PDA

View Full Version : Opinions on rules



Murphy80
2010-05-26, 02:25 PM
In a (PBP)game the DM has 2 rules;
1- I will run the module(WLD) as written.
2- If you don't post by the posting deadline(twice a day), your character goes full defense.

It seems to me that those 2 rules combine about as well as Platemail and move silently. They have already resulted in 1 TPK, and will probably lead to character death after character death. Miss just 1 critical posting and your character is toast. And we all know how REAL LIFE can sneak up and cause delays.
Am I wrong about this?

Brief summary of the TPK
Most characters missed a posting deadline, putting them out of position when the other 2 characters (who did post on time and assumed the rest would also post/follow) walked into a room and were attacked by the hiding monsters (with a CR 3-4 above the parties - but that is another topic). Choosing to try and save their companion, the group stayed and died.

Defiant
2010-05-26, 02:33 PM
Posting deadline is too strict.

Once per day should be a reasonably expected minimum, with once every 2 days as an absolute enforceable minimum.

PbPs that enforce posting deadlines that are unrealistically strict are doomed to fail.

Irreverent Fool
2010-05-26, 04:32 PM
Posting deadline is too strict.

Once per day should be a reasonably expected minimum, with once every 2 days as an absolute enforceable minimum.

PbPs that enforce posting deadlines that are unrealistically strict are doomed to fail.

I disagree. No deadline is too strict if everyone agrees to it beforehand. If you don't agree with such rules, the solution is pretty simple.

I will admit I don't care for the FULL DEFENSE option though. You should be allowed to give the DM a few if-then behaviors that your character will default to if you do not post.

obnoxious
sig

Severus
2010-05-26, 04:37 PM
Don't much like the attitude.

You miss a posting deadline so your character becomes a moron? If you doing more roleplay things, that might work, but in a dungeon crawl, he's just going to keep killing the party.

That doesn't sound like fun to me.

Mastikator
2010-05-26, 04:39 PM
If everyone misses the deadline then there's a bigger problem than there simply being a deadline.

Zeful
2010-05-26, 04:41 PM
In a (PBP)game the DM has 2 rules;
1- I will run the module(WLD) as written.
2- If you don't post by the posting deadline(twice a day), your character goes full defense.

It seems to me that those 2 rules combine about as well as Platemail and move silently. They have already resulted in 1 TPK, and will probably lead to character death after character death. Miss just 1 critical posting and your character is toast. And we all know how REAL LIFE can sneak up and cause delays.
Am I wrong about this?

So? You agreed to the rules, failing to meet them at this point seems to me that you weren't taking them seriously.

Optimystik
2010-05-26, 05:45 PM
PbPs are doomed to fail.

FTFY



I will admit I don't care for the FULL DEFENSE option though. You should be allowed to give the DM a few if-then behaviors that your character will default to if you do not post.

I heartily endorse this product and/or service.

Devils_Advocate
2010-05-26, 06:25 PM
No deadline is too strict if everyone agrees to it beforehand.
The phrase is ambiguous. Too strict to be fair? Perhaps not. Too strict not to get the PCs killed, given the penalty attached? Seems likely.

Irreverent Fool
2010-05-26, 07:16 PM
The phrase is ambiguous. Too strict to be fair? Perhaps not. Too strict not to get the PCs killed, given the penalty attached? Seems likely.

I'm just saying, it's hardly fair to claim it's too strict when one agreed to it in order to get into the game. This sort of argument/fishing for support should have been conducted before agreeing to such conditions.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear on that point.

Defiant
2010-05-26, 09:14 PM
I disagree. No deadline is too strict if everyone agrees to it beforehand. If you don't agree with such rules, the solution is pretty simple.

True, but realistically, twice a day (with significant consequences for straying from that) is rather strict.

Obviously, I myself would not agree to such a deadline. But I also feel that those who would believe that they can and would endeavor to do so would likewise have difficulties meeting it.

Devils_Advocate
2010-05-27, 01:19 AM
A requirement can be so unrealistic that most people who agree to it will predictably fail to meet it. And you can go ahead and blame them all day for this, but that won't change human nature. At this point, it's best for all parties involved to admit that they had some unreasonable expectations.

But I acknowledge that it may be unreasonable to expect most people to do that. :smallamused:

Satyr
2010-05-27, 02:57 AM
I will run the module(WLD) as written.

I actually find this a lot more impractical than the deadline. Adventure modules are good when they are used as an assistance to the GM'ing, but as a replacement they suck. Hard. It is mandatory to adjust any pre-written adventure to the group at hand.

Otherwise, it is not that difficult to come up with a "script" for characters in potential inaction; this requires a little bit of effort, though.

Lev
2010-05-27, 04:52 AM
I think that's fine, if you don't meet the deadline of the posting it is a good sign to show you don't care enough about the plot to mind being in full defense, and if it's your DM's decision not to have the time to wait for players who may or may not be entirely interested then it's his call... if the players aren't actually interested then they might as well be NPCs anyway.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-05-27, 08:27 AM
The DM should have allowed for conditional statements determining automatic courses of action, as mentioned earlier in the thread. I can't really fault him, because all the players agreed to the rules in question, but he really could have handled the situation better.

Quietus
2010-05-27, 09:24 AM
But I acknowledge that it may be unreasonable to expect most people to do that. :smallamused:

I see what you did there. :smalltongue:

Murphy80
2010-05-27, 01:50 PM
To the "You agreed to it so..." crowd;

I have a real life with a job. Normally I could post after I got home from work and then after I got up from sleeping, making both deadlines. In this manner I managed to make 95+% of the deadlines. This time, I posted, went to work and work ran late (through no fault of my own). By the time I got back home and looked at the game, the deadline had past, and with it hope....

I have been involved with near TPK's before, as both a player and DM. This one feels cheap and wrong, caused, not by the players (lets see what this "self destruct" button does), but by the meta-rules and a DM unwilling to use commonsense (about his meta-rules).

Yukitsu
2010-05-27, 02:18 PM
IRL rule at the group I game with. You don't show without a good excuse, you're the tank for the week, no full defense no buffs. You have it pretty easy.

Weezer
2010-05-27, 02:29 PM
You did agree to it ahead of time so you are obligated to follow it and accept the consequences that result from you missing the deadline. That being said twice a day posting is very hard to maintain and is approaching unreasonable. In my experience it is hard enough to get people to post once daily on PBP for an extended period of time, let alone twice daily.

Claudius Maximus
2010-05-27, 02:33 PM
IRL rule at the group I game with. You don't show without a good excuse, you're the tank for the week, no full defense no buffs. You have it pretty easy.

I really have to object to this rule. A PC really ought not to be forced to do something stupid, self-destructive and out of character for metagame reasons.

And what if the player simply can't contact the group to provide an excuse until after the session?

My feelings are similar for the OP. It's true that you're obliged to follow the rules you agreed to, but I really don't think those rules should have been that way in the first place.

Lin Bayaseda
2010-05-27, 02:42 PM
Following the rules = good
Common sense = even better
Brutal and unreasonable punishment for failing to follow the rules = bad

Yukitsu
2010-05-27, 02:46 PM
What, do they not have phones? :smallconfused:

It really starts to come down to it being really hard not to be able to contact people anymore. Even if you are suddenly shot in a back alley, after you've called the ambulance you could still give the DM a ring. It's more or less an "I don't care enough" if they for some reason can't even call to cancel. In the odd and off chance that not only is something important going on, but you also can't get to a phone, I think the DM would handle it differently, but "The game went into overtime" is a bad reason, because you could have still phoned in about it.

(Note, no I don't expect a guy who's been shot to actually call the DM, because frankly at that point, it doesn't really matter all that much.)

Lin Bayaseda
2010-05-27, 02:55 PM
The problem with such draconic rules is they don't actually deter people from not coming. Think about it - when will a player skip a game? When he has something more important (to him) than D&D. Let's emphasize the key part: more important to him than D&D.

Turning his character into a tank, or a moron, or killing him outright, will not make the player show up, because he has something, let's say it all together, more important to him than D&D. It will only make the player more angry the next time he shows up.

Now, there are ways to deal with player absenteeism, which include, but are not limited to:
- making a better game
- gaming less often
- getting more dedicated players
- engaging in an open and sincere dialogue with players

But abusing the character of an absent player isn't one of them. It may be a good way to vent frustration, but it doesn't actually solve any problems.

Murphy80
2010-05-27, 03:05 PM
What, do they not have phones? ...
You do realize we are talking about a PBP game where the players only interact online through the computer?

Weezer
2010-05-27, 03:11 PM
more important to him than D&D.


What are you talking about, D&D is Serious Business .