Rules Bloat

Jul 14, 2009 14:54

I think I've finally realized what's bothering me so much about Lost and Forsaken ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 13

eladria July 14 2009, 23:16:08 UTC
Can you give an example of a pointless overclarification?

Reply

mechanicalhyena July 15 2009, 01:38:05 UTC
have you read the Lost-ooc list lately?

I'm getting a little sick of 'official rulings' that aren't in the addenda, and being expected to use that tripe. Nor will I, until they're put into a listed sanctioned source.

I consider the restrictions on oaths with mortals to be over-clarification and against the theme of the books.
I consider the ruling that to take advantage of merit granted oaths, you must have the pre-reqs to be not only stupid, but against example oaths and the themes of the book.
I consider many of the attempts on forsaken-ooc and lost-ooc to 'clarify' the rules to be the purview of the local storyteller, not a player asking for a ruling to attempt to batter their local STs into using someone else's ruling.

Some things really DO need clarification, as the rules are unclear in their wording.

Reply

eladria July 15 2009, 01:59:09 UTC
Only Venue OOC list I'm on is Forsaken.

But let me ask this:

Isn't it a good idea for the rules to be uniform? should rules change when VSTs do? Isn't that what these rules help fix?

Reply

mechanicalhyena July 15 2009, 02:45:47 UTC
When the rules are absurd and poorly thought out and inappropriate to the venue?

No. Not appropriate at all.

Reply


Rules or Story? torakhan July 15 2009, 03:46:14 UTC
I assume you're referring more to the LARP OOC rules/association more than the story and setting? Or is that some of the issue too?

Reply


jaedyth July 15 2009, 13:32:29 UTC
Yanno...I got nothing better to say than...

This.

Reply


erin_ruston July 16 2009, 20:15:28 UTC
The rules addenda is a book in its own right. If you print the entire thing out, you have as much paper as an entire game book. That's way the hell too much.

Reply

disabrogate July 17 2009, 12:39:53 UTC
If WW had a rules edition team for the source books this wouldn't be much need for an addendum in the first place. Consider the number of clarifications per a page of the MET books to other source material.

You have a couple of editing errors, statements about which optional rules are used, and a bunch of deconfliction between the MET rule instead this other one published later". There is only 2 actual changes to the MET rules in the addendum and more then half the MET rules clarifications would not be necessary if away if WW had deconflicted the rules before publishing the later books.

The MET books are not perfect, but they do show how much having outside people review the rules before a book goes to print can cut down on the addendum. Unfortunately I don't see WW ever making serious improvement to its QA process. Most of the people I know who play TT WW games do so because they know the rules are broken, they like that type of game.

Reply


neko_indi July 17 2009, 16:16:38 UTC
That's been my core problem with Requiem for the past several months.

I hate to say it, but "we" obviously have not learned from the past mistakes of OWoD - because we're repeating them.

I avoid killboxes like the plague - partly because I'm a "role" player, but mostly because of what you're talking about here. Sorry to hear that it's ahppening in Forsaken and Lost as well, as I'm just looking at dipping my toes into those waters, finally.

*sigh*

Reply


Leave a comment

Up