INTRODUCTION
Section I: Gamesmasters Editorial
Section II: Questions asked of his Players by Tony
a) What power levels are reasonable for PCs?
b) What should be the greatest point spread between
player characters to preserve game balance?
c) How often should advancement occur, and how big a
chunk of pts should be awarded maximum per advancement?
d) What is the fairest way to give points out to players?
Section III: Advancement Editorial by Jim Groves
Section IV: Questionnaire Results for Characters
Section V: Positions Taken & Vacant
CONCLUSION
Greetings and welcome to our first newsletter. Pursuant to the suggestion made by our grand and glorious gamesmaster, Tony, this edition is concerned mostly with certain administration aspects of the game as a whole. Being the editor, and this being my little commentary on the start, I should perhaps say a few words on the subject of newsletters.
Newsletters are not group lists, or discussions, but more like fanzines. People can make contributions that they feel are important enough that everyone should know them, but are not important enough to be sent to our Webmaster for the public record preserved there. Any such wise words should be sent directly to me (sorrow@netspace.net.au), for collation and publication at the end of the month. Bothering other people with them defeats the purpose. :)
For orders sake, in Section II comments will be attached to the
names of each players character. These correlations are:
Andelia Scott Olson sdo@visi.com, olsonsd@crusader.nsd.fmc.com Celia Deb Allen deb_allen@fac.com, d-singer@albany.net Cerise Jenn Bicking nephilim@netaxis.com Corleu Craig Wright sorrow@netspace.net.au Jacob Jim Groves Shroudling@aol.com Jaunquille Craig Sparling bl036@freenet.toronto.on.ca Laurel Rod Ridgway rodr@mail.enterprise.net Morgan Karen Francis karen@helrider.demon.co.uk, Karen.Francis@lis.co.uk Raven David Dalgliesh dgd@intouch.bc.ca Samara Pilar Quezzaire quezzair@husc7.harvard.edu Taran Daniel H. Levine demian@microtec.net Teridias Dean Bailey taffy@netspace.net.au Thalion Ben Ekdahl Modristo@aol.com Urda Sara Willig mooncalf@gis.net
One of the most intriguing things I've found about E-Mail games is the amount of miscommunication and misinformation that only I as the GM am privy to. There are several kinds of misinformation, and they are all proof that Gossip is the deadliest form of Chaos.
(1) Interpretation of Motives.
Some events happen, and of course players immediately begin
to conjecture: WHY did so-and-so do that? And based on their
previous experiences with said person, certain motives become
truly apparent to that player - and that prejudice is passed
on to another player, and so forth. On the other hand, someone
with a different experience with that same PC/NPC may interpret
the other's motives in a different way, causing confusion when
one person's act seems perfectly noble to one, and treacherous
to another.
(2) Broken Telephone.
And of course, you all know what happens when you pass
information down a chain of people: it gets misheard, misinterpreted
again and again, until an innocent statement is misconstrued as a
challenge to a duel by the last person in line.
(3) Intentional Misdirection.
And we all know they're out there...characters who intentionally
twist the truth to suit their purpose. Do you know who your
enemies are? Do you know how far your friend or relative would
go to achieve their own ambition?
As a GM, those three kinds of misinformation have all been seen by me in the campaign - no, not by my doing, but by UNSUSPECTING PLAYERS. And boy, have HUGE misunderstandings caused a lot of chaos in this game! And only I know what the truth is... Paranoid yet? The most important thing is to remember that truth is subjective, and be careful what truths you believe, Mulder.
Until next time, remember that Paradox and Paranoid are only one syllable off...
Your Gamemaster, Tony
Tony has asked that answers be split into similar groups, and these groups reflect my own simplistically hurried interpretations of peoples words and may therefore not represent the actual intentions.
(ROLEPLAYING GROUP)
Jacob: I believe that regular powers should be no problem. Advanced powers available for those who make the long term investment of time and energy. I think it should be pointed out as well that there are more major power groups available too. The race for 'advanced' version powers can be offset by diversity in other powers.
Laurel: I wouldn't want to see artificial limits on power levels. Whatever a character can develop in game should be acceptable, in my view. But most developments, particularly advanced and exalted levels, should take a lot of time and effort to achieve. And I would prefer for them to be specific to the individual character, rather than being presented in the "christmas hamper" approach presented in the ADRPG rules. And it should be the player's responsibility to define what they want by way of advanced powers, and submit this to Tony for approval and negotiation.
Corleu: agree with Laurel, especially in regards to the individual nature of truly advanced powers. truly advanced abilities should be influenced by the nature and understanding of the character who wields them, such that each individual expression will be distinct to that character. simply paying the points should not be sufficient for advanced abilities.
Taran: not sure what the cap should be. I have found that as a GM, I like to keep PCs at a rather moderate power level, but I do not GM Amber -- and there are stronger built-in caps in games like Vampire and Cyberpunk. In Amber, there's the potential for characters (especially ones that have been played for a long time, as I understand many of the characters in this game have) to achieve truly awesome power. whether that's a bad thing really depends on what Tony does with it -- but you can only save the entire universe so many times in one week before it gets kinda old.
(POINTS GROUP)
Andelia: does not necessarily see a need for a maximum number of points per se, as long as the power level stays within a range that Tony is comfortable with (the example given: if we all get to exalted whatever, we might have problems).
Raven: anything from 100-300 pts. over 300 is getting a little excessive. it should be very hard to get "exalted" versions of powers, and almost impossible to be "exalted" in more than one power.
(FUNCTIONAL GROUP)
Morgan: So that they end up with a reasonable chance of effecting the outcome of taking on an elder whose strengths are the same as theirs, as long as said PC does not go about it stupidly. :)
Samara: Depends on the function of the PC. Anything is justifiable as long as it makes sense to the story.
Urda: dunno. no matter how high you go there are always those far
higher.... may not matter much at all.
(ROLEPLAYING GROUP)
Corleu: firmly believe that game balance is a myth. The roleplaying experience of cooperative storytelling has nothing to do with points, the points are simply used to describe a character concept, and elders should have more points than youths. See the words of Taran below for another viewpoint on the same idea.
Laurel: For me, this isn't an issue. Yes, I want to receive advancement points, to be able to progress the characters abilities. But it doesn't worry me that some characters have probably received 3 or 4 times as many advancement points as I have. I'm more interested in enjoying the game than in progressing my character's powers and abilities. And for me, a lot of that enjoyment comes from the interaction of the characters, where point levels are almost completely irrelevant.
Taran: do not think that there needs to be any limit on point spreads to preserve game balance. I hope we are not concerned with competing with the other players, and if our characters are competing, then a point spread that 'realistically' represents the difference between an elder and a young punk is no problem. The only problem would be if we routinely have to save the universe, and the 2000-point characters all go off and do that while the 30-point characters just sit around and watch.
Urda: Personally, I don't mind point imbalance. Reflects RL nicely. I liked that for a while points were handed out soley on the basis of RP
(POINTS GROUP)
Andelia: for play balance reasons, the characters should not be separated by more than 30-50% in points (if a low-point character has 200 points, no character should have more than 300 points), but there is no reason to keep them all in lock-step either.
Jacob: Perhaps within 50 points.. The reason being that I think most players with 50 more points tend to invest them more in powers, not stats. In a player vs player contest it is usually stats that decide the outcome. In my opinion, a 200 point player probably has more options in terms of what they can do in Shadow etc.., but a well designed 150 can still catch them off guard or take them out depending on the situation and individual characters.
Morgan: As little spread as possible, ideally none. Keep players about even with each other, maybe 10-20 point difference, if unavoidable.
Raven: 75-100 pts.
Samara: Prolly 50-75 points.
(PROGRESS GROUP)
Corleu: do not care, as long as there is progress and an opportunity to redesign the character template to reflect changes which have happened in play. I also believe that contributions and play are distinctly different categories, which require separate treatment. Contributions require far more effort and commitment to the campaign as a whole than actual play.
Morgan: I would award a skill or something the player has been using within the game, trying to find or improve on. If you have to assign points then maybe 10-20 points at a time, maximum. Advancement occurring once a year.
Samara: Advancement should occur at the end of every cycle at least. If a GM feels that a player has earned a right to an IC power, they should be given the points to get it, or get partial powers.
Taran: really have no opinion about how advancement should be handled. As long as there's some feeling of progress, whether there is a lot of points or a little isn't very important (or even if there were no points and progress in other realms).
(POINTS GROUP)
Andelia: no more than 20-25 points per advancement (max 5-10 points contributions, up to full points for play), no more often than once every 4-6 months or so.
Jacob: I think after each of Tony's story 'Arcs', to be honest. That is when Tony usually makes a set amount of time pass, and takes a short break. There is usually a sense of conclusion, and reflection upon what has happened. Tony's story arcs also tend to about 3 to 4 months.. What a better time for advancement? Seriously, after really thinking this over, I don't see the frequency of advancement being the problem, but the amount of advancement. I think if it was after every story arc, that it should be up to say 15 points.
Raven: at the end of each story arc, say every 6 months or so of real-time. 10-20 pts per advancement, plus a maximum of 15 pts for player contributions.
(GAMESMASTER GROUP)
Laurel: don't really have much of an opinion on this one. Whatever Tony's comfortable with, I guess.
Urda: I was liking every chapter. GM's responibility
(ROLEPLAYING GROUP)
Raven: should be based on quality of role-playing and amount of involvement in the game (i.e., frequency/quality of posts). I feel the amount of time one invests in Paradox should be reflected in the number of advancement points one receives. Advancement should be posted publicly, as was done after the P&P story arc. There should *not* be any sort of competitive element to advancement points; theoretically everyone should be able to receive the exact same amount, provided they role-play well and provide player contributions. Any sort of competitive element--i.e., ranking people from best to worst in terms of role-playing, or something like that--totally destroys the whole spirit of role-playing.
Corleu: agree with Raven, and cannot think of anything further to say.
Taran: giving points for contributions/jobs is fair. It may not be 'in character,' but it's something that shows a devotion to the game and is an investment of time (and one can always come up with some sort of IC explanation for someone who's advancing faster). That is, as long as they don't overshadow the rewards for good role-playing. Other than that, I think that points should just be given out as seems appropriate for role-playing. Maybe there should be some sort of rough calibration to make it easier to keep everything balanced (e.g., 5 turns of 'OK' RP= 2pts, 5 turns of 'excellent' RP=6pts), but even that's not necessary.
Urda: Basis of RP.
(BALANCE GROUP)
Jacob: I think there should be a minimum flat rate given to everyone.. ALONG with a certain amount that could be earned to a maximum, based on player preformance. Given that my last answer was 15 points..how about a minimum of 5 points be awarded everyone, with another 10 points earnable for good playing. That gives some leeway for those who may be going through some real world troubles and fell out of sorts to still get something.. Contributions would net you nothing, but could be part of the consideration of whether you get that additional 10 points.
Laurel: maybe a small minimum award for showing up regularly, bonuses for quality of play and in-game contribution to the plot, and awards for paid jobs and freelance contributions. With roughly equal awards for in-game stuff and contributions, so that regular extra-curricular contributors would expect to be progressing at about twice the rate of hangers-on like me.
Morgan: Give the same number of points to each player and let them decide where to put them. Let those who want to, bank the points for later.
Samara: Based on contributions and experience, scaled down depending upon the amount of points a player has versus another. Say there are two 300s and four 200s. They may each earn the same amout of points, but to keep the game fair, you may want to say, award 2/3 points earned for a character above 300, and give full advancement to those under 300 until they are above 300...
While writing my answers, an idea suddenly occured to me, and I thought I would suggest it as a proposal. When the advancement issue came up, on more than one occasion, there was some discussion about players having too many powers and unbalancing the game. I am to understand that even Tony becomes concerned about it, in relation to being able to present a challenge.
So.. what if we had spending guidelines?
I mean if too many points are being dumped into powers, how about a 'ceiling' being placed on how many points can be placed in a power at any one time? For example, you may invest up to a maximum ten points of your advancement in a power, while the rest must be spent elsewhere.. And that leaves a lot of options open for the rest of those points, ie.. Stats, Allies, Artifacts, Shadows, etc... That would sort of encourage diversity and growth in other areas, and keep things from being unbalanced.
It would also add to the mystique, because there would be a greater chance that some aspect of other characters could change without you realizing it. folks tend to figure out if you have new powers, but a change in Stats usually comes as a surprise.
Thanks for listening..
Jim
Height: 177 centimetres, 5 foot 9 inches
Weight: 58 kilograms, 128 pounds
Eye Colour: dark green
Hair Colour: black
Skin Colour: pale cream, no freckles
Build: slim, moderate bust, slightly narrow
hips (35C-23-32)
Handedness: right
Hairstyle: long hair, normally tied in a single braid
Jewelry: large gold and black ring on her right hand,
small gold and ruby earstuds
Characteristics: beautiful, but doesn't really know it, and
doesn't dress to show it or to hide it
Heraldry: or, an eagle sable screaming left
Height: about 175 centimetres, 5 foot 9 inches
Weight: about 64 kilograms, 140 pounds
Eye Colour: usually green
Hair Colour: randomised
Skin Colour: fair
Build: slender
Handedness: both
Hairstyle: close cropped for now
Tattoo: a spinning top done in cherry red and silver
on the inside of her left wrist
Characteristics: favors casual dress; generally jeans and a caftan
style; simple yet elegant when dressing formally.
ususally carrying a tapestry tote.
Heraldry: cherry and silver spinning top
Height: 180 centimetres, 5 feet 11 inches
Weight: 75 kilograms, 164 pounds
Eye Colour: green so dark it's a shade above black
Hair Colour: green so dark it's a shade above black
Skin Colour: fair, but he will tan which is unusual
Build: slim, athletic
Handedness: right
Hairstyle: shortish, neat, part to his right
Jewelry: wedding band, medallion which is usually obscured
Characteristics: extremely quiet when moving, very fast
economical movement
Heraldry: a pair of black crossed revolvers on a white
field, sometimes black scales on a white field
Height: 184 centimetres, six foot and a bit
Weight: 68 kilograms, 150 pounds
Eye Colour: shimmering blue, with sparkles of silver
Hair Colour: platinum blonde
Skin Colour: pale
Build: slender
Handedness: left. so is her mirror reflection!
Hairstyle: long, straight to mid back, often in a ponytail
Jewelry (lots): rings, bracelets, brooches, ear-rings, neck chokers
Heraldry: Primary Colours: silver, blue and white
Device: ornate hand mirror surrounded by silver filigree
Height: 188 centimetres, 6 foot 2 inches
Weight: normal for build and musculature
Eye Colour: deep hazel
Hair Colour: black
Skin Colour: pale with slight tan
Build: medium, muscular
Handedness: right
Hairstyle: short, practical
Jewelry: woman's locket, not worn. currently missing.
Scars: many scars spread over chest and back.
Characteristic: daggers and knives worn on him, kept around him
at all times, and used often as he talks to
emphasise a point.
Heraldry: blood-red crescent moon on a black background
Height: 183 centimetres, 6 foot
Weight: 61 kilograms, 135 pounds
Eye Colour: charcoal-grey
Hair Colour: jet black
Skin Colour: caucasian, very pale
Build: slim, toned, athletic
Handedness: ambidextrous (naturally right-handed)
Hairstyle: straight, shoulder-length
Jewelry: golden circlet with red lens; silver-and-jade
pin; silver-and-ruby ring; white gold wedding
ring; flowering tree silver brooch
Heraldry: Primary Colours: Dove-grey and pale green
Device: A flowering tree (black trunk, pale
green leaves, dove-grey petals)
Height: 160 centimetres, 5 foot 3 inches Weight: 59 kilograms, 130 pounds Eye Colour: bottle green Hair Colour: deep auburn Skin Colour: ruddy Build: voluptuous Handedness: right Hairstyle: au naturale -- long curly hair Jewelry: nondescript watch Characteristics: bitchy, short, and too Fiona-like for her own good. Heraldry: gun-metal grey Walther PPK.
Height: 135 centimetres, 4 foot 5 inches
Weight: 30 kilograms, 65 pounds
Eye Colour: pink
Hair Colour: white
Skin Colour: white
Build: slight, adolescent
Handedness: ambi
Hairstyle: top-knot
Jewelry: torc in an umber metal; styalized lines and dots.
1 knob of the torc shows a unicorn head thrown
back, neck exposed, the other a serpent head jaws
open wide to bite. earings of vaious grey metals
in increasing size as they decsend the curve. each
has between 2 and 5 beads of an opaque pink stone.
Scars: long wide scar on the ball of right thumb
Characteristics: manic, shell-shocked, terrified
Gamesmaster Tony PI (cpi@po-box.mcgill.ca) Webmaster Scott Olson (sdo@visi.com, olsonsd@crusader.nsd.fmc.com) Paradoxical Times Craig Wright (sorrow@netspace.net.au) Secretariat Sara Willig (mooncalf@gis.net) Trump Director vacant Heraldic Devisor? vacant Mythographer? vacant
A personal note from Rod Ridgeway :- "As most of you know, Susan and I have been undergoing treatment for impaired fertility. We would like to express our thanks to all those who have expressed their support. The first attempt, in late November, produced 14 viable embryos, two of which were implanted, the remainder have been frozen for possible future use.
Unfortunately, the implants were unsuccessful on this occasion. We will be trying again in February, and will keep you all informed of progress."
I'm sure we all wish them the best. :)
Well, that wraps this first edition up. Anyone who has anything they would like to submit to the second edition, please feel free, as without anyones support this will not work. Karen has expressed some interest in preparing a FAQ, so if anyone can think of any frequently asked questions, you might want to let her know.
See you in Paradox.
Craig Wright
Editor