A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

This is a general open discussion for all ALFA, Neverwinter Nights, and Dungeons & Dragons topics.

Moderator: ALFA Administrators

User avatar
kid
Dungeon Master
Posts: 2675
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:08 am

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by kid »

Not wanting to play a game by a certain set of rules is not childish.
It's a rational adult decision.
I'm amazed I need to explain this.
The fact that you want to force everyone to play by /your/ rules when there's nothing close to a consensus about it (quite the opposite it seems) is childish.

Your reaction to disagreements, so quickly resorting to name calling and attempts to belittle (very cleverly I'm sure you think to yourself) others in order to win an argument is childish.
More than that it also speaks volumes about your ability to operate in as one admin out of five.

As it seems you're going to win this election, but you should consider that whatever it is you are suggesting doesn't seem like something this community wants.

Also: Nepotism is for kin I think, you meant favoritism (unless player was family).
<paazin>: internet relationships are really a great idea
FoamBats4All
Githyanki
Posts: 1289
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 6:00 pm

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by FoamBats4All »

The one sample we have of allowing DMing where you play on ALFA has resulted in that DM cheating.

The guy who is running for DMA on the platform of DMing where you play also cheated while he was HDM.

I like Boom. But, hey, it's hard to argue with a history of favoritism and cheating for one's friends. Would I like to chill with him and play Minecraft? Yes. Would I like to play with his characters in-game? Yes. Would I trust him to react calmly and unbiasedly when his friend dies, when he can turn around in 5 seconds and rezz him? Hell no. I don't know if I trust anyone with that. I don't know if I'd trust myself with that.
Rumple C
Bard
Posts: 3561
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 9:38 pm
Location: The ceiling.

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Rumple C »

This thread. So many posts.

The library. Largely dormant other than a recent danielmn story and an April 1 post from me.

For shame.
12.August.2015: Never forget.
User avatar
Ithildur
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3548
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Best pizza town in the universe
Contact:

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Ithildur »

Two out of three candidates running for DMA have mentioned this issue, and thus far it looks like our next DMA will be one of the two; it merits discussion, even if it's a relatively short one (as the initial poll seems to indicate).

Folks, Boom or whoever wins is not going to be able to simply push things through if a clear majority of admins and members oppose the issue (if he does we have bigger problems). The sky is not going to fall.

I was hopeful that we can discuss things objectively, constructively, and maturely (regardless of the fact I myself am still skeptical about playing where you DM)... I'm a little disappointed.

[edit] I'm frankly more than a little disappointed, and slightly alarmed, at some things I'm seeing.
Formerly: Aglaril Shaelara, Faerun's unlikeliest Bladesinger
Current main: Ky - something

It’s not the critic who counts...The credit belongs to the man who actually is in the arena, who strives violently, who errs and comes up short again and again...who if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement, but who if he fails, fails while daring greatly.-T. Roosevelt
User avatar
Swift
Mook
Posts: 4043
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 12:59 pm
Location: Im somewhere where i dont know where i am
Contact:

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Swift »

danielmn wrote:Speaking of forced will....do you have any comment on the poll that shows 3/4 of alfa are actually against the proposition, Boom?
Considering that playing where you DM has been the main topic of discussion for this DMA election, I would be more interested in hearing from DMs (perhaps in the DM forum) on their real thoughts on the subject, considering that, in the first round of voting, the candidate for got the same amount of votes as both candidates against combined. Sure, there were likely some votes cast for Boom due to his other points and it would be disingenious to simply say that a vote for Boom is a vote for playing where you DM, but the disparity is real and it is there and merits investigation, even if it simply ends up in a brick wall made of nope.

It just seems strange to me that an election virtually run on this topic leads to the candidate for it polling the most votes from the actual voting body while the general poll is slanted so far the other way.

Ithildur wrote:The sky is not going to fall.
Lies. Every major change in ALFA in the last 15 years has made the sky fall :P Its a wonder we have not all been totally crushed considering (in some peoples eyes) we always make the wrong decision ;)
User avatar
Castano
Head Dungeon Master
Posts: 4593
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 5:42 pm
Location: USA

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Castano »

It's not rocket science, the players aren't effected by any restriction and worry about the outcome of lifting it. I suspect they are more likely to vote no if I had to guess. The DMs however, are effected by it, and they make up the bulk of the DMA electorate (if not almost all of it - since most staff and admin are also DMs) so some of them may be voting yes. I can't play on MS for example. If I cared about that I might very well start voting in admins who would let me. (for the record I am still opposed, but don't really care much anymore other than to say admins should consider poll results as one of many factors when deciding things).
On playing together: http://www.giantitp.com/articles/tll307 ... 6efFP.html
Useful resource: http://nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page

On bad governance: "I intend to bring democracy to this nation, and if anybody stands in my way I will crush him and his family."
You're All a Bunch of Damn Hippies
User avatar
Swift
Mook
Posts: 4043
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 12:59 pm
Location: Im somewhere where i dont know where i am
Contact:

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Swift »

Castano wrote:It's not rocket science, the players aren't effected by any restriction and worry about the outcome of lifting it. I suspect they are more likely to vote no if I had to guess. The DMs however, are effected by it, and they make up the bulk of the DMA electorate (if not almost all of it - since most staff and admin are also DMs) so some of them may be voting yes. I can't play on MS for example. If I cared about that I might very well start voting in admins who would let me. (for the record I am still opposed, but don't really care much anymore other than to say admins should consider poll results as one of many factors when deciding things).
And, if that is the genuine truth, that bears looking at, because every DMA ALFA has ever had since the quake has talked about making DMing more attractive and if the voting DMs are saying "This is something that would make DMing more attractive" it should not be dismissed out of hand over what may happen.

Yes, taking something away once it has been given is not easy, but if playing where you DM did bring with it rampant cheating and meta as some suggest it will, I would be the first in line to call for its removal. The playing environment should be kept as free from meta as it can be, but not doing something because we "think" it might be bad is no better. Hell, it is almost entirely the reason 2 PCs took so long, because that was so much fear of what negative effects it may have had (eg watering down the RP due to players focusing less on each character, putting more pressure onto DMs to keep track of people and movement and additional cheating were ones I remember from the many debates over the years).
User avatar
kid
Dungeon Master
Posts: 2675
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:08 am

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by kid »

Every server i've seen Player-DMs, odd things began to happen. Certain characters became crazy powerful, bullish and you had to choose between sucking up or backing away.

Now I know we think ourselves a different breed of players/role players.

But if we are that, the only reason we are, are the restrictions we impose upon ourselves and the higher standard we hold ourselves to. It's not that we are inherently superior to players from other servers.

Once we stop holding ourselves to that higher standard and forsake just about every rule and regulation that made us stand apart from other servers, we'll just end up being a pale version of BGTSCC.

Now that might be alright with some, personally, it ruins the game for me.
<paazin>: internet relationships are really a great idea
Zelknolf
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 6139
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:04 pm

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Zelknolf »

It's not rocket science, the players aren't effected by any restriction and worry about the outcome of lifting it.
A DM who plays where he DMs maintains the power to do everything in all of those DM complaints we've heard over the last 15 years, and abruptly acquires concrete motivation to do so-- and then that DM also has the power to set up "encounters" for their own characters, killing off self-placed spawns for XP and looting self-placed items.

Or, as you saw on MS, using the position as DM to make their PC seem a sensible person to meet in private to handle bookkeeping, and then using that sudden lack of witnesses for CvC.


And of course the reality is that we don't meaningfully punish our DMs for this sort of nonsense, at all. If we did, neither of the current candidates would be members in good standing and this would be a different conversation.
Analogkid
Ogre
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 6:22 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Analogkid »

Zelk, please stop repeating a lie. I've many times explained to all who will listen what happened but you find it useful to continue to lie about what happened. Please stop.
"Cast in his unlikely role....ill equipped to act"
Zelknolf
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 6139
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:04 pm

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Zelknolf »

I'm terribly confused about that server ban you got for it, then.

And the DM discussion about it.

And the server logs of the incident.




But the guy who did the killing denies any wrongdoing, so it's all OK? Are you sure you're not a senator?
Analogkid
Ogre
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 6:22 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Analogkid »

First of all, I did not wish to Dm the greengrass festival and I made that very clear to the various parties involved. I was fully aware of the possible reactions there might be, especially due to the attitudes some like you had of me.

Still with only one day to go or there about and only Castano and cloud volunteering to help run it, I was asked repeatedly to dm it out if a fear that only the two of them were not enough to manage the first greengrass festival. Part of the problem for me was that Drake, my then PC was the one sponsoring the event in effect, so my plans were already in place to act as the sponsor and judge of many events.

Again, after repeated requests I finally said I would "dm" but still play Drake during the event. This way I could help with npcs and loot as needed, while still being IC. Furthermore, it was agreed to that I would only dm during the event. This was agreed to and I furthermore agreed to avoid any cvc between Drake and other pcs during the event. All this was agreed to and the event went on with IC drama and fun and the only slip ups I made pertained to some mistakes in the loot I doled out.

The following day I did get into cvc with another player. It being something Drake had a desire to do for a number of reasons preceding the festival. Yes everything blew up at that point and the death of the other pc was reversed.

My belief is that there was quite a bit of misunderstanding and miscommunication on the part of admin and others that day. It also was nice and easy to blame me alone, given I already had the reputation as a cheating warlock player.
"Cast in his unlikely role....ill equipped to act"
Zelknolf
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 6139
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:04 pm

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Zelknolf »

I do like leaving out the premise under which the characters met for that CvC (it was claimed to be to give out a Greengrass prize-- a prize for the event you ran as a DM-- sayeth that server ban).

But even with the pieces you've said yourself, DMing someone and then CvCing them the next day (even without using the event as leverage to set it up) is going to make people uncomfortable with rules for DMing where you play.
Analogkid
Ogre
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 6:22 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Analogkid »

Zelknolf wrote:I do like leaving out the premise under which the characters met for that CvC (it was claimed to be to give out a Greengrass prize-- a prize for the event you ran as a DM-- sayeth that server ban).

But even with the pieces you've said yourself, DMing someone and then CvCing them the next day (even without using the event as leverage to set it up) is going to make people uncomfortable with rules for DMing where you play.
I already pointed out that drake would have been judging the events either way, and the events that led to the cvc were already set in motion beforehand.

Simply put, the situation I was In got all twisted around because of attitudes held by you and others that insisted on things being black and white and one person getting the blame. Instead the issue likely arose in the original agreement where a dm actually plays their pc while they dm. The one situation I was in was a one off that I was placed in and likely will never happen again with anyone.

Please get off your high horse and don't act like you've never been in or gotten into complicated situations
"Cast in his unlikely role....ill equipped to act"
User avatar
Audark
Owlbear
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:27 am
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Re: A Brief Reminder on the Contents of the Charter

Post by Audark »

Setting aside specific cases here, and acknowledging I have been gone for about two years.

I simply could not play with the character of someone who DMed me regularly. If I started to come into conflict with that character, even if it were just arguments and not the risk of violence, I would feel intensely uncomfortable trusting that individual to be unbiased in DMing me in the future.

Anything could be that extra nudge that makes the DM a little more unforgiving and a little more deadly in how the game plays out. Alternately that DM may grow to love my character through interactions as PCs and then be far too easy on me or generous in loot drops. I never want to ever have to even consider in my mind that something I have said IC to another character may colour my interactions with that DM. I just don't want that circumstance to even be a possibility.

To me, and I accept that others will disagree, playing where you DM just throws out any lingering appearance of DMs being impartial and fair and would make players second guess every interaction. I think that the appearance of impartiality matters even if it is only that.
Post Reply