From: rlb@access.digex.com (Richard L. Butler)
Subject: Re: rec.games.frp reorg
Organization: The Fourth Drawer on the Left, Second Column
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 09:35:01 GMT

allens@yang.earlham.edu (Allen Smith) writes:
[well, actually, Allen doesn't get to say anything here, because I'm really
 responding to points in Vincent's post, which I must have inadvertently
 chopped while scanning news.groups, but which is liberally quoted in Allen's
 article...]

>vjg@cbnews.cb.att.com (vincent.j.guinto) writes:
>>rlb@access.digex.com (Richard L. Butler) writes:
>>>[a quote from my disagreement with a *different* Mr. Smith, not the one
>>> cited above, which continues:]
>>>
>>>versions of D&D; there is NO intent to split out ALL D&D-related discussion,
>>>                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>only that which has to do with the worlds, adventure modules, and rules-or-
>>>mechanics of the assorted D&D systems.  If his reasons for suggesting this
>>
>> Why do I fear that whenever someone mentions, in rec.games.frp after the
>> split, anything relating to *dnd, someone (or probably several someones)
>> will shout out, "Back to your r.g.f.dnd ghetto, you *&#)!* munchkin!"

I think that you probably should restate that, but I think I also understood
what you meant to say.  As my quoted statement says, there is NO intent to
split out ALL D&D-related discussion into rec.games.frp.dnd;  if you want to
discuss whether orcs (or any creature) can be inherently evil, or whether or
not a character can truly be considered good because he fights evil, I would
imagine that you'd be welcome in rec.games.frp.misc.  Some few jerks will
flame about how those questions are D&D rules questions, but they can re-
insert their heads where appropriate (over in .advocacy).  If you said, "Can
my paladin use his healing points a little at a time, or only all at once?",
you'd be asking a rules question, and rightly be directed to .dnd.

>> My dislike over rec.games.frp.dnd is that it seems unequal and unfair to
>> single out a specific game for special treatment. Some people view having
>> [part deleted for sake of brevity]
>> How can rec.games.frp be a common, all-genre, all-system newsgroup if
>> you single out one game for special treatment and exclusion? Why is it

Loren didn't single *D&D* out for special treatment, *per se*.  He singled
out a particular game system (and its attendant gigantic mass of published
world and campaign material) which generates a great-f-ing-*LOT* of rules
and game mechanics discussion, which is uninteresting to many r.g.frpers,
and which if removed to another group will significantly reduce the traffic
in rec.games.frp.misc (carthago delenda est), and establish a healthy new
newsgroup with more than enough traffic to justify its existence.  It could
have just as easily been any other major gaming system, but D&D is the one
which generates so much rules discussion pertinent *only to D&D gamers* that
it needs this special treatment.

>> okay to take out all *dnd rule questions from the group, but leave the
>> GURPS disad discussions, Shadowrun combat questions, the occasional
>> Champions "how do I build a cheap energy projector" posts, etc.?

Because that's what rec.games.frp.misc will be for, as rec.games.frp is
now;  discussion for ALL .frp topics not specifically meant to occur in a
subgroup of r.g.frp.  There just aren't any subgroups right now, because
we've never been able to agree on a split.

>> I disagree with the volume argument, simply because it is not being
>> applied uniformly. People support giving *dnd its own group because
>> of the volume of postings, and then go on to advocate things like
>> r.g.f.forsale, which would take maybe ten postings week out of r.g.f.

It's a matter of establishing high signal-to-noise groups for certain kinds
of information, so that those who need or want that information can find it.

To date, the ONLY possible other newsgroup that *might* be justified (if
volume of postings as a percentage of total r.g.frp traffic is a valid measure)
would be r.g.frp.cyber, so all those rules and game mechanics posts about
Shadowrun would have a place to go.  It's recently been decided that no action
will be taken on that idea until after the reorg passes or is shot down.

As for applying the volume argument uniformly, we can't.  R.g.frp traffic is
not uniformly divided between all systems and all topics.  If it were, no
meaningful split could be achieved.  Instead, Loren is addressing a current
problem, which has been a problem for many people for over one year (and now
worse than ever before - the amount of traffic in r.g.frp and in all groups
in general is climbing steadily, and will continue to do so as more and more
people gain access to the net).

Ooops - it's me again...
>>>My other reason for capitulation is that some people suggested a rec.games.-
>>>frp.srun newsgroup - EXACTLY the kind of single-group/single-game naming that
>>>we should be avoiding (.dnd is NOT about a single game...).  Rather than see
>>                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> 
>> Are the distinctions between D&D, AD&D v1, and AD&D v2 so great that you
>> can honestly call them three distinct and unique games? I view them more
>> as variants of the same game, since they have so much in common.

It's not just the distinctions between these highly similar systems - it's
the mass of different published campaign worlds and related products that
makes D&D a unique problem for r.g.frp at this time.  Some of TSR's campaign
worlds are markedly dissimilar, and engender larges amounts of discussion
that will also be directed to r.g.frp.dnd.

>> agreeing with them. But I really, REALLY dislike singling out one group
>> of players (and one group of r.g.f readers) and shunting them aside into
>> their own little niche. Either shunt aside NOBODY, or shunt aside
>> EVERYONE.

As previously stated, and as Loren's proposed charter states, r.g.frp.dnd
isn't proposed so that D&Ders can be segregated away from the rest of r.g.frp,
it's so that D&D-only *rules* discussion (which is a surprisingly large amount
of what r.g.frp carries) can be moved into a separate group.  D&Ders will
still be completely welcome to discuss *role-playing* matters (such as what to
do about rules-lawyers, munchkins, and other low forms of life, or how to
motivate people to do heroic deeds, or whatever) in rec.games.frp.misc.


Damn, that wasn't a horse, if was a *whale*.  No wonder my foot hurts...

-- 
 Richard L. Butler             rlb@access.digex.com             301-220-2020
 Digital Express Group, 6006 Greenbelt Road #228, Greenbelt, Maryland  20770
   **** Express Access: Online Communications in Washington/Baltimore ****
   * login as "new" for info, 301-220-0462 (Wash) or 410-766-1855 (Balt) *
Xref: sparky news.groups:9915 alt.music.enya:1