Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Squeegy]

You're also not in session 83 days of every year. In fact, you don't take breaks at all.

Just drop it.

[Parsely]

So you're just not going to consider any of our feedback at all?

Okay.

[Squeegy]

I considered it and I rejected it. There's a difference. I'm not obligated to agree with you.

[tryrar]

Well, THAT'S an attitude that's going to endear yourself to your players. (Not)

[Squeegy]

Well, first off, Rule Zero. Secondly, I give them plenty of freedom. They can conduct themselves in any manner they like except for those two exceptions. I'm allowed to put my foot down, especially since I refrain from arbitrating otherwise. I have faith that they are more mature than that.

[Orange Wizard]

That's fair enough, but also not really the point.

You have every right to run a game in whatever manner you please. However, the players also have the right to tell you when your decisions as Game Master are not conducive to an enjoyable gameplay experience.
Granted, you don't have any obligation to listen to them, in the same way that your players have no obligation to participate in the first place.

[TCM]

Still, it's kinda silly to assume we're moving in real-time. We're a forum game, we're of course much slower. lIt's like the world is moving at a normal speed, while we're stuck in slow-motion.

This.

I have to concur. The Metagame was one of the main reasons I couldn't keep up with the pace with the disparity between how fast we could post, debate, and vote on policy versus the amount of issues popping up. If these were simply news reports of ongoing events that didn't need to be dealt with immediately, then I would've preferred them to just not appear until they required some urgency so that the players could focus on whatever issues are currently at hand and not be bogged down by a torrent of other information.

The Victory Condition for Rutinde also required a good amount of Metagaming, so when I found out what it was and discussed possible methods to accomplish it with Squeegy, I pretty much capitulated victory from that point. I thought I could continue playing just for fun, but that didn't work out. I won't reveal what the victory condition was, in case someone comes in wanting to play as Rutinde, but take my statement as a forewarning.

As a long time GM, I understand the need to set rules and boundaries Squeegy. But  then there's things like this:

I guar-an-tee you, 100% absolutely no doubt no way no how, that in real life a genocide, a hurricane, and an invasion have all taken place at the same time in different places. How disconnected are you guys from real world politics and news?

Patronizing and being rude is not going to convince players to stay in your game or join it. It's not good especially in a game which you stated required a set number of players to function, which is now suffering from players exiting and pace stagnation. You can claim Rule Zero, but as much as you retain that power, players have the power to leave when the game isn't delivering what they were promised.

[10ebbor10]

Really, quit making such a fuzz about stuff. There is 1 event each day, with rules now adjusted we can handle 6 (or more) events per council at once.

This means we can take 12 days per council. It's only because we decided to handle policy first that we developped a backlog.

[Sheb]

Well, but without handling policy first, we wouldn't be able to deal with those events. I'm willing to try things as they are at the moment though, I think we can take more time and still deal with events with the new rules.

Still, while I don't dispute that you're the GM and you've got the right to set whatever rules you want, it would help if you could explain the logic behind some of your decisions, such as that restrictions that one cannot attend multiple thread at once, which I'll admit don't make any sense to me.

[10ebbor10]

From a gameplay perspective, that is interesting, mainly for me, as through careful selection of which councils I call I can force some people to choose between which councils to attend allowing me to push through stuff I normally couldn't.

[Sheb]

Indeed, it occurred to me too (using the limited Economic Council size to ram sdtuff through the Economic Council for exemple), but is that the reason?

[10ebbor10]

The reason is probably bureaucracy for bureaucracy's sake.

[Sheb]

Well, if it's IG bureaucracy, we can just vote ourself out of that, so I guess it's not. :p

[10ebbor10]

Well, it's in game bureaucracy in the sense that you can't be in the multiple rooms (each thread being a room) at the same time. The United Assembly is powerful, but it can't override reality. Not yet, anyway.

[Parsely]

*is dogpiled* D:

With that authorization, I call for a meeting of the board of first nations, led by myself, as well as a meeting of the economic Council, led by Tirina and a meeting of the Justice council, guided by the Mirian representative.

Oh right he did. It's just that it was a bit far back and not obvious and no one has really been saying anything.

..does anyone else in the First Nations have anything to say?