Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I have to say, Trebuchet hit the nail on the head. This is a pure Troll thread. You want responses from players who've made it through the audit process? Okay, here you go.

 

I enjoy the audit system. I find it helps a lot, and sets my mind at ease knowing that there isn't a uber-munchkin out there that creates a character that totally over-shadows my own. The house rules aren't that far off from what Hero Designer kicks out, with only a few modifications really.

 

What the original poster gave as his/her/it's experiences was, as far as I can determine, NOT the average experience. Either he/she/it's a munchkin that tried to submit a character idea that's way beyond the pale, or is totally over-blowing what really happened.

 

If your character concept can't stand a little tweaking to fit in with the multitude of other players and characters, then perhaps it's best you do quietly go away. However, it seems to me that this post is not 'quietly' going away. Rather it's a temper tantrum of the worst sort.

 

And just in case anyone asks, I've had two pre-reboot characters, one modified post-reboot and one brand new post-reboot character and am Co-GM for the Legacy campaign.

 

I think this is a little harsh. I love the world, love the people, and think the house rules are amazingly well thought out... and I've come close to quitting in anger and frustration multiple times.

 

It ain't love if it doesn't hurt.

 

Seriously, it's _because_ it's so good that it's annoying.

 

Audit has been incredibly painful for me... I tend towards power pools (Wraith, Bedouin) (because I like the _potential_ flexibility; it's about what my guy COULD do, not what he does do that I like... I'm kinda weird, I think), which either get turned into multipowers (which, when I was submitting, was the one aspect of the game I felt the GG house rules nerfed to the point of causing me pain to use) or disappeared entirely (for some reason I never got email from them, so I don't know exactly what happened... I picked the character back up after he'd fallen into 'common usage') (Robot, mk 1 - pre Reboot).

 

I didn't like that. Neither did I like having entire limitations dismissed/removed, and I really didn't like having a perk cut off a character sheet to get me to shut up and stop arguing about the audit (I was over points once the limitations I'd designed with went bye bye)... and I'm not that happy at how long I've been waiting for one of my PC's to clear audit... (Robot, mk II)

 

..but I love the actual games. Heck, I'm even in Jack's game (although being dropped into the middle of scene wasn't easy to handle, and my PC is feeling truly poorly designed...), and it is way cool to watch, and I think he's a great GM. Heck, I'm a GM there. (Defenders of New Zealand)

 

But yeah. I understand the frustration the original poster posted. Audit causes migraines for a certain class of people... and we're not munchkins. Munchkins are going for _power_, however they can get it. I just have rather strong opinions on how my characters should work.

 

However, that said, once removed from the 'heat of the moment'... I tend to get where Jack and everyone else is coming from, and I agree with how they do it. It's the best way to handle things, it really is; I've been in other PBeMs, and there are worse things than the audit process.

 

My 5 cents (I'm a Kiwi... we don't have anything smaller. )

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

but I love the actual games. Heck, I'm even in Jack's game (although being dropped into the middle of scene wasn't easy to handle, and my PC is feeling truly poorly designed...), and it is way cool to watch, and I think he's a great GM. Heck, I'm a GM there. (Defenders of New Zealand)

 

What would you like to change about Bedouin that you currently think is ill-designed?

[LorrdWolf]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

LONG POST

 

First, I've been in the Global Guardians Universe (GGU) for several years and consider Jack and Rebecca Butler close friends, despite having met them in person only once. I also volunteer my time to the GGU. Now, a point by point reply follows:

 

"After fooling with these people for about 9 months, neither of the two campaigns that I had been accepted into have actually started. Months, literally MONTHS of character audits, lots of house rules that change how most of us design characters and play Champions, and a Master of Ceremonies with a very irritable nature have finally convinced me that I should quietly back away and pretend I don't know about them."

 

Yes, players sometimes wait months to get into a game and months more to actually start playing. Is this irritating and disheartening? I think so. Is it necessary? No, I don't think so, at least not the waiting months after being accepted. In the original incarnation of the GGU, once you and your character were accepted into a game and the GM was ready to start the game began. This meant that sometimes a character who had already been in play for a while might be changed when it was later audited (which did cause some grumbling), but I think that is both understandable and better than waiting months to play.

 

However, I can understand why the GGU is run this way, since some people just don't like to change a character that's been played for weeks or months. Would I do it that way? No. Do I understand it? Yes.

 

As for House Rules which change the way most of us design/play Champions, well, I just don't see it. Some of it is different, neither good nor bad, just different. But I think your comment is far too strong.

 

"How it works: you see what campaigns have openings, submit a character history and write-up (specifics vary), see if you're chosen, and then sit and wait. Eventually they get around to auditing your character, at which point they remove your favorite powers, charge you extra for others due to 'house rules', inform you that you have a different hair color or birthday or DNPC or something, and then remind you to shave off the 38 points they tacked on due to decreasing your OAF to an OIF or something."

 

Again, I think you speak too strongly. Yes, the auditors will tell you what they think is wrong with your character and why. Yes, this sometimes means that your vision of the character might need altering in order to mesh with the rest of the GGU. Yes, your concept of the character is paramount and superior to everyone else's. However, the auditors strive for game balance and continuity. They will, and should remove any power or power-construct which is abusive. They also have directions to enforce a certain amount of diversity. However, and I'm sorry to doubt your veracity here, but I do doubt that you were told to change your characters' hair color or any other personal information with the possible exception of city of origin (and that's only recently). As for telling you to remove 38 points which they "tacked on" due to altering your OAF to and OIF (which type of thing has happened to me and, I will admit, is annoying), well, isn't it possible that they were correct and the item in question really is properly an OIF?

 

Also, despite his strong opinions and forceful nature, Worldmaker is quite reasonable. I and others have, with sound logic and reasoning, convinced him that our idea/position/rule interpretation/etc was correct and had the item in question changed back.

 

In this or any other gaming system, the GM can and should keep a close eye on character construction to ensure that game parity is maintained and abuse minimized. I find it hard to believe that your prior GMs, if they were any good, did not do this.

 

"It's possible that once you get into an active game, it's fun outweighs all the inconveniences. I wouldn't know. Apparently there's a year-long waiting period before you find out. Doesn't SAY there is one...."

 

The sarcasm here needs no response and will get nothing further from me except to say that it tends to decrease the effectiveness of your argument. That's just a general result of sarcasm.

 

"Also, if you are new and accidentally violate some obscure board rule or guideline, you will be publicly humiliated by the boss. Thank goodness it wasn't me; I just watched it happen time after time to others. Wanna see some astonishing flames? Tune in."

 

Worldmaker rarely, very rarely, humiliates anyone. When he must use a particular person as an example of what not to do, he almost always deletes any reference to that person meaning the person in question cannot be identified from the information given, except perhaps by that person. If that person then chooses to identify himself, then oh well. Anyone who has read the GGU lists will know this to be true. Worldmaker is a strong personality but not mean.

 

"That being said, they have some fantastic databases of unusual character limitations and psychological disadvantages of great use for players and GMs. Many are things I hadn't heard of or thought of in 20 years of playing Champions, and was just plain tickled about."

 

Absolutely and I, for one, am glad that you found something here which you can enjoy and use.

 

"I just felt that a review was in order, since HERO lists them as a link. Do with it what you will… I'd be very interested in input from GG players who have survived all of this, but not from the Uber-GM. I've heard enough from him."

 

I have survived it and many another thing in the GGU and, personally, feel that the time is worth the effort. That will not hold true for others. Also, some people are not interested for whatever reason in subjecting themselves to the rigoress needs of a large PBEM world. However, such a world has such needs in order to maintain continuity, character parity, and the overall world vision which must, necessarily, belong to the progenitor(s) of that world.

 

If you are one who cannot do so, if you are one who cannot surrender some of your vision to participate in a large and populous PBEM world, the GGU is probably not for you. There is nothing wrong with that, nothing is for everyone, and there will be no hard feelings for those who try it out and decide it is not for them. Many have done so.

 

Jason Bennett

[LorrdWolf]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Nice reply Celtic Cowboy. As someone else said, fair and balanced.

[AngryBug]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I've never P'd BEM before, but having thus far failed to find a Champs game here in Edmonton, I've been seriously thinking about it. As such, I've been eyeing the GGU, so I think a thread to review and discuss it is a great idea.

Capt. Aardvark, you're quite clear about your frustration with the review/audit process, and I really appreciate both the review and your starting this thread.

However, on the GGU site and in his postings here, WM's House Rules seem well explained and certainly not arbitrary. Even ones I might personally disagree with (and, from what I can see, the Reboot removed/changed a lot of those) make sense from a POV of creating and maintaining a consistent universe for multiple (to put it mildly) characters.

WM has posted audit examples on this thread and on others, and, frankly, they seem pretty reasonable. So, Captain, as someone who hasn't gone through the process but is considering it, I'm very interested in why it was so difficult for you.

Would you post the character(s) you submitted, and the changes the Auditors called for? If it really was that difficult and unreasonable, I'd like to see for myself your original submission... Thanks.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

So, your review is of waiting to get into a game, and not actually playing one, right? Do you have an example of what powers were cut that you thought were acceptable?

 

Note: GM, GG Majestic

 

Eh?

 

YOU?

 

My world was just turned topsy turvy...

 

I can provide an example of (IMO) reasonable powers that were disallowed: (actually, several)

-Power Pool: Ghost Control

-EGO 23

-"Invisibility", bought to try and be a non-Attack Action version of Darkness

(specifically, the limiter 'Does not conceal location' or something like that - to indicate it's obvious he's there, but not terribly hittable)

 

I can see where they were coming from... but it was still annoying (not least because each time I plugged a hole, I opened a new one... (blush))

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

What would you like to change about Bedouin that you currently think is ill-designed?

 

Well, I'd like to feel like I had something I could _do_ in the current situation... meh. Price I paid for creating a weaponmaster.

 

I don't know, I'm just annoyed 'cause I feel stupid. He should have some kind of applicable non-combat 'stuff' - heck, he probably does.

 

I get this way a lot.

[Fireg0lem]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Eh?

 

YOU?

 

My world was just turned topsy turvy...

 

 

Heck, check out the player gallery. He's...human. He even looks respectable.

[Mightybec]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Eh?

 

YOU?

 

My world was just turned topsy turvy...

 

 

:vader breathing: Yes WhammeWhamme... :vader breathing: I am your GM...

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Heck' date=' check out the player gallery. He's...human. He even looks respectable.[/quote']

 

Hey, it's just... weird, y'know?

 

As he put it, it was definately a 'Luke, I am your father' moment. Just something totally unexpected.

 

If anyone cares, he makes a good GM, and a bizarre hero boards poster.

[sinanju]

Re: Global Guardians: My Audit Experience

 

Okay, here's the complete audit of the character I'll be playing in the Z Optima campaign (soon, I hope). As emailed to me by Worldmaker, which my comments added.

 

Total Cost: 365

Disads Total: 325

 

The player needs to cut 15 points from the character, while simultaneously

adding 25 points of disadvantages. This will balance the character at

350/350 and end the audit. Le Fantome will be on the website shortly.

 

 

The following issues were discovered:

 

Given the nature of the character, the limitation "Not While Desolidified"

is worth -1/2, rather than -1/4. This change does not affect any of the

slot costs in the Multipower. It does, however, reduce the cost of the

"Grappling With a Ghost II" and "Grappling With a Ghost III" powers from 9

points apiece to 7 points apiece.

 

I deliberately chose the lesser of two possible limitation values for just this reason--I'd rather spend more points than necessary than fewer, and get them back after the audit.

 

As per the House rules regarding the Linked limitation, the "Grappling With a Ghost II" power is illegally constructed. In addition, it is illegally constructed by the rules regarding multiple powers in a single Framework slot. The powers have thus been separated and removed from the Framework.

 

Well, darn. He's right. I missed that. I can't legally link those two powers. I'd rather have been given the option to revise the MP slot somehow, rather than have them simply moved out of the MP entirely, but that wasn't an option. Or rather, maybe if I'd suggested it, but as Worldmaker can be touchy sometimes and I frankly didn't care that much, I left it alone.

 

The "Self Only" limitation has been added to the "Gaseous Reassembly" power, as this properly reflects the description of this power given in the background.

 

Another error on my part. I'd intended to include that but didn't.

 

Given that this character's native language is English, and given the

presence of the Linguist skill enhancer, Language Skill: Arabic - Fluent

Conversation costs 2 points rather than 1.

 

Given that this character's native language is English, and given the

presence of the Linguist skill enhancer, Language Skill: Bantu - Fluent

Conversation costs 2 points rather than 1.

 

Given that this character's native language is English, and given the

presence of the Linguist skill enhancer, Language Skill: French - Fluent

With Accent costs 1 points rather than 2.

 

Given that this character's native language is English, and given the

presence of the Linguist skill enhancer, Language Skill: Setswana - Fluent

With Accent costs 2 points rather than 1.

 

Given that this character's native language is English, and given the

presence of the Linguist skill enhancer, Language Skill: Swahili - Fluent

With Accent costs 2 points rather than 1.

 

I didn't know the optional rule making languages outside the character's native "box" cost more was in use. I don't recall seeing it written anywhere on the website, but I might have missed it.

 

Science Skill: Anthropology 12 or less costs 3 points, rather than 1.

 

The Z Optima package costs 10 points rather than 9.

 

Reputation: Avenging Spectre 11 or less, +/- 2d6 has a cost of 2 points,

rather than 4.

 

Minor Talent: Knows Someone in Every Town, City, and Village has been

disallowed, since its not all that minor a talent (and is in fact a rather

large one). The character should instead take Contacts to reflect this ability.

 

The GM of the campaign and I had discussed this in email, and agreed that just because I knew someone in every town didn't mean I'd know anyone _helpful_. It was just color for a well-traveled, outgoing character. So I figured this was okay. Apparently not, but since it _was_ just color, having it disallowed wasn't a big deal.

 

Dependent NPC: Innocent Bystander of the Week has been disallowed because the character must have some connection to the DNPC that would allow the DNPC to be a burden on the character. A random person on the street who just happens to be in danger does not qualify.

 

I was a little disappointed that this didn't pass, but not surprised. It was an attempt at creating a disad that replicated the tendency of characters like Modesty Blaise to find people in need of rescuing wherever they go.

 

Dependent NPC: Girlfriend of the Week is worth 10 points, rather than 5.

 

Le Fantome does not qualify for the "Easy to Find" adder. Thus, Mystery

Hunted 8 or less (Hunter is as Powerful, Harshly Punish) is worth 10 points

rather than 15.

 

Please submit a writeup for "Physical Limitation: Trouble Magnet" for

inclusion in the Master Lists of Limitations.

 

On the other hand, I wrote up "Trouble Magnet" to be the pulp-style disadvantage I described above and the disad was accepted, so I got what I wanted in the end, and so did the auditors.

 

"Reputation: Interfering Do-Gooder to Be Eliminated Pre-emptively" has been disallowed because this would fall under the "Duh, he's a hero" doctrine.

 

Again, disappointed but not surprised. It just seemed so pulp-like.

 

Vulnerability: 2 x Stun from Fire is worth 20 points, rather than 10.

 

Another math error on my part.

 

In the end I added two disadvantages to the character and dropped two HTH Combat Skill Levels and 1 3-maneuver combat skill level and a background skill to balance the character out. Moving the two powers out of the MP and making them stand-alone powers cost 14 points that had to be squeezed out somewhere else. It hurt to lose those combat skill levels, but that was the least painful way to do it. Because, frankly, if my prior experience in the pre-reboot Anchorage Embassy campaign is anything to go by, combat is gonna be the least of my activities.

 

So, overall impressions?

 

It was a little over two months from the time this character was initially accepted for a campaign until it was audited, and the campaign still hasn't started yet. It should be soon, though. I spent a lot of time creating characters and submitting them for other campaigns without getting chosen by the GMs, which was frustrating. But when I finally get to play these (two) characters, I think it'll be fun.

 

I'm also playing in a non-GGU Champions game. Joining that one was MUCH faster. Several turns a week, so far. It has it's own difficulties, though. Background info is much less voluminous, for one thing. Some of the participants write...oddly (bad spelling and erratic punctuation, which can make posts hard to decipher sometimes). Still, we're playing, which is what it's all about.

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I am really, really new to the GGU. I wanted to play in several games (closed or not open for submission...YET!), and have been feeling my way around. I am the proposed GM of the a new game because of the sense of community that the GGU has to offer. It is like getting to be apart of DC or Marvel, or a Living City Game.

 

Do I expect some headaches? Yeah. Both as a Player and a GM I expect there to be some hurdles. In the PC department, I am a reforming powergamer and I only really like *playing* characters *I* build. But the Audit process is going to ensure that what ever power level and structure the final PC ends up being will be legal for *all* of the GGU. As a GM, I worry about the cohesiveness of the GGU. I want to design adventures that will challenge the Players and add to the atmosphere of the GGU...It is like being a writer for Star Trek or Star Wars: I have a responsibility to the others that play in the game. It is a restriction that I believe will *bolster* my creativity rather than hinder it.

 

The only problem that I find as true in the opening statement was about the length of the Audit process. Does the GGU need more auditors? Are there written rules of the Audit process? If so a checklist would be wonderful as a GM and Player tool. Yes there is FReD and the Houserules page, but the implication is that other requirements exist as well. Having those available on the site would make the process more transperent to the players.

 

The amount of information you put into the character submission *before* you go to audit is likely to help. I plan on submitting a line by line explaination of any power, talent, perk, or characteristic so that the auditor *knows* why I did something. Communication is important...WM says so on the GGU homepage. It is the Player's responsibility to communicate as much as he can so that the process can flow smoothly.

 

Hawksmoor

[synergy]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Lots has been said on this topic, so I'll just summarize my thoughts.

 

Good things about GGU: lots of players, lots of diverse campaign, large database that makes it feel like a complete world; there is also a sense of logical consistency to the world (well, as much as can be had in a superhero world)

 

Bad things about GGU: waiting

 

Perhaps the waiting is tedious, but the audit process is understandably needed to ensure fairness. Also, the entire thing is volunteer driven, so everybody is doing this on their free time. I'm sure that if there were as many volunteers as there are players, things would move along much faster. There are a lot of things to do while you are waiting, in any case: set up your own campaign, write NPCs, audit characters...

 

In case anyone wants to know my perspective, I've been in GGU since last August, but did not start playing until February. I now have two characters in active campaigns and one in a campaign that has not started active play. I have a campaign that has not started play, yet, and fill dead time writing NPCs. I was a relative novice at the Hero system when I first joined GGU, but the other players (including Worldmaster) have all helped me to the point where I feel fairly competent.

[ScottoStanek]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

The GGU has been a bumpy ride for me, but never a boring one. I happened on the scene right around y2k and submitted a character that was rejected for having trod rampant all over one of those fine print house rules. I even got one of those _rare_ (I've seen a lot of posts, but I'll leave it to others to dredge the old yahoo groups or the current lists for statistics) public rants as a result of my error. It didn't mention a name and I later found out the rant wasn't even a true result of my submission. I had seen a cool sci-fi offering and had tried to make a character cut from the same cloth. As had a dozen others at exactly the same time!

 

The thing to understand is that the GGU is supposed to be world wide, that is there should be some variety. But every time a new movie (Spider-Man, Daredevil, Hulk) comes out there are a dozen submissions for _that_ character. Surprise! Uniqueness gets lost. I think that part of the reason that WM and WoWM were losing interest was that the trend was for each embassy --as similar as they were to each other-- to have the same set of characters with little differences between them. The world was sooo homogenous after time that it was getting boring to do anything but character byplay.

 

The reboot caught a lot of us off-guard, because we (or at least I) didn't see the bigger picture forming. Post reboot hasn't started off real fast because it takes a lot of effort to get something this big moving again. A lot of us had to get out and push. One of the ways to do so is to help in auditing.

 

I have participated in the audit process. I was even one of those people that changed a character's age. The character had taken the doctor package and written about years worth of research, but their birthdate showed them to be only around sixteen. I changed the year and sent it back, along with other nits, because the text description didn't give any reason to assume a 'Dougie Howser' young character in the campaign. I audited others and got some of the wierder concepts sent my way.

 

Lately I have been doing more in the NPC creation arm. I can say that submitting an NPC based on what WM described is no less taxing than creating a regular PC, in fact they must fit the world even closer than a character does. (But they often _do_ get more points to play with, which makes it less a shoehorn process.) And some of these have turned up on the website very different from the original NPC submission. So be it. La.

 

I have one character in play, heck my GM poked his nose in on the thread already --Banshee from GG Majestic. (Would that make her Leia? ) She sailed through audit in my mind at least, and she feels to me to be kind of on the bleeding edge of what could be allowed without campaign ruination. (Speedster + Desolid + invisible) While she is a rework of my prereboot character Spriggan, her history fits the new campaign. And even though WM is a bit touchy lately about cross-gender playing I think she comes across well enough --or I wouldn't play her.

 

Two characters of mine are awaiting audit, Zand in New Zealand and Mariner in Force Pacific. Both are reworks of pre-reboot chars and seem like they gain from the chance to redress problems in the character construct. You think you've had problems with a character, well Zand has been reworked due to House Rule changes so often that I have to sort by datestamp on all the character sheet versions of his --let alone the sheets made to submit to the various post-reboot games I tried to get him into before he was accepted. But the core feeling is there, so the fun is there to play him.

 

I've GM'd in the GGU before --in the Big Easy-- and it is very hard to step into shoes as large as WM who had let it go because of the breadth of work keeping the GGU at large going. I also let it go, and bless the new face who took it for doing so. I will wait this time to get all 3 of the games I am playing in going and settled before I attempt to GM again --it really is sooo different from a face-2-face game that I need more time to get past the rules and into the play.

 

Sorry about wandering all over here, but there is no way to quickly put into one paragraph the amount of work I put into GGU. Then multiply that by a factor of 100 and you may get the work put in by someone more active. Multiply by 20 more and then you may approximate WM. I mentioned before that it takes a lot to get this thing moving, and it is still just moving along. Hopping on board a stalled car being pushed along then complaining about the speed of it is a little childish. Stick around, put some effort into it, the return far outweighs the work. Lurk on a few lists to get an idea about how game play goes. Actually _look_ at audited characters to see what will --ahem-- fly and what won't.

 

And realize one thing, if it isn't in the description of the character somewhere, it probably doesn't belong on the character sheet.

 

Scotto the Unwise

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Well, I'd like to feel like I had something I could _do_ in the current situation... meh. Price I paid for creating a weaponmaster.

 

I don't know, I'm just annoyed 'cause I feel stupid. He should have some kind of applicable non-combat 'stuff' - heck, he probably does.

 

I get this way a lot.

 

If you want to re-engineer him slightly, feel free to do so. My players may always send in tweaks to their character in order to get them just as you like.

[Vanguard00]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Jack Butler can come across as a bit abrasive at times, but eveyone gets cranky sometimes. He does have a allot of work to do. And if he does go genuninely over the top he's big enough to apolgoize about it which is more than I can say about allot of people online.

 

Worldmaker rarely, very rarely, humiliates anyone.

 

 

It’s not as rare as you make it out to be, Jason, and he doesn’t apologize every time, nexus. To say that either of these statements is absolutely true is incorrect. He goes over the top more often than he should, he does send scathing public emails on occasion—they’re not common, but they’re not “very rareâ€, either—and he doesn’t always apologize when he’s wrong.

 

Sometimes it gets so bad that there’s a public exchange between long-time players/GM/contributers and Jack that results in people leaving and the GGU world being rebooted. I know it’s happened at least once. I was called names, I had words put in my mouth (figuratively, of course, being an email forum), and I never received an apology. It wasn’t the first time, either. It was merely the biggest, and the last. And to say the two incidents were unrelated would also be incorrect. It wasn’t the sole cause, of course, but it contributed. And at the time it was theorized by me that if something didn’t change, that if Jack didn’t loosen up and lighten up a little bit the GGU was gonna tank. I’m glad to see he did a bit of both, but I think he could do a bit of both even more.

 

*Sidebar: By “loosen up†I meant that Jack should entrust certain responsibilities to those he had placed in charge without trying to be involved in every little thing. I think he just did too much and needed to delegate more. I think he’s done that. By “lighten up†I mean that it seemed like the GGU wasn’t fun for him anymore, and I’ve always maintained that it should be fun for all involved, especially for the guy running the whole show. I think he’s having more fun now, which I’m glad to hear. These terms were not meant in a negative connotation and should not be construed as such.*

 

Nine months later I came back to the “new and improved†GGU to play in Thrak’s game, and only for that reason. I don’t participate in Chat, I don’t play any other games, I won’t get into the BS that was prevalent before, and so far I’ve been much happier. I just wanted to play that particular game with that particular GM, and when he invited me, I accepted. I was hesitant due to the circumstances behind my leaving GGU, but was informed that Jack “wasn’t sure why I left, but had no problems with my returnâ€. Okay. I’m cool with that. Whatever lets me play in Thrak’s game.

 

I have not, however, ever—ever—attacked his style of GMing, his style of overseeing the campaign world, or the rules he puts into place. As rigid or as loose as they seem to others, I have always seen consistency and fairness in his rules and campaign structure. If CA’s main problem is that process, I’m gonna have to disagree with him. But he also mentioned public humiliation, and with that I agree. Jack does go over the top on occasion, and he doesn’t always apologize. To say otherwise is a falsehood.

 

Lastly, since this is the underlying question CA posed, do I think Jack’s GGU Campaign World should have a link in the Hero Games site? Heck yeah! Disagree with him all you want, but he’s pulled together some of the coolest ideas in Champions world. Whether his ideas, ideas inspired by other or contributed by others, the GGU campaign world is a cool place to read about. And because of that arduous auditing process the characters are some of the coolest on the web. I never understood why people felt the need to bash the way he runs his campaign world. It’s his world, he can run it how he sees fit. I took exception to personal attacks only, never to world- or rule-related issues.

 

I think CA is mostly off-base with his remarks, but Jack isn’t perfect, the GGU isn’t perfect, and it’s not for everyone. It is, however, pretty darn cool whether you’re involved in it or not.

[Tallow]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I first got involved with Global Guardians back in May 2003 (pre-reboot.) A friend of mine played in the GGU quite extensively and a mutual PBEM player was opening up a new game. She played with me in my friends non-GGU PBEM and invited all the other players from that game to submit to her new game within the GGU. I was not accepted into her game.

 

Then I tried to get a new character audited and put into the "I'm gonna wait for a GM to choose me" que. Well the character sat in audit for 3 months and was kicked back twice for, at the time, what I thought were stupid reasons. I was disillusioned, upset, and frustrated.

 

I expressed as much publicly on the GGU chat list. I got some support, some chastisement, and even response from the World Maker. In the end, I decided to take over an embassy that had lost its GM 3 times.

 

Then the reboot happened. I helped come up with some of the ideas (along with several other players) for the reboot. I felt like I was an integral part in the world. I rewrote the embassy campaign to fit into the new world (it is completely and utterly different now... just the place is the same, sorta.) I also have been accepted into 3 campaigns with new characters.

 

I have yet to GM or play a second in the GGU. But I stick it out because I believe it will be worth it. Yeah, the audit process could be a bit more streamlined...

 

But when I got the characters for my campaign. I decided to do a pre-audit, to make things easier for the auditors. I think it helped some, but there were still things I missed. It took me about 6 hours for 8 characters. That isn't bad. But like I said, there were things I missed. Auditors aren't supposed to miss anything.

 

Not to mention there are like 30 campaigns, with an average of 5 or 6 players each. I also think that there are like only 4 auditors (World Maker, Chief Auditor, and maybe two underlings). That's ALOT of characters to audit.

 

And when I did the pre-audit... I had players send me characters that strictly broke the easy to follow formatting rules. I kicked their character back and told them to follow the formatting rules. So when I look back on my frustration with my first character, I realize it wasn't as big a deal as I made it out to be at first.

 

Yeah, the audit process COULD be more streamlined... IF more people qualified actually decided to help audit the characters.

 

I'm satisfied with things.

 

On another note: World Maker decided to make some wholesale changes to an NPC team I had been working on. This team was HUGELY tied into the campaign I wrote up, had been approved, and player characters I'd sent to audit. I was hot. Very angry. World Maker was willing to call me on the phone to resolve the issue. We resolved the issue calmly, and equitably. I got some of my way, he got some of his way, and everything is actually exactly like we both wanted it. We just didn't realize we were speaking the same language.

 

So World Maker can be a very generous and fair person. As someone who can get irate and go off on unsuspecting consumers sometimes, I totally understand where he is coming from, and can't really fault him for venting.

 

 

GM Z-Optima and Player in Ascension, Knights of Malta, and Benifactor

[LorrdWolf]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

It’s not as rare as you make it out to be' date=' Jason, and he doesn’t apologize every time, nexus. To say that either of these statements is absolutely true is incorrect. He goes over the top more often than he should, he does send scathing public emails on occasion—they’re not common, but they’re not “very rareâ€, either—and he doesn’t always apologize when he’s wrong.[/quote']

 

To simply say that Jack rants is correct. To say that every time he does it he singles out and identifies a particular person is not. My point, and the only one I was making, is that while he often "rants", meaning has something pointed to say about something that is or has been done in GGU, he rarely identifies the person. Without that identification, humilation is a null point since if no one knows you've been humiliated (which the person in question must accept but that's another argument), have you really been?

 

Jason

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Sometimes it gets so bad that there’s a public exchange between long-time players/GM/contributers and Jack that results in people leaving and the GGU world being rebooted. I know it’s happened at least once. I was called names' date=' I had words put in my mouth (figuratively, of course, being an email forum), and I never received an apology.[/quote']

 

I do not recall anyone calling you anything when you left. In fact, I do not recall any problems or arguments whatsoever involving you in any way, shape, or form. You posted a rambling, message regarding "attitudes" that didn't seem to have any sort of relevance to anything and disappeared.

 

From our end, it simply appeared as if you stomped off in a huff, reason unknown. Since you were a friend (or rather, since I thought you were a friend...), I figured you knew what you were doing and would either be back on your own or wouldn't. Either way, the door was open for you.

[JSenecal]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Here's another review of the process of getting into a game:

 

It does take a lot of work to get into a game. To start with you need to write a fully developed character background for the game you're interested in. Games are open for about a week to give you time to do this (though you can start early). Then the next game opens. It's rare for this kind of detail to be required for a face to face game, but it does make for a better game.

 

Then you cross your fingers and hope to be selected. Often there will be twice as many entries as openings (or even more). A single opening in an existing game might result in 8 submissions (and a lot of competition). Some games are less popular, and all submissions are accepted. The number of games per player is limited, this keeps a few players from taking a lot of game positions.

 

The GM of the new game himself had a lot of work to do to develop his corner of the game world. I had it easier here, the work was already done for my game, I just need to tweak it for the reboot. But the worst part is selecting which characters get to play. It was my experience, and many other GM's have posted this, that all submissions were good enough to play, this makes the job harder as each GM uses their own criteria to make the selection.

 

It can take several tries to get into a game. I've been lucky, I get into a game in a few tries. Some aren't so lucky, but if they keep trying, they should get in.

 

Finally a line up is announced. Now it's time to make those character sheets (rarely needed to apply). You send them to the GM, who might request changes before forwarding them to the auditor. Background changes might also be required at this point. But these revisions are fairly painless, just the usually fine tuning with the GM.

 

The final step is the Audit. Your characters are gone over with a fine tooth comb looking for any problems or inconstancies. It's very rare for a character to go though this process unchanged (the same was true the times I've audited characters in my face-to-face games). This is an important step for maintaining continuity in such a large game, although it is the cause for most of the delay before games are started. Most characters require only minor changes, some undergo drastic revision. More on this later.

 

While it may indeed take months for the auditors to catch up with your new game (after all, this is a volunteer effort down in spare time), the wait is worth it. After all, it's not like a face-to-face game where you sit around doing nothing while the GM works on someone else's character. While you're waiting, you can keep doing whatever you were doing in your spare time. Also GG is not the only game world where it takes months to start once all characters are done.

 

Finally the game starts. And yes, it was worth all the hassle and wait (in my opinion). The above process has weeded out those who aren't inclined to stick with the game (though players do leave). The players are motivated and write well. To make it simple, the games are fun.

 

Now back to the audit. Some people dread the audit, and I'm one of them. Why? Not because I'm unwilling to change my character, but because the process doesn't have the usual give and take when working on a character with a GM. You're given a list of changes made to your character. If they're minor changes, no problem. But if drastic changes have been made to your character, it seems that you aren't allowed to work with the auditors (Worldbuilder himself at this stage) to fix your character. Instead you have to accept the auditors changes without further changes or attempts to justify your character construction. I can understand this, Worldbuilder is doing a lot of audits, and and is putting in a lot of time into this already. He needs to make this quick and painless to him (so he can get on with the next audit), but in the process, he makes it very painful to many players.

 

For example:

My most most recent audit was for a character who could assume the powers of any sea creature. This was a character I played in GG two reboots ago (I've been playing here a long time). At that time the house rules allowed senses (such as dolphin sonar) into a multipower, so the character was build with a multipower.

 

Currently the house rules only allow senses in a VPP, so I converted the character to use a VPP. During Audit, the auditors decided that there was another way to do this (I agree), and converted the VPP to a MP, removing all senses and life supports. But this didn't quite do things as described in the characters power section.

 

I was OK with this, and half expecting it. So I sent in a list of changes so that it would match the background again. This consisted of a limitation on the MP so that it would take a half phase to change powers, and asked for a limitation on the senses so that they would lock out that many points from the MP, even though they weren't in the MP. Then I spent the points that were saved, trying to keep it simple.

 

The response was:

In accordance to Guardians policy, players who refuse to

cooperate with an audit get their audits finished for them without the .

The player was instructed to cut 3 points from his character and add 20

points of disadvantages. While he did, indeed add the disadvantages, the

fact that the player then attempted a major rewrite of his character rather

than follow the auditors instructions indicates an unwillingness to

cooperate. Using the audit to completely rewrite the character has never

been allowed.

 

The auditor has thus completed the audit for the character by

reducing the character's Dexterity by 1 point, and reducing a Science Skill

to 11 or less.

That seems unnecessarily harsh to me. When the auditors completely rewrite a character, I think they should expect (and allow) the player to make adjustments to fine tune the character again.

 

I got very upset about this, and complained (politely) to the Player Advocate, which let me blow off steam, but didn't result in any changes.

[Vanguard00]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I do not recall anyone calling you anything when you left. In fact, I do not recall any problems or arguments whatsoever involving you in any way, shape, or form. You posted a rambling, message regarding "attitudes" that didn't seem to have any sort of relevance to anything and disappeared.

 

From our end, it simply appeared as if you stomped off in a huff, reason unknown. Since you were a friend (or rather, since I thought you were a friend...), I figured you knew what you were doing and would either be back on your own or wouldn't. Either way, the door was open for you.

 

 

You called me names, Jack, and you took on a condescending attitude like you're doing now (or tried to). I didn't bother keeping the emails, but you definitely used directly insulting names and terms, put words in my mouth, and took the argument in a completely different direction than I intended. My email was not rambling and it had extreme relevance. It clearly pointed out what I thought was a problem and asked you to address it. And I didn't "disappear" as you well know. I publicly stated that I was leaving because of your then-current attitude. Which, by the way, didn't keep you from sending one last email to me personally.

 

At the time I did indeed consider you a friend. I wouldn't have sent money if I didn't. But no friend I've ever had treated me with such disdain in the face of challenging what they held to be "inviolate" the way you did. It was at that point that I realized that my mistake was in assuming we were friends. We weren't. We were fellow gamers with similar interests and similar attitudes about gaming. Where we differed was in our approach to people. Neither one of us is perfect, but I never put myself above others, either.

 

I've put the personal issues behind me, but that doesn't mean I forget about it. I just don't get worked up about it anymore, even when I see the same thing happening again now. And it is happening again, but I don't care. I'm just there to game with a GM I like. When John asked me to come back in and I heard that you were cool with it, I took it for what it was worth--it simply wasn't worth revisiting the old issue. I maintain that my attitude in regards to your gaming world have always been the highest. I back you 100% on your rules, your games, your audit process--all of it. Your attitudes regarding your place in the world, however, seem skewed to me, and at times your frustration (justified or not) comes across in your posts. And yes, you can be directly insulting to a person. But no one is allowed to reciprocate, and that's what I've always found to be petty and unfair of you.

 

We're not friends, Jack. We're just fellow gamers. CA asked for honest review of the issues stated and that's what I gave. In regards to gaming you're one of the best out there and I have a great deal of respect for you, but you and I will never be friends.

[Rachel]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I got very upset about this' date=' and complained (politely) to the Player Advocate, which let me blow off steam, but didn't result in any changes.[/quote']

 

Mainly because I dropped the ball on it. My sincerest apologies.

[Thrakazog]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I've been gaming in the GGU for a few years. I've played many characters and I've run a few campaigns. I also volunteer time as a player liaison/universe ambassador/part-time consigliere to Jack kind of role.

 

The audit process is a pain in the ass. That being said, it's has made me a much better Hero system character designer and has created a sense of legitimacy and fairness unsurpassed in any PBeM universe I've seen. Every campaign and charcater is in balance - point balance, power balance, game balance, universe balance. The power of such is not fully evident until you actually play or GM is said universe.

 

Does it take a while to get going on a new campaign? Sure does. But the auditing staff has a full plate and they are volunteers, not employees. Everyone has lives. Sometimes these things take time. Again, it's worth it if you can show a little patience.

 

As for personalities, well, who here among us can claim to be perfect? Jack and Rebecca Butler are two of the finest people I know. (Then again, I think I'm pretty good, too, so what does that tell you about my judgement? ) They work hard to try and make the GGU as fun as possible for the sixty or so people involved and they do it for no other reason than they want to. They don't get paid, they don't get accolades, there's no glory or fame or fortune involved (until Hero Games gets going on that Global Guardians sourcebook, but that's a topic for another thread. )

 

So the next time you hear a story about Jack being overly-aggressive or mean, think about the two hundred or so emails he deals with on a daily basis regarding the GGU and ask yourself how long it would be before your unpaid ass snapped at someone when maybe you shouldn't have.

 

He's not perfect, he doesn't always apologize, and sometimes he's a bear. But in many ways that's no different than myself and based on what he's willing to put up with and sacrifice for his labor of love - which so many others enjoy as well - I'm more than willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when he cheeses me off.

[thbczar]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Normally I stay away from these kinds of discussions. But since I’ve essentially been invited twice to do this, once by Captain Aardvark and once by Worldmaker, I figured I’d take advantage of the opportunity they have presented to add in my 2 cents on the topic.

 

The short version: CA’s review is completely believable. Yes, he does participate in a little exaggeration to make his point, an exaggeration which has been scientifically analyzed by many of the people who have responded to this. However, the spirit of his message taken in its entirety is correct. The basic facts are entirely believable and not exaggerated. I very easily believe that it took multiple months to complete a character audit. There are lots of house rules, and those house rules change. During his 9 month stint, those house rules have probably altered. Those of you going and looking at the GG website for the first time right now are seeing a much abbreviated version of the house rules. They were different 9 months ago. Do you wait a lot? Yes. Will you find that your character had a power removed that you really liked? Sure, entirely possible. Will Worldmaker explode at people in private and public? Yes. None of CA’s observations are incorrect. New people to GG could easily find this to be their experience.

 

Everyone else seems to be including their credentials when responding to this, so I’ll include mine too. I’ve been in GG since it started as a single game oh so many years ago. There were plenty of times I’m sure Mr. and Mrs. Worldmaker thought we’d all come to blows if only we could find a way to smack each other through the computer screen. I’ve experienced every single change that has come down the line as it happened in Global Guardians.

 

So, as Captain Aardvark requested, he’s having a chance to hear from someone who has ‘survived it all’. Unfortunately, since I have survived it all, it can be difficult to know where to begin when making comments about Global Guardians in all of its forms.

 

Let’s start with the description line on the Hero Games link, heralding Global Guardians as the largest shared world PBEM on the internet. If you want to pick on a statement that is an exaggeration, this is the one I’d take exception with, as opposed to anything in CA’s review. The most recent change people in general seem to be aware of is “The Rebootâ€. If you are not aware, The Global Guardians world was once united by the idea that the Global Guardians were the super-hero team sponsored by the United Nations. A city with a UN team had an “Embassy†housing the team. So, most (at least 50%) of the games located in this shared world were part of the United Nation’s para-military effort to provide super-heroic aid in many cities around the world. Yes, there were other games set in this world, but the backbone of the gaming world was the Embassy games. You can see where this helped make the world feel “sharedâ€. Most of the teams operated under the same banner. Most characters were Global Guardians.

 

Now, after The Reboot, the game world bearing the name Global Guardians is more like a regular comic book world. There is a single Global Guardians team – only they bear the title Global Guardians. The remaining games are spread out from being a ‘game’ for one hero to city-based hero teams to teams composed of ex-criminals to a game taking place under the sea in Atlantis. And like other comic book worlds, these various heroes will have little to do with one another. At this point, I think Global Guardians comes closer to being ‘shared rules’ than shared world.

 

The line in the Hero description also mentions 3 years of constant play. Well, GG has been around for longer than that by now. But play has hardly been constant, though it is still on-going. The Reboot is only the latest change taking place in Global Guardians. Significant changes happen regularly. The Reboot has been the largest overall change, but changes do happen. To be honest, they happen when Worldmaker gets bored. Even he admits that is the reason we had The Reboot. His own personal dissatisfaction with things will make changes in the gaming world that you may or may not enjoy. Because it is a shared world, this means that the changes he institutes can/will change every game in that world and every character in that world. Those changes create gaps in game play. The Reboot caused an incredible wait for things to kick off again, and even longer for people to actually get to begin playing/writing.

 

Obviously, this won’t be everyone’s cup of tea. There’s an attraction to Global Guardians because it has been around for a long time. As a new person, hearing the incredible amount of time GG has been around, and seeing the detailed website, it’d be easy to get the impression that GG is a stable gaming place, a place where you can start today and be doing the same type of thing in a year. You’d be wrong. Not only won’t you be starting today, but the game will go through massive change any time Worldmaker gets bored with things. The game world will still be there. Perhaps it won’t be the same world you remembered. You may or may not be able to play the same character the same way before and after these changes. Remember, it is not a democracy. You’re playing in a dictatorship.

 

Lately, one of the most interesting examples of that dictatorship has been The Audit. If you’ve been reading this thread, you’ve heard about The Audit already. The Audit is frustrating for two reasons. Reason #1 – it takes a long time. I keep on being told this cannot be avoided, but I’d like to think it’d take less than a month. I suppose this is part of the penalty you pay for being in a large gaming world. Reason #2 – the audit is an exercise in dictatorship. Changes made by the Audit team are permanent. The Audit is not a discussion. You do not have the chance to plead your case with the Auditor. Do that and you’ll be kicked out of Global Guardians.

 

No, I’m not exaggerating.

 

The Audit is not a discussion. Usually when making any kind of character, you can engage in dialogue with whoever is ‘auditing’ it. You can discuss things they do not like. You can attempt to explain things that don’t make sense to them. You can search for middle ground that will keep you both happy. Ah, but this cannot be done in the Audit.

 

Worldmaker knows me. He knows that I’d actually go through the comments from the Auditor point by point to talk about them and try to plead my case. To see if we can reach some middle ground, or if I can find a way to keep the power that is being disallowed. So, on the very day that I received my first note regarding the Audit of my character (and yes, it took a bit more than a month to get that first note), Worldmaker sends a note to the entire GG world reminding us all that responding to the Audit note with anything other than the changes required by the Auditor would be seen as ‘argumentative’, and being argumentative will get you kicked out of Global Guardians.

 

Like I said, it is a dictatorship.

 

Of course, you have choices. High on that list of choices is change countries. In CA’s case of hanging out for 9 months and not getting to play, I have to say I’d rather play in 3 different games that fold up after 3 months than sit and wait for 9 months and have nothing happen. I’d rather get to play and write than sit and hope that I’ll have the chance to write. No one is forced to stay, and CA exercised his option to leave. I can’t say I blame him.

 

So why am I still here? Let me say that I’ve enjoyed the writing I get to do in Global Guardians. There are great people there. It has been fun. I hold on to the memory of good times and expect that there will be more good times. GG attracts many good folks. I stay in the dictatorship because I like it more than I don't like it.

 

But I’ve learned an interesting lesson, one that took a long time for me to get through my thick head. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket. Don’t get too attached to the way things are in GG because they’ll change. Write and play, but control your passion and attachments. Don’t limit yourself to only playing here either. There are other places out there. Go, play in them. Hopefully while waiting to get in to GG, you’re taking advantage of other gaming opportunities. Hopefully while playing in GG you’re playing in other games too, so that when things change in GG you have some other game that isn’t going through upheaval to keep you happy.

 

If you leave GG, people will be sad, but you can be replaced. Mr. and Mrs. Worldmaker said so themselves when The Reboot hit. There are people waiting around to replace you if you chose to go. More than a couple people with my same amount of time in GG have left, and yes, they’re missed, but hey, GG still has nearly the same number of writers, meaning Mr. and Mrs. Worldmaker must be keeping enough people happy and their World of Global Guardians goes on.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Okay, guys... if everything's so broken in my house so how do I fix it?

 

Other than resigning, handing it over to someone who never, ever gets irritated, and entering immediate psychotherapy to handle my anger issues, I mean?