Red_Snow: Looks good. GmDngn: Not my cuppa. Would like to see a sample turn before making a judgment call. Feline Fantacy [sic]: Interesting idea, weak execution. RPG Email: Same old same old. Spells better than Ms. Fantacy. -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
> Red_Snow: Looks good. Agreed... > > GmDngn: Not my cuppa. Would like to see a sample turn before > making a judgment call. Comedic? It didn't sound very humorous to me at all... > > Feline Fantacy [sic]: Interesting idea, weak execution. Sounds like a one-shot adventure to me. > > RPG Email: Same old same old. Spells better than Ms. Fantacy. Agreed -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Martin Hanley wrote: > > Red_Snow: Looks good. > Agreed... Okay, I'll invite him into the sekrit kabal. > > GmDngn: Not my cuppa. Would like to see a sample turn before > > making a judgment call. > Comedic? It didn't sound very humorous to me at all... Me neither. I'll ask for the sample turn. > > Feline Fantacy [sic]: Interesting idea, weak execution. > Sounds like a one-shot adventure to me. Well, a "one-shot adventure" can stretch over years in PBeM time. > > RPG Email: Same old same old. Spells better than Ms. Fantacy. > Agreed So do you guys all think we should take on any "same old same old" games? These last two are kind of the typical dilemma: do we accept good games with awful spelling? Good-other-than-being-Yet-Another-Undifferentiated- AD&D-Game games with decent spelling? -- Karen J. Cravens silver@phoenyx.net The Dog Ate My Sketchbook: http://silver.phoenyx.net/ -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Silver wrote: > So do you guys all think we should take on any "same old same old" games? > These last two are kind of the typical dilemma: do we accept good games > with awful spelling? Good-other-than-being-Yet-Another-Undifferentiated- > AD&D-Game games with decent spelling? I think that there's a lot of room for "same old same old". A "generic" fantasy game can become a very interesting event with the right players and GM. As long as there are players willing to play in them, I don't see a reason to reject them, provided that they are of a sufficient quality in the first place. (And it gives GM's a place to grow.) A GM that makes frequent spelling mistakes (especially the common words of the genre) would drive me batty, and I think that it can lower the perceived quality of the Phoenyx. If a GM can't spell properly on his application, I don't think it bodes well for the game. I might make exceptions (the web form doesn't have a spell checker) but I'd want to see some sample work and determine the "severity" of the problem. -- Carl (raven@phoenyx.net) -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
In a message dated 99-08-02 11:49:02 EDT, you write: << So do you guys all think we should take on any "same old same old" games? These last two are kind of the typical dilemma: do we accept good games with awful spelling? Good-other-than-being-Yet-Another-Undifferentiated- AD&D-Game games with decent spelling? >> hmmmm. . . . As has been suggested in other places for other reasons there are a lot of other places that mediocre games can be played I guess we have to decide what is mediocre. My vote is for the interesting and fun.Spelling can be learned. As I have recently found (much to my chagrin) a good game master or game player is harder to come by. Just my two cents Ruth-- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
> I think that there's a lot of room for "same old same old"... > As long as there are players willing to play in them, I don't see a > reason to reject them, provided that they are of a sufficient quality > in the first place. (And it gives GM's a place to grow.) I'd agree with Carl. Things I think the Phoenyx can do to set itself apart are prune away the large numbers of campaigns that are stillborn or quickly abandoned. And keep enough games of different genres that it doesn't get a rep as being only for one type of game. There's room for a lot of medieval fantasy games without that happening. > A GM that makes frequent spelling mistakes (especially the common > words of the genre) would drive me batty, and I think that it can > lower the perceived quality of the Phoenyx. Err... me too. Again. One misspelling I see a lot and that drives me around the bend is 'rouge' instead of 'rogue'. Bad spelling in general annoys me, though. And 'magick' instead of 'magic', but that's another issue. However, I don't know whether it's effective to use bad spelling as a filter. I get the general impression that most people can't spell all that well. Maybe it's just that the internet has made examples of many more people's writing available, that wouldn't have been seen before. More than that, though, I wonder how many people are bothered by spelling errors in the material they read. I don't know if I'm representative or a nit-picker. It is a little ironic that this discussion is happening on the 'Phoenyx', though. Wonder how many spelling mistakes I'll make in this post... ---- Jeff Johnson jsjohnso@islandnet.com Carpei Sharpei (Seize the Wrinkle Dog.) -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
Put me down as another vote for the 'bad spelling is a problem' brigade. I don't know of any good player that would play in a game where the DM couldn't spell properly and so I think that bad spelling must have a major impact on the quality of the games. I also think that most bad spelling is as a result of sloppiness more than anything else. If a GM can't take care over one game application, then I can imagine that the game itself isn't going to be much cop. Let the voting continue. Bye for now, Nick -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
At , Nick Pendrell wrote: >Put me down as another vote for the 'bad spelling is a problem' brigade. > >I don't know of any good player that would play in a game where the DM couldn't >spell properly and so I think that bad spelling must have a major impact on the >quality of the games. I also think that most bad spelling is as a result of >sloppiness more than anything else. If a GM can't take care over one game >application, then I can imagine that the game itself isn't going to be much >cop. > >Let the voting continue. I'll just put my two cents in and say that I agree with all of Nick's points, including the "bad spelling is a problem". On the concepts in the four games: Red Snow looks interesting. Definite yes. Feline Fantacy [sic] has an interesting premise (but I'm disturbed by the frequent spelling and typographical errors in the request post, especially in the title of the game). Provisional yes, provided the GM is willing to invest in a spell checker. I think that a comic game will be difficult to pull off, especially for a new GM. Comic timing is hard to pull off face-to-face, in email, lacking facial expressions, tone of voice and body language, it is even harder. Provisional no, unless the GM can demonstrate some real ability with comic writing. As to the generic AD&D game, it's hard to say. The GM is new, but that *might* be a good thing. It's not my cup of tea, but some people like these types of games. Provisional yes. -- Michael Feldhusen (mikef@pharlap.com) http://excalibur.pharlap.com/homepage.html The Lord made grass, Man made booze; Who CAN you trust? -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
On 3 Jan 17, at 22:207, Jeff Johnson wrote: > It is a little ironic that this discussion is happening on the > 'Phoenyx', though. Wonder how many spelling mistakes I'll make in this > post... When the Phoenix became the Phoenyx, it was not a typo, but a primitive, non-error-correcting modem that caused the name change. Still have that modem, I think. Hacked-up Vicmodem. Never had the Vic to go with it, though. -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
> > I think that there's a lot of room for "same old same old"... > > As long as there are players willing to play in them, I don't see a > > reason to reject them, provided that they are of a sufficient quality > > in the first place. (And it gives GM's a place to grow.) > > I'd agree with Carl. Things I think the Phoenyx can do to set itself > apart are prune away the large numbers of campaigns that are stillborn > or quickly abandoned. And keep enough games of different genres that it > doesn't get a rep as being only for one type of game. There's room for a > lot of medieval fantasy games without that happening. Agree. As a GM of a 'same old same old' campaign, and a player in two others (one of which is on Phoenyx; the other just uses CC when sending e-mails) I have to say that they are all very different from one another. > > A GM that makes frequent spelling mistakes (especially the common > > words of the genre) would drive me batty, and I think that it can > > lower the perceived quality of the Phoenyx. > > Err... me too. Again.> I don't know if I'm > representative or a nit-picker. I'm such a nit picker that I've got rooms full of nits. Poor spelling (and grammar and punctuation) are pet peeves of mine. I can't say categorically that poor English skills imply a poor game, but it sure makes it a heck of a lot easier to enjoy a good game if you don't keep stumbling over the language. Having said that, I also know that nobody's perfect, and I've later found errors in my own posts. But for a GM, that should be the exception, not the rule. If a person doesn't take the care to use English properly in a game proposal, you can't expect the game to be any better. I'd say if the game looks REALLY interesting, let them give it a go. But otherwise the quality of the proposal probably reflects the quality of the game. As to the content of the proposals in question, I dunno. I'm a hard and fast medieval fantasy D&D player. I've dabbled in sci-fi and other stuff, but never really got into it. The cat one sounds like it could be okay for about one short scenario (in PBEM time, say six months). The comedy one is probably a bust without a very good comedy writer running it, and the proposal doesn't reflect that. In all honesty, it's really hard to say how good the games would be based on the proposals. I'd suggest requiring the GM's to create their web pages first, and judge those instead. If they're serious about running a PBEM, it's a good idea to have a web page anyway. (And if they get turned down here, there are plenty of other places to have their page hosted for free.) If they balk at the effort of making a web page before even having their game accepted here, then they probably don't have the drive to run a decent game either. -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
