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    What did I screw up (I'm sure there's something)? What did I miss? What should be changed?

    Vampire is not a LARP. Get it right. Sheesh

    Premier kakos on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    What did I screw up (I'm sure there's something)? What did I miss? What should be changed?
    Vampire is not a LARP. Get it right. Sheesh
    There is a Vampire LARP, though; is it Vampire: The Masquerade?

    Thanatos on
  • redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Vampire: The Masquerade

    Larping is not done on a table top, so we should still be able to mock the shit out of them in that forum.

    Please? Please let me make fun of the LARPs.


    Tecnicaly, I think people can LARP damn near anything.

    redx on
    This machine kills threads.
  • Premier kakosPremier kakos Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    What did I screw up (I'm sure there's something)? What did I miss? What should be changed?
    Vampire is not a LARP. Get it right. Sheesh
    There is a Vampire LARP, though; is it Vampire: The Masquerade?

    Pst. There's also a DnD LARP. Vampire is primarily a Pen and Paper RPG, but LARP rules do exist for it. The Vampire LARP is technically called Mind's Eye Theatre: The Masquerade. Vampire: The Masquerade is the PnP version.

    Premier kakos on
  • Premier kakosPremier kakos Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2006
    redx wrote:
    Vampire: The Masquerade

    Larping is not done on a table top, so we should still be able to mock the shit out of them in that forum.

    Please? Please let me make fun of the LARPs.


    Tecnicaly, I think people can LARP damn near anything.

    Do that and I'm sure you'll find a very nice ride to jail, do not pass go. LARP is a legitamate form of role playing and we sure as hell shouldn't exclude it.

    Premier kakos on
  • redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Rules look good.

    You might want to expand on the romz thing so that people are sure thay can't start scanning pages out of thier monster manual.

    I don't think it is really nessisary, but well people are stupid and might try it. It would probaly end up being added eventualy.


    edit:oh never mind. You added the word book. Clever. That should work just fine.

    Kakos, you have no sense of humor. note the content of the post was confirming that it is VtM and that most anything can be larped.


    I was thinking something about reading the first damn post and that agreeing to follow any rules outlined in one. Just to make it seem like GMs have a bit of power. Mabey. Something like that.

    redx on
    This machine kills threads.
  • Premier kakosPremier kakos Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2006
    redx wrote:
    Rules look good.

    You might want to expand on the romz thing so that people are sure thay can't start scanning pages out of thier monster manual.

    I don't think it is really nessisary, but well people are stupid and might try it. It would probaly end up being added eventualy.


    edit:oh never mind. You added the word book. Clever. That should work just fine.

    Kakos, you have no sense of humor. note the content of the post was confirming that it is VtM and that most anything can be larped.

    That's fair, but I don't want any of the people in power to look at that and not get the joke and thing that we're already being elitist assholes and shit. We want The Tabletop to be as inclusive as possible for as many sorts of non-video games as possible.

    Premier kakos on
  • redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    ok.. so here is a thing. Take something like litterati or whatever. Now, it is a videogame of sorts, but based on a TT game.

    Like, a bunch of people decide they want to play scrable online, well... they aint going to do that. Would it be wrong to start a litterati(sp?) game on thread in TT?

    grey area and if it got moved/locked inconsitantly it would be confusing.

    redx on
    This machine kills threads.
  • Premier kakosPremier kakos Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2006
    redx wrote:
    ok.. so here is a thing. Take something like litterati or whatever. Now, it is a videogame of sorts, but based on a TT game.

    Like, a bunch of people decide they want to play scrable online, well... they aint going to do that. Would it be wrong to start a litterati(sp?) game on thread in TT?

    grey area and if it got moved/locked inconsitantly it would be confusing.

    If a certain subject is in a grey area, just leave it in whatever forum the creator put it in. The creator likely put it in a particular forum for one reason or another and he should likely get the benefit of the doubt.

    Premier kakos on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    redx wrote:
    I was thinking something about reading the first damn post and that agreeing to follow any rules outlined in one. Just to make it seem like GMs have a bit of power. Mabey. Something like that.
    I figured that would be covered by the "Asshattery in the game threads will not be tolerated" portion of the rules. I was trying to come up with some way to phrase the "Game threads are a GM's castle"-type thing, but it just wasn't coming out right. Lemme see if I can think of some good way to phrase it, and I'll get back to you (or come up with one yourself).
    redx wrote:
    ok.. so here is a thing. Take something like litterati or whatever. Now, it is a videogame of sorts, but based on a TT game.

    Like, a bunch of people decide they want to play scrable online, well... they aint going to do that. Would it be wrong to start a litterati(sp?) game on thread in TT?

    grey area and if it got moved/locked inconsitantly it would be confusing.
    It is a gray area, and I think it could realistically fit in either area. I'd say that, like all gray areas, should be left to mod discretion. I know I'm not going to freak about a literati thread in the TTG forum, provided there's not already one in the G&T forum.

    Thanatos on
  • redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    redx wrote:
    I was thinking something about reading the first damn post and that agreeing to follow any rules outlined in one. Just to make it seem like GMs have a bit of power. Mabey. Something like that.
    I figured that would be covered by the "Asshatery in the game threads will not be tolerated" portion of the rules. I was trying to come up with some way to phrase the "Game threads are a GM's castle"-type thing, but it just wasn't coming out right. Lemme see if I can think of some good way to phrase it, and I'll get back to you (or come up with one yourself).

    Asshattery in SE++ is diffrent from that in DD or G+T or H/A

    it is a little broad. We all seem to be on about the same page, but new folks might get a little confused.

    redx on
    This machine kills threads.
  • DrakeDrake Edgelord Trash Below the ecliptic plane.Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    I was trying to come up with some way to phrase the "Game threads are a GM's castle"-type thing, but it just wasn't coming out right.

    "Gome On threads are the GM's domain second only to the forum moderators." Or however you want to put it. We don't need some asshat deciding he can play metagame rules lawyer with the forum rules.

    Drake on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    I think I took care of it with simple italics. What do y'all think? Enough, or does it need more?

    Thanatos on
  • redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    italitastic. Seems to work. Can't think of anything wrong with it.


    would be nice to see some input form the mod corrner, what with them are more experience and stuff. I would truely value thier insight.


    edit:I will totaly give my children to anyone willing to run a CoC campaign. God that looked like fun.

    redx on
    This machine kills threads.
  • NapoleonNapoleon Registered User
    edited February 2006
    Rules are looking good.

    Napoleon on
    Napoleon+1796.gif
  • Paradox ControlParadox Control Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    I'll read the rest of the thread after I say I want this now!
    I've made at two MTG threads in GnT, and have seen only one other. I would have made more but GnT just eats that shit in like a day, it was just getting pointless.

    Paradox Control on
    \
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    There's no reason the TTG forum would use non-D&D sig size limitations, right?

    Thanatos on
  • JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    this is like trying to design a gas station before cars have been invented





    just incase

    Jasconius on
  • Nfinit VylenceNfinit Vylence Registered User
    edited February 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    There's no reason the TTG forum would use non-D&D sig size limitations, right?

    In a wholly tangental topic, I've never understood why we don't have standardized sig rules.

    Nfinit Vylence on
    The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides. -- Carl Sagan

    For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love. -- Also Carl Sagan
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Jasconius wrote:
    this is like trying to design a gas station before cars have been invented





    just incase
    Meh. The administration wants to see a business plan before they start investing capital in the idea. I can totally see their perspective. It's not really unreasonable at all; this was, what, an hour's work, while I was bored at work waiting for some shit to finish up? And that's for someone who's a total neurotic perfectionist when it comes to posting. Not that big of a deal for getting a subforum made. I mean, really, if there's no one willing to put that little work into a proposal, how many people are going to be interested in posting/frequenting the board?

    Thanatos on
  • JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    actually I think by now they don't give a shit, its been a couple of pages since one of them even bothered to tell us to go fuck ourselves, again, in the same thread.


    the odds of this happening are going down daily, i do believe


    its possible by saying this they may do it out of spite, but that is wishful thinking at best

    Jasconius on
  • Seattle ThreadSeattle Thread Seattle?Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Your defintions for tabletop gaming are spot-on, Thanatos. The only thing I could think of as constructive criticism would be a bulleted list for easy reading, but that's just a stylistic matter.

    How are meet-up/game night threads going to be handled? Potentially, someone could make a thread along the lines of "[Your Area] Game Night," and while it could be fine, it could cause problems. Mods, what do you think? Does it need a ruling and/or guidelines, or is it more of a case-by-case judgment?

    Another thread idea is a chess-by-(e)mail thread, where game sign-ups are held so they don't clutter the rest of the forum with two- or three-line "[GAME ON] - Chess" threads (simliar to the theory behind the Poetry Thread in AC).

    Seattle Thread on
    kofz2amsvqm3.png
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Makershot wrote:
    Your defintions for tabletop gaming are spot-on, Thanatos. The only thing I could think of as constructive criticism would be a bulleted list for easy reading, but that's just a stylistic matter.
    I am ashamed that I did not do this before. If you'll excuse me, I have to go commit seppuku. :oops:
    How are meet-up/game night threads going to be handled? Potentially, someone could make a thread along the lines of "[Your Area] Game Night," and while it could be fine, it could cause problems. Mods, what do you think? Does it need a ruling and/or guidelines, or is it more of a case-by-case judgment?
    IMO, it's not going to be a huge issue. I can't imagine, like, ten meet-up threads being made and staying on the first page for long. I wouldn't expect more than two or three to remain active for any significant amount of time.
    Another thread idea is a chess-by-(e)mail thread, where game sign-ups are held so they don't clutter the rest of the forum with two- or three-line "[GAME ON] - Chess" threads (simliar to the theory behind the Poetry Thread in AC).
    Yeah, I changed "each game gets its own thread" to "each gaming group gets it's own thread." When I was referring to "game," I really meant RPG-style game; things like board games being played over the internet would be assigned to their own thread on a per-game, rather than per-match basis. Can anyone think of a way I can clear up the wording for that any more?

    Thanatos on
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Jasconius wrote:
    actually I think by now they don't give a shit, its been a couple of pages since one of them even bothered to tell us to go fuck ourselves, again, in the same thread.

    the odds of this happening are going down daily, i do believe

    its possible by saying this they may do it out of spite, but that is wishful thinking at best
    No reason to get snarky.

    Salvation122 on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Jasconius wrote:
    actually I think by now they don't give a shit, its been a couple of pages since one of them even bothered to tell us to go fuck ourselves, again, in the same thread.

    the odds of this happening are going down daily, i do believe

    its possible by saying this they may do it out of spite, but that is wishful thinking at best
    No reason to get snarky.
    Seriously. If you don't have anything constructive to contribute, then just don't post.

    Thanatos on
  • Seattle ThreadSeattle Thread Seattle?Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    Makershot wrote:
    Another thread idea is a chess-by-(e)mail thread, where game sign-ups are held so they don't clutter the rest of the forum with two- or three-line "[GAME ON] - Chess" threads (simliar to the theory behind the Poetry Thread in AC).
    Yeah, I changed "each game gets its own thread" to "each gaming group gets it's own thread." When I was referring to "game," I really meant RPG-style game; things like board games being played over the internet would be assigned to their own thread on a per-game, rather than per-match basis. Can anyone think of a way I can clear up the wording for that any more?
    Maybe a clause taking into account the many expansions/rule sets/campaigns that a lot of RPGs have? Something like "'Gaming Group' refers to a particular rule set or campaign in the case of RPGs. For example, if someone already has a thread devoted to standar 2nd Edition D&D, it's not OK to make another thread for a standard 2nd Edition game, but it is OK to make a thread for a 3rd Edition game, or a 2nd Edition "The Horn of Balthashaznaar" game." Or that too excessive?

    Seattle Thread on
    kofz2amsvqm3.png
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Makershot wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    Makershot wrote:
    Another thread idea is a chess-by-(e)mail thread, where game sign-ups are held so they don't clutter the rest of the forum with two- or three-line "[GAME ON] - Chess" threads (simliar to the theory behind the Poetry Thread in AC).
    Yeah, I changed "each game gets its own thread" to "each gaming group gets it's own thread." When I was referring to "game," I really meant RPG-style game; things like board games being played over the internet would be assigned to their own thread on a per-game, rather than per-match basis. Can anyone think of a way I can clear up the wording for that any more?
    Maybe a clause taking into account the many expansions/rule sets/campaigns that a lot of RPGs have? Something like "'Gaming Group' refers to a particular rule set or campaign in the case of RPGs. For example, if someone already has a thread devoted to standar 2nd Edition D&D, it's not OK to make another thread for a standard 2nd Edition game, but it is OK to make a thread for a 3rd Edition game, or a 2nd Edition "The Horn of Balthashaznaar" game." Or that too excessive?
    Well, the thing is, I want to express the fact that it would be okay to make a thread for another 2nd Edition game (I fully anticipate there will be multiple 3.5 D&D games running at once), but not okay to have two Chess play-by-email games. Or, at least, that's how I feel.

    Thanatos on
  • Alexan DriteAlexan Drite Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    I have a question, wasn't the very foundation of most muds were based on rules of table top games, so would a discussion on those be ok in this new potential forum?

    Alexan Drite on
    Tycho wrote:
    I still can't get my head around forums... that method of communication is impossible for me. Like, I can't keep track of it. I'll think "Ok, well, now it's time for me to contribute something", and then the next post is like "KITTIES!" And there's these cats, and they're in a basket, and I'm thinking "Well, they have an excellent point..." .
  • Seattle ThreadSeattle Thread Seattle?Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    Makershot wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    Makershot wrote:
    Another thread idea is a chess-by-(e)mail thread, where game sign-ups are held so they don't clutter the rest of the forum with two- or three-line "[GAME ON] - Chess" threads (simliar to the theory behind the Poetry Thread in AC).
    Yeah, I changed "each game gets its own thread" to "each gaming group gets it's own thread." When I was referring to "game," I really meant RPG-style game; things like board games being played over the internet would be assigned to their own thread on a per-game, rather than per-match basis. Can anyone think of a way I can clear up the wording for that any more?
    Maybe a clause taking into account the many expansions/rule sets/campaigns that a lot of RPGs have? Something like "'Gaming Group' refers to a particular rule set or campaign in the case of RPGs. For example, if someone already has a thread devoted to standar 2nd Edition D&D, it's not OK to make another thread for a standard 2nd Edition game, but it is OK to make a thread for a 3rd Edition game, or a 2nd Edition "The Horn of Balthashaznaar" game." Or that too excessive?
    Well, the thing is, I want to express the fact that it would be okay to make a thread for another 2nd Edition game (I fully anticipate there will be multiple 3.5 D&D games running at once), but not okay to have two Chess play-by-email games. Or, at least, that's how I feel.
    Oh, by all means. I misread your intent behind "gaming group," thinking "only one D&D thread evar!" Which, come to think of it, would be totally ridiculous.

    The only other things I can think of would be the ever-important "This is Not a Democracy" clause, all matters are up to mod discretion, and a rule against complaining about jail in public. Other than that, we've got a sound setup, with plenty of room for mod-expandability should the need arise.

    Seattle Thread on
    kofz2amsvqm3.png
  • LitejediLitejedi New York CityRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    Makershot wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    Makershot wrote:
    Another thread idea is a chess-by-(e)mail thread, where game sign-ups are held so they don't clutter the rest of the forum with two- or three-line "[GAME ON] - Chess" threads (simliar to the theory behind the Poetry Thread in AC).
    Yeah, I changed "each game gets its own thread" to "each gaming group gets it's own thread." When I was referring to "game," I really meant RPG-style game; things like board games being played over the internet would be assigned to their own thread on a per-game, rather than per-match basis. Can anyone think of a way I can clear up the wording for that any more?
    Maybe a clause taking into account the many expansions/rule sets/campaigns that a lot of RPGs have? Something like "'Gaming Group' refers to a particular rule set or campaign in the case of RPGs. For example, if someone already has a thread devoted to standar 2nd Edition D&D, it's not OK to make another thread for a standard 2nd Edition game, but it is OK to make a thread for a 3rd Edition game, or a 2nd Edition "The Horn of Balthashaznaar" game." Or that too excessive?
    Well, the thing is, I want to express the fact that it would be okay to make a thread for another 2nd Edition game (I fully anticipate there will be multiple 3.5 D&D games running at once), but not okay to have two Chess play-by-email games. Or, at least, that's how I feel.

    Yeah, you definately shouldn't exclude people from having threads that may be based around the same systems as each other. If, for some awesome reason, there were enough people to support two simultaneous Shadowrun games, one thread shouldn't be locked just because it came later.

    Litejedi on
    3DS FC: 1907-9450-1017
    lj_graaaaahhhhh.gif
  • redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    There's no reason the TTG forum would use non-D&D sig size limitations, right?

    In a wholly tangental topic, I've never understood why we don't have standardized sig rules.

    because A/C does/did not want people to have thier art in sigs at some point.

    G+T are about the same D&D, SE++ has thier own thing, but it is about the same. They are just wacky.



    "each campaign or touniment gets it's own thread. Redundant threads for genral discussion or game lobbies need not apply." But you know... with good spelling and punctuation.

    Like that would allow for a [Game On] e-mail chess and an e-mail chess torunament to run at the same time. The would be sepreate animals. Or a "Magic rule set 1" and "Magic rule set 2" tourny. I think that is what we want.

    redx on
    This machine kills threads.
  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2006
    I have a question, wasn't the very foundation of most muds were based on rules of table top games, so would a discussion on those be ok in this new potential forum?

    I personally would leave that in G&T. The dividing line has to be somewhere, and I supose electronic game vs. non-electronic games is a good enough line as any.

    Just_Bri_Thanks on
    We are the skeletons in our closets.
    We are the monsters under our beds.
  • DrakeDrake Edgelord Trash Below the ecliptic plane.Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    I have a question, wasn't the very foundation of most muds were based on rules of table top games, so would a discussion on those be ok in this new potential forum?

    I personally would leave that in G&T. The dividing line has to be somewhere, and I supose electronic game vs. non-electronic games is a good enough line as any.

    Yeah, as much as I like where you are coming from, I have to agree with Bri. The dividing line really has to be there. A good MUSH will have many great table top elements involved such as strict role play, "dicey" combat mechanics and stats, etc. The fact is though, you are playing over the internet, in front of your PC.

    Drake on
  • OrikaeshigitaeOrikaeshigitae Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2006
    Drake wrote:
    I have a question, wasn't the very foundation of most muds were based on rules of table top games, so would a discussion on those be ok in this new potential forum?

    I personally would leave that in G&T. The dividing line has to be somewhere, and I supose electronic game vs. non-electronic games is a good enough line as any.

    Yeah, as much as I like where you are coming from, I have to agree with Bri. The dividing line really has to be there. A good MUSH will have many great table top elements involved such as strict role play, "dicey" combat mechanics and stats, etc. The fact is though, you are playing over the internet, in front of your PC.
    I wouldn't want to extend that division too far; then it would probably end up being strictly a discussion board, since tools such as JParanoia and OpenRPG are, in fact, playing over the internet on your PC.

    Orikaeshigitae on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2006
    Makershot wrote:
    The only other things I can think of would be the ever-important "This is Not a Democracy" clause, all matters are up to mod discretion, and a rule against complaining about jail in public. Other than that, we've got a sound setup, with plenty of room for mod-expandability should the need arise.
    I successfully saved against the urge to put "this is not a democracy, it's a cheerocracy, and the mods are the cheertators." :P

    If we need to put that in there, we may as well just shut down the forums now. I don't see it in any of the other forums' rules, anyhow. ;-)
    redx wrote:
    "each campaign or touniment gets it's own thread. Redundant threads for genral discussion or game lobbies need not apply." But you know... with good spelling and punctuation.

    Like that would allow for a [Game On] e-mail chess and an e-mail chess torunament to run at the same time. The would be sepreate animals. Or a "Magic rule set 1" and "Magic rule set 2" tourny. I think that is what we want.
    How's that?
    Drake wrote:
    I have a question, wasn't the very foundation of most muds were based on rules of table top games, so would a discussion on those be ok in this new potential forum?
    I personally would leave that in G&T. The dividing line has to be somewhere, and I supose electronic game vs. non-electronic games is a good enough line as any.
    Yeah, as much as I like where you are coming from, I have to agree with Bri. The dividing line really has to be there. A good MUSH will have many great table top elements involved such as strict role play, "dicey" combat mechanics and stats, etc. The fact is though, you are playing over the internet, in front of your PC.
    What, exactly, is the difference between a MUDD/MUSH and a bunch of people playing DnD over IRC? I ask, because I honestly don't know.

    Thanatos on
This discussion has been closed.