Rhul wrote: While it seems odd for random monsters to attack the "town", remember what the world is like. The world is quite a bit wilder than during the CARPs timeline. We know how hard it is for people who know how to take care of themselves to deal with the new flora and fauna and enviroment changing catastrophies (like the giant crevasse opening during the Nov event).
You give great examples. However none of the examples are random, they all have motives.
celegar wrote:i made my point about not liking power gamers because every chance that i see them actually power game they put everyone in the dust in terms of power, by hoarding magic items or money and using those things to kill everything that comes their way without leaving anything for other people to do, which makes the game not fun for anyone else but them.
The Brighton event was a major exeption to the usual. Things like that DO NOT happen normally, as Nelkie says, everything has a cost and that is the balance. But hopefully without starting an argument or debate on them, it was a good example of how the theorized "advanced" progression combat rules at the time could be OP and make the game less fun for those who are just starting. Your perspective was the cleanest, because I BELIEVE that was your first event?
General Maximus wrote: But the flaw in this system is if people are not paying the upkeep or the crafting costs. It is an honor system and is very hard to figure who is exactly not following the rules and paying for stuff. For the most part, the PC's do it correctly, but I would lay money down that there are some people who don't pay the proper upkeep for stuff whcih breaks the system. And I personaly take great offense who do this type of stuff to gain some power over their fellow players. It destroys the entire game for everyone. And this is one of the reason I quit FH. The people who followed the rules got screwed. No fault from the GM's. They have enough to do with runnning the game with out baby sitting the players.
Unless you want to name names so they can defend/incriminate themselves, lets just assume that NO ONE IS CHEATING. When you say you would "lay money down" that people are cheating, it creates that "us vs them" mentality that I REALLY hate. It's says "It's ok for me to try to screw certain players over, or cheat to compensate, because even though I can't PROOVE they are cheating, I feel that they must be."
I'm sure this isn't the case, I'm sure that isn't what it means, but it REALLY, REALLY sounds like it and it HURTS THE PLAYERBASE.
Cheaters are going to cheat. Nothing is going to change that except confronting them with the proof and/or kicking them out of the game, which only GMs have the authority to do. I hate to sound defensive about it, but I'm really tired of hearing the shady attacks and hearing people say that it isn't the GM's job to mediate problems like this. You think someone is cheating, you aren't willing to throw out names and examples in public, keep it off the public forums and leave it in private messages to the staff.
Contacting a GM about issues is not called babysitting, it's called "I've tried to educate this person, but they still aren't following the rules. It's time for me to call in the people who have the authority to actually DO something about it instead of starting an inflammatory situation. Also, I may not be privy to all the relevant information, which is probably not my business anyway."
I occasionally disagree, or feel situations weren't resolved to my satisfaction, but I accept that what the the people GMing a game decide is up to them.
This is the kind of talk/attitude that kept ME out of FH most of last year. My absolute #1 issue. I can't think of anything else that even comes in at a close second.
The problem I have with the "Powergaming" argument making things not fun for other people is this: They earned everything they had, as far as the GMs were concerned. People are expressing the things they did and did not like and I think taking people's achievements away would be not fun for them, either.
Let's look at the Corbyn thing:
Do I think it was a great story? You bet. Epic. If I were reading or watching it, I would have been enthralled (As it is, I was amused, but then again, I'm something of a masochist
).
Do I think it was still powergaming? Hell yes. No one one can reasonably argue against that.
Should the GMs have let it happen? I definitely can't make that call from a GM standpoint, but if it IS a player-driven game, then yes. Artificially taking things away from people because you don't like what it does to the game takes away choices and believability. It also takes away player trust.
"Character actions = Character consequences." People decided that because someone was their friend, they wouldn't get lied to, manipulated or otherwise. People made those decisions for themselves.
Is it fair and was their ever any cheating or fudging, no matter how minor? Were some things done cheesy, even though they weren't technically against the rules? Can't answer that one. It's all an issue of perspective.
Do I think it was good for the playerbase as a whole? Probably not from an OOC perspective. I seriously don't know if the game will ever "come back" from it. But where do you draw the line?
In the end, was it fun for anyone except Vince? Somehow, I think very few people would say yes. I think there are still a lot of bad feelings both between players and characters. But that's part of what you have to accept when you make decisions and when you roleplay.
I DO sympathize. Cheating sucks. And guess how I do my part? Instead of just saying I'm sure people are cheating, and instead of accepting that my friends won't "cheat" or that they know all the rules, I ask them lots of questions and if I still don't feel something is right, I tell a GM and let them decide if something is fishy, because hopefully they have the missing pieces, or can decide what to do from there. I don't let the people I play with do whatever they want on general principle, no matter HOW long I've known them. I call them on things they are doing or discussing ALL THE TIME. Ask how much of a pest I am, although I think you already know.
I think people LIKE being able to prove that everything is legit. But if the answer you get from a GM is "Yeah, it's legal," accept that answer. I know some people thrive on details and it KILLS them not to have them all, but some things are not other player's business, no matter HOW impartial they say they are.