Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

[Trebuchet]

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?

Jack, you have more than enough of your players here defending you for me to think your house is broken. You can be a bit abrasive, and you have admitted that. (I'm no saint in that regard myself, which is why we always had such entertaining political discussions, at least after the broken bones knit.)

 

As an outsider, it appears to me the GGU Audit process is the major source of gripes, both for it's slow turnaround time and it's inflexibility. Given how much grumbling character approval generates even among friends in face to face games, it's hardly surprising some people dislike having their character concept fiddled with by a total stranger who at the same time tells him "Do this. End of discussion." Perhaps you and your auditors might try to find ways to streamline the process a bit and make it a bit more user friendly? Perhaps along with any rejected abilities the auditors might offer a suggestion or two as to what would be acceptable as a substitute?

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

As an outsider' date=' it appears to me the GGU Audit process is the major source of gripes, both for it's slow turnaround time and it's inflexibility.[/quote']

 

The reason for the long turnaround is the workload. There's only five auditors (with a sixth one recently having volunteered but having not yet been given any characters to work on), and close to 100 unaudited characters in the backlog.

 

As for the inflexibility, well... as far as I know there has *never* been a time when a player could not say "Excuse me, but I think you were wrong and here's why." Its a simple fact... you *can* plead your case. People do it all the time. Its just that you won't always get your way after doing so.

 

The "don't be argumentative" thing that Terry (thbczar, that is) mentions was sent because I didn't want to see a bunch of messages that began with some variation of "F*CK YOU" in response to an audit report. And those used to happen all the time.

 

I had one guy tell me that I wouldn't know a creative thought if it swam up and bit me on the ass because I told him that his character concept (a guy who changed the universe every time he slept, but only he realized it) was a bit too out there for a superheroes game.

 

And then there was the guy who, in response to a character audit in which it was suggested that perhaps his character was a bit too lethal, made incredibly rude (not to mention graphically vivid) comments regarding my sexual history with farm animals and my wife's pre-marital porn career.

 

Excuse me if I wanted to cut down on what I saw as "overly argumentative" posts.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I quite understand. Nobody should have to tolerate obscenity, especially directed at their significant other.

 

Just as an observation: I think you mentioned you are now using HD in character design? Would it not be possible to make a GGU Campaign Rules plugin for Hero Designer that would incorporate some of the basic rules and the like just to reduce the auditors' workload a bit? I realize some players are going to come up with absurd concepts and power constructions anyway, but if (for example) no Stop Sign Powers are permitted in GGU then you could preset the HD Campaign Rules to do that automatically. (Even in my own rather liberal campaign, Stop Sign Powers require explicit GM permission.) It would keep the auditors from having to waste their time rejecting at least some character proposals that shouldn't have come in the first place.

 

Is there a central location where all the House Rules and design parameters for GGU are clearly listed?

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Just as an observation: I think you mentioned you are now using HD in character design? Would it not be possible to make a GGU Campaign Rules plugin for Hero Designer that would incorporate some of the basic rules and the like just to reduce the auditors' workload a bit?

 

Way ahead of you. The .hdr file was already distributed to the auditors.

 

 

 

Is there a central location where all the House Rules and design parameters for GGU are clearly listed?

 

The house rules pages of the website.

[Chairman]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Okay' date=' guys... if everything's so broken in my house so how do I fix it?QUOTE']

 

It's your house. You don't have to fix it. *shrug*

 

People just need to realize that when they sign on. Either play nice in your house and deal with your rules or leave. I think that everyone knows that or should know it, you make it clear often.

 

I think that was the main lesson I learned during my years there. I had a great time when I was there. Particularly when Jack was enjoying himself. It was when Jack got in a bad mood or Jack got bored that the entire game world had some hiccups.

 

...but. It's Jack's house. Or World Maker, as you guys know him. Players and GMs just have to respect that and deal with it. I dealt with it by leaving after I found my personal limit.

 

The audit, I was always an advocate of that myself. But my primary reason at the time was that since most the games were embassy games and any player could move their character from one embassy game to another, it just made a lot of sense. GMs wouldn't/couldn't make players change powers every time they switched campaigns, which with the house rules and reboots could happen quite often.

 

I'm not a part of the new GGU currently (nor will I likely ever be since I'm not allowed on the chat boards) but I'm guessing that crossovers can still happen.

 

I think complaining about something too much that doesn't cost anyone anything is bad karma. Just find another game, trust me, there are a lot out there. And some appreciate a really good pace and really great worlds. Not all are a part of a large community but if you look hard enough you'll find a spot.

 

And...WorldMaker... I'm astounded, positively in disbelief that you read so little into why Vanguard/Dave left. Especially since 7 other people that just spring readily to my memory left over the same incident. *shrug* You got bigger problems, and plenty of gamers to fill the voids, but I'm quite surprised that you would try to color that one into your favor.

 

I tried like hell to not comment but after reading the part about leaving w/o a reason. (Sorry don't want to open another window to find the quote.) I just couldn't be quiet.

 

To all those that enjoy GG, Yay for you! Been there and done that! Hopefully those people will continue to do so for a very very long time. However, just remember that what Jack says goes, and while he doesn't tend to be unreasonable if he chooses to be so then deal with it or leave. A fuss ain't gonna get you anything worth the sweat it takes you to get worked up over it.

[JSenecal]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

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

 

Overall your house is fine shape, as many people have said. Most of the problems stem from the sheer size of GG, the number of people involved, and the care taken to keep the game consistent. These problems (such as the audit delays) aren't going away.

 

I can suggest two changes that would greatly reduce my stress, and I think the stress of others.

 

First, confirm receipt of important messages. This would be character submissions (usually confirmed already), characters delivered to the auditor, characters delivered to the NPC Boss, and anything sent to the proofreader. Just a simple "Received" is enough to for the sender to know that the message wasn't lost in the internet, and that it will be processed in due time.

 

As part of this, it should be spelled out on the site which messages will be acknowledged, and most importantly, how long a sender should wait for an acknowledgment before sending a followup message (with a warning of how irritating they are). Also put in an explanation that once acknowledged, that it may be a long time before anything is actually done with the request.

 

As long as I know the message has been received, I have no problem with waiting for months (if need be) for it to be dealt with. Without a confirmation, I'm left wondering, torn between asking about the message (and possibly irritating the recipient), or waiting too long to where my input is ignored.

 

Second is to make the audit more of a dialog. I have some concerns about suggesting this, since audits are slow enough already, but this has been a great source of pain to me. Perhaps the individual auditors could contact players about specific issues (changing framework types, disallowing frameworks, etc) at an earlier step in the audit process before all audit changes are cast in stone.

 

Perhaps a "How an audit works" section could be put up on the web site. This would explain what should be expected, and how object and try to explain why you did things the way you did. And it could explain what changes are allowed when responding to auditor requested changes.

 

Also I'd like to see more latitude in making changes. If the auditor directs cutting 3 points from the character, it seems reasonable to me to cut something that is more than 3 points, then spend the difference. And more importantly, the bigger the auditors changes, the more requested changes from the player should be allowed. Changing a framework type, or shifting powers out of a framework are big changes after all. I know you've had problems in the past with players trying to change things back the way they were. If they are just undoing the auditors changes, I agree, that is a problem. But if they are working with the auditors changes, and expanding on them to try and get the characer to be closer than what it is before, then that should be allowed even if it does mean another cycle of auditing.

 

 

As for the inflexibility, well... as far as I know there has *never* been a time when a player could not say "Excuse me, but I think you were wrong and here's why." Its a simple fact... you *can* plead your case. People do it all the time. Its just that you won't always get your way after doing so.

 

This hasn't been my experience in my most recent audit (as described above). I sent a polite message agreeing with the auditors changes, but doing more than just removing a few points. Although I had now complaints about the VPP being changed to a MP, I wanted the MP to work more like a VPP (1/2 phase to change powers). My polite message was rejected as "unwilling to cooperate". I still have the messages if anyone would like to see them.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I'm not a part of the new GGU currently (nor will I likely ever be since I'm not allowed on the chat boards) but I'm guessing that crossovers can still happen.

 

Whoever told you that lied to you, unless someone outside of the GG is keeping you off our lists. You (and Dave, for that matter) are welcome to come back any time, and always have been so. So is everyone but Bill, at least until he apologizes for his comments regarding Rebecca.

 

 

And...WorldMaker... I'm astounded, positively in disbelief that you read so little into why Vanguard/Dave left. Especially since 7 other people that just spring readily to my memory left over the same incident. *shrug* You got bigger problems, and plenty of gamers to fill the voids, but I'm quite surprised that you would try to color that one into your favor.

 

Forgive me for not being so vindictive as to hold a grudge over something I never saw as a major problem in the first place. I don't remember it because it wasn't worth remembering. I'm not trying to color it in my favor... I'm trying to color it as being insignificant to me.

 

But hey, I have an idea... Let me quote the "offensive" message so everyone can see what we're talking about. All names have been removed to protect the offended.

 

 

, I find it interesting that you, the one person who can always be counted on to explain to people that (as put it) I cannot be shouted down, but I certainly can be reasoned with, sent a message accusing me of being a dictator and an asshole. My post addressed one thing, and one thing only: being courteous to players who post less frequently than you. I didn't see a need to lay down specific limits. To me, saying "If you post 40 times in a day, you're fine, 41 you're out" is nonsense.

 

Can you have conversations? Of course. Both players are able to participate as regularly as they need, as long as it does not get ridiculous. What is ridiculous? I can cite the example of John Scalera's Maneuver Drive campaign. At one point, while I was at work for 8 hours, three players moved their "sideline story" some 8 hours into the future, as perceived by my character, who was still dealing with the first response to my post. It got so bad that there was no longer any reason for me to participate because the other players had pretty much unilaterally decided that my character was superfluous. Only John's direct intervention in the game kept me from leaving right then and there.

 

I am telling people to keep the other players in mind as they post. I'm telling people to be courteous. And I'm reminding people that being discourteous has unpleasant repercussions in these games. Personally, I don't see what the debate is about. "Be courteous" isn't all that open to random interpretation to me.

 

Now, as for the other issue. Once again, I'm accused of being a dictatorial asshole. Thank you, . I appreciate it. Considering how

many times various people (including, might I point out, yourself) have

successfully convinced me to change my opinion regarding these games, your

opinion of me as an ogre is somewhat misplaced.

 

After all, if I were as bad as you and your mystery friends think I am, you'd be out of here already, wouldn't you?

 

 

 

I tried like hell to not comment but after reading the part about leaving w/o a reason. (Sorry don't want to open another window to find the quote.) I just couldn't be quiet.

 

You never gave me any reason other than "I'm not having fun anymore", and you never really succeeded in explaining why you weren't having any fun. Dave left because he objected to the message quoted above, apparently (at least, that is the reason he is giving me now). In either case, I didn't see the entire episode as some sort of Federal Case and saw it for what it was... a rather minor difference in opinion.

 

 

 

To all those that enjoy GG, Yay for you! Been there and done that! Hopefully those people will continue to do so for a very very long time. However, just remember that what Jack says goes, and while he doesn't tend to be unreasonable if he chooses to be so then deal with it or leave. A fuss ain't gonna get you anything worth the sweat it takes you to get worked up over it.

 

You know, for a pair of people who keep saying "We never called you a tyrant", you sure are doing a good job of repeating, over and over like a religious mantra, how dictatorial I am...

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

This hasn't been my experience in my most recent audit (as described above). I sent a polite message agreeing with the auditors changes' date=' but doing more than just removing a few points. Although I had now complaints about the VPP being changed to a MP, I wanted the MP to work more like a VPP (1/2 phase to change powers). My polite message was rejected as "unwilling to cooperate". I still have the messages if anyone would like to see them.[/quote']

 

I believe I said "You won't always get your way after pleading your case." In this one specific example, you didn't. I don't see the contradiction.

[Vanguard00]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Jack, if you're going to get specific on this list at least have the courtesy to accurate represent the situation.

 

The email you quote is but one in a larger issue that started with your wife being insulted and escalated into you threatening a posting limit rule for the entire GGU. I called you on it and...well, everyone seems to know how it ended. Bill wasn’t all that involved, really, so I’d be interested in why he should have to apologize. Then again, you don't know why I was upset, so I suppose there's a correlation there.

 

You have double standards, Jack. You had a player advocate whom you didn't use--much like that time you insulted one of my players in my game--but you refuse to let anyone else act in that manner. You don't want flame wars or replies on list, you want people to go through channels, but then you turn around and contradict yourself by posting when you're angry. You want people to communicate with you but you don’t communicate with them, then get upset when they ask if you received an email/file/character/whatever. You think you’re above everyone else, but when another old timer left recently you decided to take another hack at him on the list.

 

No, Jack is not perfect and yes, Jack gets upset. At times rightfully so. My only point earlier was that it was said he admits when he’s wrong and he doesn’t publicly attack anyone, and that both those statements are false.

 

The GGU has a lot to offer people, and I won't speak for anyone else (I can’t, obviously). You already said you wouldn't reply to me in person anymore. If you want to take it to another public forum I'm more than willing to continue stating my case. Otherwise I’ll assume the personal issues are dead.

 

 

EDIT: Earlier I stated that Jack had called me names. This doesn't appear to be the case, though there was insinuation of such. My apologies for the incorrect statement.

[Fireg0lem]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

As others have said...you're house isn't broken. It isn't perfect, but nothing is.

 

First, confirm receipt of important messages. This would be character submissions (usually confirmed already), characters delivered to the auditor, characters delivered to the NPC Boss, and anything sent to the proofreader.

I agree with Joe that this would be nice, especially because it could feasibly be done by someone without the skills needed to be, say, an auditor. However, I don't think this is necessary, but it might reduce some tension. Perhaps just post things like this to the adminlist weekly - but Jack, don't take it upon yourself to do this solo, please.

 

Second is to make the audit more of a dialog. I have some concerns about suggesting this, since audits are slow enough already, but this has been a great source of pain to me. Perhaps the individual auditors could contact players about specific issues (changing framework types, disallowing frameworks, etc) at an earlier step in the audit process before all audit changes are cast in stone.

 

I'll throw in my two cents. Let me preface this by repeating, Jack, that I don't think there is any crushing problem in the GG, and my suggestions are just that - suggestions. If you don't like them, well, they're free.

 

Have the GM be the middleman for the audit process. IOW, specifically request that the GM look for rules violations, math errors, and abuses. Next, have the GM send things to the auditor, and have the auditor respond to the GM with important changes like, say "This power isn't legal," "That's an OIF, not an OAF," and "That Power Construct won't fly" (but not bother, yet, with picky details like checking active and real points, looking at figured characteristics, adding up multipower slots, and checking point totals. The "wide-toothed comb" if you will). The GM takes these results to the players himself, gets things worked out (even if it means a serious rewrite), then sends it in as the final version. The auditor then does a full-on audit, and this time no changes are allowed besides the minimum to get the character in play - but by this point, there should be nothing left but minimal point balancing.

 

The advantages here are twofold - first, anybody who wants to rant is going to be doing at their GM (which is really, really dumb), not you, and if there's an argument to be made about the character, the auditor can talk to the GM, who is less likely to be a problem than a player. Second, characters that are going to have to undergo sweeping changes get one chance to be fixed up before things are written in stone. In fact, this might make the job of an auditor easier, since they'd be able to avoid having to fix large problems (like illegally constructed Power Frameworks) themselves.

 

As a side suggestion, would it be feasible to have two audit teams, one that simply checks math, and another that makes decisions about legality, rules abuses, and whatnot? I can't speak for everyone, but while I don't think I'd be competent to be an auditor, I would be happy to volunteer as a "math monkey," and this could reduce the workload on the main auditors.

[JSenecal]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I believe I said "You won't always get your way after pleading your case." In this one specific example, you didn't. I don't see the contradiction.

 

The contradiction as I see it is that the audit reply posted above didn't address my proposed changes, but rather said I had an "unwillingness to

cooperate". This when I was working very hard to coorperate!

 

That's a very different message than, "Your proposed changes are disallowed because...". That would show that you've considered my changes and rejected them. The message I received was more along the lines of "you're out of line for suggesting any changes to our conversion of a VPP to an MP. It doesn't matter that it no longer matches the background power description." I can't say what you intended to say, but that's the message I received, and I had trouble sleeping that night because of it.

 

On my part, I admit that I am much to attached to the characters I create, which is why a bad audit is so painful to me.

[Super Squirrel]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

You know.. all this bitching and moaning about GGU has only made me more interested in it. Well, everything but the 100 players on back log. Heck, I'm refering to the GG Psych/Social/Physical list for all future players.

 

See, I have a problem and it is hitting me with a full force of depression. I want nothing more than to play a "hero" but it was laid out to me recently, that the only person who runs isn't good at creating games that hero's play in and the players aren't good at being heroes.

 

Well that just sucks... I get one game. Just ONE to play in, and the players would prefer to turn it into a vigilante campaign. Well, that's nice and all, but not what I want.

 

Then there is the "audit" process. Can anyone here that has ever played any games in the HERO system or any other roleplaying game for that matter, say that they have never had a player who had a munchkin or tweak or a rules bending on there character? The audit system isn't so that the auditors can rip your sheet into tiny pieces and throw it away. It is so that the players and the GM have a game where you don't have to stop and say "Wait a second, that power just ain't right".

 

Case and point, this hero game turned vigilante has a player with a Physical Limitation. The disadvantage makes anyone who looks into his eyes fall in mad lust with him. Yeah, sounds like a disadvantage... but it also sounds like a cheap power too considering no where on his sheet is a Mind Control or Telepathy with NCC.

 

So, maybe dealing with an anal process of fact checking is worth it. After all, it is about the game, not about the rules. And once your in, well, your in.

 

Well, I'm highly interested now, after it has become aparent at this rate I'm going to die before being able to play a hero in a campaign.

 

Oh, Day 1 of my review. I build 350 points on a character I have tried building over and over and over again. Made the limitations lower than they needed to be in some cases. I emailed the auditor guy about a house rules question, and I perused the disadvantages finding a good deal of predesigned, acceptable Disadvantages (always my weakness). I sat down and wrote the first part of my characters background.

 

So far, I'm having fun with the audit process.

[Chairman]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I'd like to preface this with an apology to any readers who are actually still following this thread. I'm pretty new at this forum type of medium and I don't know how to use the quote thingy very well.

 

Quote: Whoever told you that lied to you, unless someone outside of the GG is keeping you off our lists. /end

 

Forgive the length. Here is the last conversation that I EVER had with you Jack. Or perhaps it could have been Becky. This was AFTER you received my submission request for Chat. After this my request was NEVER approved, I do apologize if that was an error. But I'm sure that after reading this you can understand why I felt unwelcome. And...I have a LOT of emails squirreled away in my inbox. I won't bore the list with them. But I am a packrat, so just know that if you decide to pick back at me.

 

---begin: ICQ copy/paste---

11/14/2003:

Jack: Can I ask you a personal question?

 

China: Yes. You caught me right before bedtime, but shoot.

 

Jack: If you walked out in a huff, all pissed off because I was "trying to control your fun", why do you want back onto the Chat list?

 

China: I've always enjoyed the community, I have friends there and am interested in the changes you made. ...and keeping up with them. I subscribed immediately after the chang, but their was a hiccup of sorts and it didn't go through. If my presence makes you uncomfortable I'll understand if you don't approve my request.

 

Jack: I just don't understand why you'd want to hang around, seeing as how I am such a dictatorial asshole and all.

 

China: you ok Jack? ...

 

China: I've always liked you. I also said as much when I left. :-( I'm not trying to be hurtful

 

China: I still have my exit email, and while I admit to being emotional over losing a player, I also reminded myself throughout my email how much I thought of you and Becky and the efforts you put into this for other people.

 

China: Well...I'm off to bed. I'm not feeling very well. I didn't mean to upset you.

 

Jack: Neither the one of you had any idea what it took to run the GG, how much work I had to put in to keep it running, the care I had to show to keep the background universe consistent, all the senseless bitching I had dumped on me the nanosecnd someone didn't get what they wanted... yet you and he blithely criticize the way I did things because you didn't get what *you* wanted.

 

Jack: I've had a while to think about what was said, and it occurred to me that I was offended... not pissed off, or angered, but offended, as if I had witnessed an obscenity... by the accusations leveled at me by you and Dave regarding my attitude.

 

China: ok jack. thanks for the explanation. I guess that door got locked behind me after all. That's upsetting, but as I said before if it causes you discomfort I understand.

 

---end: ICQ copy/paste---

 

Quote: So is everyone but Bill, at least until he apologizes for his comments regarding Rebecca. /end

 

I won't defend Bill, he can be a butt sometimes. But I think you're thinking of another redemtion player named Carl C. I won't post his name in full because I don't mean any ill towards him. I do have some of those emails. I'll look for them and maybe piece this story together if anyone wants to hear it. Which I really doubt.

 

Quote: But hey, I have an idea... Let me quote the "offensive" message so everyone can see what we're talking about. /end

 

Ha. Ha.Ha.Ha. Good one Jack. You can out write me and out debate me ANY day of the week. But ya know what. That well thought our post came after several mini tantrums. In this post you had an opportunity to collect everyone's questions and reply to them in such a manner that you looked like the poor little over worked victim. Meanwhile ignoring the real issues and the real hurt feelings that you caused with your previous posts. You're overworked, I'll give you that. But really, anyone can color a single email in such a way that it looks like everyone else is 'not getting it'.

 

Quote: You never gave me any reason other than "I'm not having fun anymore", and you never really succeeded in explaining why you weren't having any fun. /end

 

Oh. Well that WAS the reason I left. Allow me to repost my exit email. Sorry guys, this is long and I hate to bore you with this stuff...but I'd like to give Jack another opportunity to undersand why I wasn't having fun. For brevity I removed my intro and what to do with my old characters. But I do assure you that never once in the deleted portion did I call Jack any names. Especially the tyranical dictator that he's so found of taking injury from

 

--exit email--

The sad thing is, is that Dave, one of Jack's staunchest supporters decided that he'd reached that point. ...and so another one bites the dust. This time though I care and the reason that I care is because this directly interferes with my fun. He was in one of the games I run, one of the most enthusiastic players, and in another game that I play in. So? What do you do when you stop having fun in something that you invest this much effort into? You leave.

 

If you're asking yourself is China really gonna leave. The answer is yes. A part of me is very sad because this place has been a big part of my life for the last few years. But it hasn't been without its stresses and down times. I've gotten mad lots of times, but only as a GM. I'm not leaving because I'm angry at Jack, the players or because I don't appreciate and enjoy what the GGU has to offer.

 

I'm leaving because I finally reached my breaking point, the point where my fun isn't outweighing the negatives that I see. ...and I'm really happy that I'm deciding to leave at a time when I'm not angry. I don't want to be rude or hurtful because I think a lot of you guys, Butlers very much included. It's just time for me to go. Some of you may call me a follower, *shrug*, whatever makes it easier to swallow. Perhaps I am. Following my fun out the door. I suppose I could wait another six months or year before I get good and mad again, but I'd rather leave in such a way that I don't get the door locked after me.

 

If you need reasons...I'll try to explain why I'm feeling this way.

1. Jack really could impose that posting maximum if he chose to. Sure he said it as a way to make us take him seriously, but Jack follows through with his threats. And if the offenders kept on offending and he implemented it, then everyone would have been affected. This is just an example. Whatever Jack says goes...plain and simple. Usually I agree with Jack or it doesn't affect me so I don't worry about it overly much, but just the idea of 'whatever Jack says goes' has always bothered me. I'm to the point where I don't want to play in that unknown environment. My feelings may change later, but at the very minimum I need a big break from it.

 

2. As a GM it's hard enough to keep my players happy. ...and when I do a half way decent job of it and still lose people because of Jack's attitude, Jack's rules or Jack's forced reboot...Then that upsets me. I like my people and don't appreciate losing control of their happiness. To chase a player off by my own incompetence is one thing, but to lose them because of something beyond my control or influence is disheartening. About a year ago the entire universe got shuffled around in a reboot, so don't think I'm without patience. I ditched my plots, I totally let go of my line-up of players that I loved, and was as supportive as I could be.

 

3. I guess in a nutshell what I'm trying to say is that nobody should have control of my fun. As a player I shouldn't be forced to leave a game because Jack wants me to, I shouldn't have anyone over me telling me how often I can post or what I can say. And any given day if Jack was so inclined this could happen, likely not, I totally agree that he isn't an Ogre, but make no mistake he is in charge and what he says goes.

 

4. Jack, you are quite a writer and can really spin things in your direction. ...but you didn't handle this well, in my opinion you were very wrong. You don't handle a lot of things well when you get worked up. I hate it when you curse on the lists and issue ultimatums. I know you have a lot to deal with and it's really hard, you probably feel like all you do is give and give and have every right to say whatever you want. But so far, it's been your choice to give and be the caretaker of this place, if you want to preserve what you have...take these losses as a learning experience. If you could tweak your people skills you'd have just about the perfect thing here.

 

I would like to apologize to my players, I've really enjoyed our time together and feel pretty wicked about deserting you. I hope you can understand that it isn't you guys or anything that you've done.

 

...I know that loosing a couple of players won't put a dent in the GGU, it's too big and too strong. I'm sure there will be another Guard Dog and Nice Girl to fill our shoes shortly. Have fun guys and thanks for all of the fun you've given to me!

 

---end exit post---

 

I would like to note that after I left, Jack rebooted the whole Universe. Everyone, or mostly everyone lost their games and characters as they were. So even if this sounded harsh, my main point of what Jack says goes, did happen in a very noticeable way. It's his right! I'm not denying that. It's HIS house. I just don't feel that my reasons for leaving were unfounded.

 

Quote: You know, for a pair of people who keep saying "We never called you a tyrant", you sure are doing a good job of repeating, over and over like a religious mantra, how dictatorial I am... /end

 

First off, Dave and I really aren't a pair. I don't think we're the only ones you lost over this or similar items in your past. And all I've ever said is true...If I came right out and called you a dictator at any time I don't remember doing so. If I've said over and over true statements that you've inferred this from then... If the shoe fits...you know what to do with it.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Jack, if you're going to get specific on this list at least have the courtesy to accurate represent the situation.

 

The email you quote is but one in a larger issue that started with your wife being insulted and escalated into you threatening a posting limit rule for the entire GGU. I called you on it and...well, everyone seems to know how it ended. Bill wasn’t all that involved, really, so I’d be interested in why he should have to apologize. Then again, you don't know why I was upset, so I suppose there's a correlation there.

 

I did not post the message Becky received from Bill regarding what she should do with the fact that she objected to coming home from work to find over a hundred "let's just move the plot ahead just by a little" posts which left her character way, way behind. I never said boo about this issue until he and the other guy got abusive to Becky regarding an issue Becky was in the right about.

 

You see, to me the entire problem was that: they were rude to Becky.

 

 

 

You have double standards, Jack. You had a player advocate whom you didn't use--much like that time you insulted one of my players in my game--but you refuse to let anyone else act in that manner.

 

Yet another event I have no memory about. This is why I mentioned holding a grudge, Dave. You are reacting to things I felt were insignificant in a manner that suggests you considered them worldshaking.

 

 

 

 

You think you’re above everyone else, but when another old timer left recently you decided to take another hack at him on the list.

 

Is telling the truth about the reasons for an action to be considered "taking a hack" at someone? If you do something for Reason X, and when someone asks why, I respond "He did it because of Reason X", is it now to be considered taking a hack at someone?

 

Interesting...

 

 

 

EDIT: Earlier I stated that Jack had called me names. This doesn't appear to be the case, though there was insinuation of such. My apologies for the incorrect statement.

 

Thank you. For the record, I apologize if I put words in your mouth that you did not intend.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I agree with Joe that this would be nice, especially because it could feasibly be done by someone without the skills needed to be, say, an auditor. However, I don't think this is necessary, but it might reduce some tension. Perhaps just post things like this to the adminlist weekly - but Jack, don't take it upon yourself to do this solo, please.

 

I just posted a possible solution to the backlog of audits holding up game play. We'll see what everyone says.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

The contradiction as I see it is that the audit reply posted above didn't address my proposed changes, but rather said I had an "unwillingness to

cooperate". This when I was working very hard to coorperate!

 

That's a very different message than, "Your proposed changes are disallowed because...". That would show that you've considered my changes and rejected them. The message I received was more along the lines of "you're out of line for suggesting any changes to our conversion of a VPP to an MP. It doesn't matter that it no longer matches the background power description." I can't say what you intended to say, but that's the message I received, and I had trouble sleeping that night because of it.

 

On my part, I admit that I am much to attached to the characters I create, which is why a bad audit is so painful to me.

 

I seem to remember your response being more complicated than you are saying here. In any case, send it to me and I'll reconsider.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Well' date=' I'm highly interested now, after it has become aparent at this rate I'm going to die before being able to play a hero in a campaign.[/quote']

 

Check this out. We make the call for players in two weeks or so. I'd love for you to submit.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

China, you are right and I was wrong, and I apologize if I offended you. If you would like back in, you can come back in any time you like.

 

Which was my point all along.

[Vanguard00]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Okay, so it stays public...

 

 

I did not post the message Becky received from Bill regarding what she should do with the fact that she objected to coming home from work to find over a hundred "let's just move the plot ahead just by a little" posts which left her character way, way behind. I never said boo about this issue until he and the other guy got abusive to Becky regarding an issue Becky was in the right about.

 

You see, to me the entire problem was that: they were rude to Becky.

 

So? Tell her to go the player advocate like everybody else is supposed to. Or the GM. Both of which post here with frequency, it should be pointed out.

 

 

 

Yet another event I have no memory about. This is why I mentioned holding a grudge, Dave. You are reacting to things I felt were insignificant in a manner that suggests you considered them worldshaking.

 

 

Nice try, Jack, but not true. My point here was the same as it was in my reply to you personally: pattern. It's a pattern with you to go off the handle, then forget about it. Maybe it's nothing to you but it's something to other people, especially those directly affected. I'm not holding a grudge. I've simply been trying to explain why I felt the way I did. There's a big difference.

 

And if you feel that being personally insulting to someone--anyone, not just me--is "insignificant" then you've helped illustrate my point more than I ever could.

 

 

Is telling the truth about the reasons for an action to be considered "taking a hack" at someone? If you do something for Reason X, and when someone asks why, I respond "He did it because of Reason X", is it now to be considered taking a hack at someone?

 

 

No, but then again, that's exactly what I did and you thought I was attacking you. That's what this has been about all along. You did something, I reacted, you asked why, and I responded. It's not my fault you didn't like my answer. It was my opinion, and my opinion is never wrong. It can be unfounded, it can be based on poor information, it can change, but it can never be wrong because it is an opinion. I told you why I felt the way I did without rancor and as unoffensively as possible, and you took it as an attack. That ain't my cross to bear.

 

Double standards again, Jack. And thank you again for illustrating my other point.

 

 

Interesting...

 

Isn't it, though?

 

 

Thank you. For the record, I apologize if I put words in your mouth that you did not intend.

 

And for that I thank you.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I've reached the "Whatever" stage. You feel I acted atrociously and are scandalized that I consider such things insignificant when looked at from the span of a year and a half or however long its been. I think you and she and everyone involved was vastly overreacting both then and now. But hey, you've got a right to your opinion, however bizarre I think that opinion is.

 

I tried apologizing to you for whatever it was that I did that I cannot now remember having done. I was being earnest in that apology, and still am, despite what you think. Take it or leave it, I no longer give a shit. I tried to mend the fences, Dave. I truly did. I'm somewhat disinheartened that you threw it back in my face.

[Super Squirrel]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Check this out. We make the call for players in two weeks or so. I'd love for you to submit.

Worldmaker, looks good. Can I make a quick recommendation for your site? Thanks.

 

Your site is wonderful, but for a newbie to GG and website, it is a bit, well, overwhelming. More specifically, the mailing lists. I know from my experience with the internet, how to subscribe to mailing lists. However, beyond that, I'm a bit in the dark. I read in the Home Page that Admin List announces new games and such. I know from an admin email I just got and conversations, that Chat List is for basic conversations and such. However, while I can assume that "The Brawl" is for fights, it seems like it is a general subscribe to all fights and not campaign specific.

 

Could you either add some sort of simple FAQ to the site. I saw a second ago that there was one, in fact. It seems to only appear at the Various Other Stuff section and even then, it doesn't load.

 

I have other, questions that are Legacy specific, but for now I'll wait on asking them and just sleep on it.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

Your site is wonderful, but for a newbie to GG and website, it is a bit, well, overwhelming. More specifically, the mailing lists. I know from my experience with the internet, how to subscribe to mailing lists. However, beyond that, I'm a bit in the dark. I read in the Home Page that Admin List announces new games and such. I know from an admin email I just got and conversations, that Chat List is for basic conversations and such. However, while I can assume that "The Brawl" is for fights, it seems like it is a general subscribe to all fights and not campaign specific.

 

Could you either add some sort of simple FAQ to the site. I saw a second ago that there was one, in fact. It seems to only appear at the Various Other Stuff section and even then, it doesn't load.

 

The Brawl is for Players to test their characters out by throwing them up against other PCs in an "out of game" environment.

[Vanguard00]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I've reached the "Whatever" stage. You feel I acted atrociously and are scandalized that I consider such things insignificant when looked at from the span of a year and a half or however long its been.

 

 

Not "atrociously", Jack. Just wrong. And it was about six months ago. You really have to watch that "exaggeration for effect" thing you have going on. It doesn't play well to an attentive audience.

 

 

I think you and she and everyone involved was vastly overreacting both then and now. But hey, you've got a right to your opinion, however bizarre I think that opinion is.

 

 

Yes, I do. You believe it overreacting and I believe I reacted in a justifiable manner given the history and the current circumstances. I didn't insult you then, I simply wanted to know why you were doing what you were doing so that I could determine if it was time for me to move on or not. You tossed the gauntlet back then. I just picked it up.

 

 

I tried apologizing to you for whatever it was that I did that I cannot now remember having done. I was being earnest in that apology, and still am, despite what you think. Take it or leave it, I no longer give a shit. I tried to mend the fences, Dave. I truly did. I'm somewhat disinheartened that you threw it back in my face.

 

 

But I didn't, Jack. I wanted you to recognize that you were wrong. You treat personal and public insults as "insignificant", then wonder why I don't want to accept your half-hearted and vague apology right off the bat. You even say above that you cannot remember having done anything. Of what worth is such an apology? I wanted to discuss it, to air it out, figure out a middle ground, but you shut off communication, except here where everyone can see it. Not my choice in forums, but I'll take what I can get.

 

I'll admit that I've seen an admission of sorts which may be construed as an apology, but it doesn't matter now because you're spitting it out through gritted teeth and you resent it. You professed friendship to me yet did nothing to try and save it, when all I ever wanted was for you to treat people with courtesy and respect, including me. You still can't do that when you believe you've been challenged. Challenging your opinions is not a personal attack, Jack. Challenging your rules in GGU was not a personal attack. This entire exchange has not been a personal attack. A true friend would never have showed me the disrespect you did, then come back six months later and say "I'm sorry you were offended by whatever it is that I feel was so insignificant that I can't remember, even though it prompted the reboot of the so-called largest shared world PBEM on the internet". Could you be any more offensive to me than that?

 

It's sad that this had to air in public, Jack. You didn't have to go this route. If you wanted to try and hurt me more you could've done it in a personal email. You didn't succeed regardless, but now I feel pity for you and I hate that. I wanted to understand where you were coming from, and I wanted you to understand where I was coming from, but I see now that it's not going to happen. You're incapable of it, either with me or with this issue or both.

 

If you won't respect or address my feelings, my opinions, and my arguments on this--not agree, but at least respect and address--then you were never anything even remotely close to being a friend. To even pretend otherwise is an offense of the highest order.

[sinanju]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

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.

 

I second this. I am, in fact, currently playing a Yahoo-group based Champions game. A post seeking players was posting the GGU Chat list (and Worldbuilder has explicitly blessed such posts there), and I joined the game. I wrote up a character (background and character sheets), sent it to the GM, got a note back asking me to change a couple of things, and I did. And then I started playing. I'm still looking forward to playing in the two GGU games I've got queued up, but in the meantime I'm playing another game right _now_.

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Global Guardians - Champs by email (review)

 

I wanted to second FireG0lem's idea about GMs of all games acting a "Preauditors" for the GGU. True, we might miss things but the House Rules and Campaign Rules are easy hits. Plus, if there are any noncanon but acceptable builds like say Gunmetal's Flash Defense in an EC the GM can say "Jack et al; I know this is not HERO or GGU acceptable *but* I have looked over existing PCs and NPCs,talked it over with the group of players in this game and have decided to allow it to pass."

 

Combined with a simple list of Nos and Hell Nos for the approval process this should speed things up considerably. But, given the shared nature of the GGU it (the audit process) is vital to the game. We have to have portability.

 

As to Chairman and other longstanding GGU players and GMs maybe, just maybe with the current world and diverse campaigns Jack won't get bored for a while.

 

Hawksmoor