Jump to content

GM's "rights"


nexus

Recommended Posts

Re: GM's "rights"

 

Its clear you have a personal problem with how Worldmaker runs his PBEM, which you have doggedly pursued in numerous threads at this point. Not every game is for every player. No one is compelling you to play in WM's game and no one is compelling his players to play in his game. They play in it because they've found they enjoy it. To suggest that the fact that they enjoy playing in a game or game style you do not care for means they have no self-respect is arrogant in the extreme.

 

I am known for being an open-minded GM who is willing to negotiate insofar as the concept doesn't change the overall nature of the game or make my life difficult in plot and balance areas - and I honestly don't think you'd last in my game. The first time you turned to the other players to "get consensus" on your character they would shrug and send you to me and I would send you packing. I've got a good thing going and there are other games out there for you to enjoy.

 

Yes, the players need to have a general say in the genre and style of play, but once a game is afoot the GM has invests a great deal of effort into building that vision from the ground up and should have a lot of say in maintaining it and keeping it on course. Worldmaker's game is a pre-existing game world that has been running for some time and has players who enjoy the way things are. A new player coming into that world, especially since its a PBEM game, should fully comprehend the fact that it has a direction its headed in and "auditors" to ensure that the whole house of cards doesn't come crashing down.

 

I ran a successful and popular game (three interlaced campaigns, really) that lasted for thirteen years. That kind of endurance and players who kept coming back chomping at the bit for more week after week tells my I must have been running something they liked - but it was a game with limited possible origins and characters who had to meet a specific set of parameters. The players accepted this, and because it required them to consider and invest in their characters - led them to be its biggest enforcers.

 

New players coming into that game had to understand some concepts were okay and some weren't, and that I was going to audit the hell out of not just their characters, but them as well. And my auditing system was suggested by one of my players after we had a bad experience with a newbiew who wouldn't get on the page with the rest of us. I can't have been that big a tyrant - I've been asked to start a fourth freedom patrol campaign as a PBEM game.

 

Everytime this general topic comes up and WM makes a comment you take the opportunity to attack his game and the way he runs it. Its demonstrative of a bigger problem on your part than his from where I sit. There are a lot of games on the wide-world of the net. His simply wasn't for you. Let it go.

 

Disclaimer: I am not now, nor have I ever, played in Worldmaker's game.

 

Is saying "I love you" in response to this post inappropriate? :D I'd rep ya if I hadn't already done so recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 195
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Re: GM's "rights"

 

Its clear you have a personal problem with how Worldmaker runs his PBEM, which you have doggedly pursued in numerous threads at this point. Not every game is for every player. No one is compelling you to play in WM's game and no one is compelling his players to play in his game. They play in it because they've found they enjoy it. To suggest that the fact that they enjoy playing in a game or game style you do not care for means they have no self-respect is arrogant in the extreme.

 

SNIP

 

Everytime this general topic comes up and WM makes a comment you take the opportunity to attack his game and the way he runs it. Its demonstrative of a bigger problem on your part than his from where I sit. There are a lot of games on the wide-world of the net. His simply wasn't for you. Let it go.

 

Disclaimer: I am not now, nor have I ever, played in Worldmaker's game.

 

I'd rep you if I could. Well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: GM's "rights"

 

Oh. Thanks for clearing that up. :rolleyes:

Seriously, what do you want me to say? I don't know bblackmoor, never talked to him, couldn't tell you his real name. Jack's plagarist bit twigged me to something I'd wondered about when I was looking at the GG pages last week. I asked him about it, and it carried on from there.

 

He acted like it wasn't a big deal, and then I pointed out that since he said he was creating almost everything in the GG universe, yeah, it was a big deal. He tried to treat me like a fool by throwing up a link and a page that not weren't there last week, but that just a little searching could find out hand't been there for a year before, and saying "Didn't you see that?" I called him on it, and now he's just calling me names. (Okay, I called him a weasel first. Shouldn't have done that.)

 

Instead of getting "We need to get that up" or "We forgot about that" or something normal, not only do I get this crap, not only do I get lumped in with the rest of the folks that might have said a discouraging word that Jack heard, I become one of those other people.

 

So, yeah. I've gone from a guy who had a question about a website to a guy who's wondering just how tightly wrapped the guy at the other end of the computer line is.

 

Actually, that's probably a good rule for Internet users everywhere, come to think of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: GM's "rights"

 

Seriously, what do you want me to say? I don't know bblackmoor, never talked to him, couldn't tell you his real name. Jack's plagarist bit twigged me to something I'd wondered about when I was looking at the GG pages last week. I asked him about it, and it carried on from there.

 

He acted like it wasn't a big deal, and then I pointed out that since he said he was creating almost everything in the GG universe, yeah, it was a big deal. He tried to treat me like a fool by throwing up a link and a page that not weren't there last week, but that just a little searching could find out hand't been there for a year before, and saying "Didn't you see that?" I called him on it, and now he's just calling me names. (Okay, I called him a weasel first. Shouldn't have done that.)

 

Instead of getting "We need to get that up" or "We forgot about that" or something normal, not only do I get this crap, not only do I get lumped in with the rest of the folks that might have said a discouraging word that Jack heard, I become one of those other people.

 

So, yeah. I've gone from a guy who had a question about a website to a guy who's wondering just how tightly wrapped the guy at the other end of the computer line is.

 

Actually, that's probably a good rule for Internet users everywhere, come to think of it.

 

Personally, I'm usually unwrapped. :winkgrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: GM's "rights"

 

That' date=' ma'am, may step over into that whole zone of Too Much Information...[/quote']

You don't know Kara yet, do you? :)

 

I asked WM once on something he had not credited but was verbatim from Jack Rite. He happily said, "oh, you're right, I forgot." It was a post on these boards. That tells me he's not likely to have scrambled to put together a page just for your benefit. As to searching caches, what if the page simply wasn't searched (had norobots on it) or the link was simply broken? The site has been in flux. I've seen occasional broken links, reporting them as found.

 

If he did, there's no point n going on about it now anyway.

 

And even if he did, that's got nothing to do with the plagiarism issue between bblackmoor and him. Two wrongs and a right and all that.

 

And that issue should be dead and gone on these boards by now as we've heard about it, and the record speaks for itself.

 

And whether you're bblackmoor (which I doubt as your posts show up back in September in places there's no reason at all to hide one's identity) we've also "discussed", and I say we leave you to be whom you wish to be, TheHermit - who is done questioning GGU's accreditations in a spin-out from an argument between WM and bblackmoor.

 

Welcome, TheHermit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Worldmaker

Re: GM's "rights"

 

For the record, my calling him blackmoor was sarcasm, given that they both share the same aim of badmouthing me every chance they get.

 

As for the page, its been there all along. Of course, its also been a .html page until I poked Steve in the ribs and told him to convert it. But its been there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: GM's "rights"

 

but also wonder about guys like you who keep jumping in to try and defend him all the time.

For the record I was not defending him.

 

I was attacking you. Having read what you wrote and in light of what blackmoor was writing I detected a certain similarity and it made me suspicious. Also the fact that you chose TheHermit as a handle. Hermit is a well known poster here so I have reservations and suspicions about the way the handle was selected.

 

You may claim innocence but I still doubt you at present.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...