Reference The RPF Rules Discussion - Now Discussing: Writing Violence

I see nothing wrong with the current rule. Then again I don't know what happened in the last awards that brought this rule onto the table for discussion.

 

The only problem I have with the current rule is that Best GM and Best Player becomes a case of "who hasn't won it yet?" rather than "who was the best GM/Player in the last three months?"

 

So ... next?

 

Indeed Miss Xan!

Last call for points on Awards...

We're movin' to the NSWRPF Franchise Rule tomorrow...

-I_H

 

Alright, as promised, lets move with this...

I know there has been talk about this peppered about already, but lets talk about it in a more focused manner...

The NSWRPF Franchise Rule

6) Redundancy

Only one RPG per franchise (Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, etc.) is allowed at a time. Any issues or questions in this regard can be directed to the forum Moderator(s). Be aware that our intention is to prevent redundancy and promote creativity, not to limit your imaginations or to prevent fair chance for all members, regardless of registration dates and/or skill and experience.

Similarly, only two RPGs per genré will be accepted. That is, two broadly Fantasy-based games, two Historical based games, etc. Again, please seek the Moderator(s) with any issues you might have.

---

So, at least in my opinion, the rule is founded on good intentions. Especially with the franchise part. Franchises seem narrow enough that more than one game in the franchise compete each other into the dust. I would be fine keeping this rule.

The genre rule, however, seems a bit much. I don't believe that a Narnia RPG, LotR RPG, and a Camelot RPG can't all get along together. And in fact, I would hazard that this rule has not been a hard and fast one now or in the past. I would not be opposed to removing this rule.

Finally, there is a third issue related to all this that should be talked about. The scenario of a new user that got their super-cool yet skeletally acceptable game up for Kingdom Hearts or what-have-ye and runs it terribly, all-the-while denying an older, more experienced user from utilizing the franchise.

Is there any way to get around this? Should there be any way to get around this? Special Moderator permission is one way to go. Or some sort of set-standard that the game must pass by a certain time to keep the franchise...

Or something else entirely?

Now entertaining thoughts!

Aaaaaaaannnndddddd..... go.

-I_H

 

I think special moderator permission is one way to work it. That way, we get to determine things on a case-by-case basis. I don't know if there's a better way to do things, given the variety of RPs out there, and it allows a fair amount of administrative control. The way I imagine it working, anybody could set up an RP for a franchise which doesn't already have a thread. But for an already-represented franchise, the GM would have to send you or Saint a PM. It would then be up to you and/or Saint to determine whether or not to allow the RP. I imagine criteria might be the strength of the game idea (as well as the strength of the currently established franchise RP) and the perceived ability/experience of the GM. I would also consider how different the new game idea is from the existing one.

Let's use Harry Potter as an example. Right now, Harry Potter has been doing pretty poorly, which is a shame. So if a decent GM pitched you a solid RP, it'd probably be pretty acceptable - even if it weren't really any different from the standard academy-based Harry Potter stuff we've been seeing. It's a pretty good setting for an RP, and if we're going to have one Harry Potter RP, it oughta be at Hogwarts. So let's suppose somebody launches this RP (we'll say it takes place in Hogwarts in the years following DH), and it's going pretty well. Somebody else pitches you a new Harry Potter idea, except this one is focused on one of the wars with Voldemort, rather than the Hogwarts focus. If it's a well-put-together game idea, I think it'd be acceptable to allow another Harry Potter RP. It's a sizable franchise, with plenty of support and a fairly extensive world that leaves room for plenty of distinct game ideas.

 

Again, for transparency's sake I'll throw my own view out there again: I don't think a blanket "one RPG per franchise" prohibition is the right way to go anymore, and the "no more than two RPGs per genre" blanket rule should remain, either.

The main reason I'm of that view is because of the (present) barren wasteland that is the NSWRPF. If I remember correctly this rule dated back to the days of the Old Republic. Er, back to the days when NSWRPGs and SWRPGs occupied the same space -- although I haven't done my history research in detail and I could be wrong. Now, I could certainly understand such a rule being in place in that scenario, since the alternative is madness with having to control Harry Pothead RPGs, Lord of the Rings RPGs, and all the Legacy RPGs in one place.

As it is, in a technical sense these rules do apply to the SWRPF as well as NSWRPF. And I can't see myself or Hammer cutting Legacy RPGs down in their tracks - it isn't feasible, and it doesn't encourage new players to stay.

I think both these rules could easily be relaxed back to "moderator discretion" rather than "ironclad rule". If by some miracle the drought in NSWRPF breaks and suddenly we get three Matrix RPGs a week the rule could be revisited, but in their current forms I believe these rules aren't needed.

In particular the "two RPGs per genre" seems to me outdated and probably needs to go in its entirety. The majority of RPGs in the NSWRPF will be either science fiction or fantasy, so how does one work that rule in any event? I certainly haven't been in there with my razor-edged halo killing RPGs for this rule, and the NSWRPF isn't dying except from a lack of RPGs (IMHHO). The rationale for this rule was so the historical RPGs didn't drown among the D&D/LOTR/Camelot/Harry Potter clones, but in its present state I don't see any need for this rule to be there. If someone does come up with a really good off-the-wall RPG that isn't in the scifi/fantasy genre I think they'd be doing better than most of the NSWRPGs out there anyway, and their game would prosper as a result.

As to how we'd enforce these rules and what the policy behind the discretion would be, I'd tend to think along these lines: Unofficial Rule of Two. Generally two RPGs in a given franchise are enough to satisfy players; if they don't like one, they'll go to the other and ultimately the "market" (or the GM's sanity) will decide the issue as to which RPG lives and which dies. If someone came along proposing a third RPG in a franchise, it'd be a matter for mod discretion. If, as Hammurabi suggests, there's plenty of support in the franchise, or a pledged player base before launch, or the GM is an experienced one who wants to try his hand at the genre, then I'd be confident enough to let it run. I think PM requests to start a third RPG will be the exception rather than the rule -- in scenarios where someone plonks down a third RPG I'd probably throw a provisional lock on the thread as I do with malformed new RPGs these days. If I'm convinced of the support, the player base, or the GM's experience, I'd unlock and let it meet its destiny. In short: case-by-case basis, as Hammurabi suggests.

 

I'll repost my opinion on this:

This needs to go. Im sorry to say it but it is harming the NSWRPF. There have been players, and I'm one of them, that have had a great idea for a franchise game but couldnt start it because someone else had already started such a game. So those ideas get put on the back burner and are lost and forgotten.

Limiting games on genre is also stupid. Each franchise can be catagorized under a number of genres. Just two franchises could prevent a third different franchise from being started because of genre. Genre is too broad of a term to use as a basis to limit games.

Limitation, imo, is really what is killing the NSWRPF. It is not allowing for creativity to flow like we get in the SWRPF. We have to get approval for this or for that before we can even start another game thats already been started. Also just because it is Non-Star Wars or a Star Wars forum doesnt mean crossovers with Star Wars/Non-Star Wars should be disallowed without approval. Keep the SWRPF strictly Star Wars and move all crossovers to the NSWRPF. Star Wars only games should be disallowed in the NSWRPF. Crossovers with Star Wars should not be limited to Mod approval, especially if we want to get more people into the NSWRPF.

 

I'm for doing away with both the genre and franchise rules.. In fact I'd say unofficially we basically have already done that. I'm pretty sure were two Batman RPs running at one point, although they've both since died, and the vast majority of games over there can be classified as sci-fi/fantasy.

 

I am going to agree with you guys on this one. The only thing is that, without a limit on the franchises, then there can be too many at one point and people will just tire of it, lose interest, and then they all will die. I think what Saintheart said about two-per franchise will be a good idea. It offers a choice for players, allows more creativity of games for each franchise, and yet, it still offers a bit of a restriction. If there is another example like what Mitth provided about wanting to start a game and there is already two being run at the same time, then simply PM a mod about it.

I also think that the genre rule should be totally abolished. I think that is too limiting, and, as Mitth says, it is hurting the NSWRPF as well as the franchise rule.

 

On one hand, I agree. Going back to the Batman games, when they were starting up I remember looking at both of them and wondering which one to join - I didn't end up joining either, but would definitely not have joined both - so even two games already split the player base. And then once they started going players naturally gravitated to the better of the two, so yeah, there's some attrition.

But. I think players would have gravitated to the better one no matter how many Batman games were going on. I also think what killed both games in the end was their GMs stopped posting, not that they bled players to the other game of the franchise, and that would have been the same no matter how many Batman games there were up.

So IMO, we can do away with the franchise rule entirely. If for some reason we end up being flooded with a dozen crappy Harry Potter (or whatever) RPGs then by all means slap some controls on it, but I don't think that's going to happen.

 

Last call for opinions on the franchise rule topic...

Next time I post here, it will be moving it on to discussions about socks and how many we should allow here per user within games.

-I_H

 

Okiedokie... Sock Time...

This subject is more nitpicky than anything else really. Proooobably shouldn't even be up to discussion, buuuut, why not. Might as well hear what you have to say.

So the rules say,

This just seems kinda old and in need of revision.

So there are two ways of interpreting this, either placing stress on the 1st or 2nd sentence. If its the first, its three socks, no matter what. This I have a problem with, and would like to see it changed to 1. There have been users, even in the three months I've been here, where one name makes a game, and three of that name's socks join the game disguised as normal users. To me, this is sneaky and deceptive towards others, who might be joining because there seems to be alot of folks interested.

However, if we put a stress on the second sentence, this means that the only socks usable in the RPF are game socks, and thats it. While I'd be fine with this, I know there are plenty of folks who have a pseudonym they like to use to get away from it all. So this might be a bit too strict.

Once more, I put this out to the posters. How many socks should RPFers be able to use? Should they be only game socks?

Lets hear what you alls have to say.

-I_H

 

Hm...the sock rule. I don't really see it as much of a problem, especially since it's not too noticeable to the userbase. Though, I do agree with what you said about that example you gave, that is a bit deceitful. So, what can we do about that? I don't really think there is that much that can be done.

I would say 1 sock per user can limit that. But is that too strict? Judging by this poll, I would say that people like creating socks. Something that you could do is have a sort of "Official Sock Registry" thread of sorts where members come in and give a link to the sock they will be using in the games. That way, you can keep track of socks easier and what not, especially if you have to limit them. Though, I do admit, it may not work out that good.

One thing that will have to be allowed though, is the use of game-ban socks, I would think. Say a user uses a sock for an RPG, yet their main accounts gets a game ban and they post with a different sock. I would think that would be no problem.

 

[obi-Wan]From my point of view[/obi-wan] I believe socks are really not that useful in the RPF anyway.

One of the principal reasons I hold that view is because of a phenomenon I've noticed in the forums in my short time here: socks are sometimes used to circumvent the "one RPG per forum" rule. For example, IizL33tJedi is running a Legacy RPG, his sock BadButtSithLordMKay is running a KOTOR RPG, and IizL33tJedi is also running a Yu-Gi-Oh RPG.

That gets my back up because the rule is there (in whatever form we finally decide for it) for very good reasons - to stop spam, and to get home to people that they shouldn't be taking on too many RPGs at a time. Now, I appreciate that we're here to enforce the rules, but I've seen people with a large number of socks and I really don't relish the idea of repelling smurf rushes from the RPF on a daily basis; I've got other duties to attend to.

Game ban socks are less of a problem because the rationale of the ban is usually clearly stated in the sock.

But from my point of view, 1 sock on the RPF is really enough. More than that and my experience is that you either have multiple personality syndrome or you're looking to hype your game or circumvent RPG rules. It's not as though we have a rule of "one user account per character per RPG" in here, after all.

On the "Official Sock Registry" thing - not a bad idea, but this isn't really required from my point of view mostly because the problem isn't quite that endemic, and as Colonel Klink would say on behalf of moderators, "We haff vays of finding your socks."

 

I don't like the idea of an Official Sock Registry. The entire point of using a sock is so nobody knows who you really are in a game (save the mods, naturally) - having to go to a thread and say "Hai guys this is my sock!" would defeat the purpose of having one in the first place.

If people use socks to circumvent the RP authorship rules, then have the rule say "One RPG per forum per person" rather than username instead and ban them. Or I dunno, this might be what you're doing already.

Do the official JC rules still state max 3 socks per person? I was sure they used to but I can't find that stated anywhere now.

 

If they do, I think I'm kinda screwed.

The only big deal I see in terms of socks is using them to make more than one RPG in a forum. Other than that, what's the harm? I don't think it hurts the RPF, so I don't see why something special needs to be done to prevent it.

 

Last call for comments on the sock thing.

Moving on the Mod Involvement in the RPF Awards come tomorrow or Wednesday ish...

-I_H

 

Alright, lets do it then....

Mods and the RPF Awards

So no rule on the book here, but thats what this is about. Should there be some sort of rule about Moderators and their eligibility with the Awards? For the Spring Awards, I just sorta tagged us on to the two highest non-Mods as a party of notice, but not getting a spot for colors or what have you. Should we do that? Or maybe just ban the mods all together? Or give us all the rights of any other normal player? Now that we have two active Mods that are GMs, it's probably good to have something for this on the books for later.

Any opinions on where the Mods fall in the whole awards scheme? Was what what I for the Spring Awards kosher w/ you all?

-I_H

 

I think that, if you guys actively participate in the games within these forums (which is what you guys do), and people vote for you, then you should be allowed to win. That just wouldn't be fair. However, I think the colors should go to the second place person/people. And I think this should go for all mods, not just you guys. I know that some other mods (sey, HanSolo, Pulsar) post around these parts occasionally, so they shouldn't be exempt from this rule either.

 

Oh, so now being a mod just isn't enough. They gotta have their cake and eat it, too. Well, Imperial_Slammer, that is our cake, and I do not intend to let you get your filthy gavel on it!

[image=http://sonoranalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/ThumbsDown.jpg]

 

I can see where you're coming from Reynar, but I just don't see it as being fair to them. I mean, look at this:

When mods join a game, they do so as "normal users", not moderators. And the Awards are to acknowledge exceptional playing by players of these games: ie. normal users. They are players, and they should have a shot as well. When it comes to actually RPing in a game, they are only mods in the sense that they: 1.) Are in the header, 2.) Have longer edit time, 3.) Have colors.

 

Okay, let's look at it this way.

Say the president of the Academy Awards decides to go into acting. And, hear me out, he gives an Oscar worthy performance and gets nominated. Should he win?

No, he's the president of the ******* Academy.

 

I like what you did in the last awards. It seems the fairest, especially (as Nem said) when you consider non-RPF mods who RP.

That the person counting the votes shouldn't also win is perhaps a valid point, so maybe have an awards sock instead of using your main account?

 

Or, you could have someone like me run the awards.

I mean, I don't RP, and I'm not a mod.

And I am the most trustworthy user here.