From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: r.g.frp.* and sci fi games
Date: 13 Sep 92 08:32:52 GMT
Organization: Newt World Order

In article <12SEP199215541729@rosie.uh.edu>, lib1p@rosie.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino) writes:
> This is r.g.frp.misc.  In the hierarchy r.g.frp.* is for 
> fantasy role playing games.  Sci fi games are not fantasy
> games.  Therefore, officially they do not belong here.

Wrong.

Perhaps a glance at the official charter of rec.games.frp.misc would
clarify this point for you and anybody else who is deluded in this way.

NAME:      rec.games.frp.misc
CHARTER:   This is a discussion group for all aspects of roleplaying
           games which are not subsumed within another rec.games.frp.*
           newsgroup. It fully replaces rec.games.frp within the
           roleplaying newsgroup hierarchy. The acronym "frp" refers to
           Fantasy Role-Playing, but this does not mean that the scope
           of the group is restricted to pseudo medieval settings where
           magic is common and powerful. The common mis-use of the word
           "fantasy" comes from the marketing distinction between the
           literary genres of science fiction and fantasy. Fantasy
           actually means anything that is set in a time or place that
           is **in some essential way** unlike our own.  Science Fiction
           fits this definition of fantasy, as do other genres including
           Horror, Tolkeinesque High Fantasy, and Westerns. Lines of
           discussion in this newsgroup can be expected to include,
           among other topics: roleplaying advice; gamemastering advice;
           reviews of roleplaying products; scenario ideas; rules;
           errata; gaming anecdotes; and many peripherally connected
           subjects. Crossposting between this group and other
           roleplaying discussion groups is to be discouraged.

> Now someone mentioned that there is a group r.g.rpg, but I
> haven't noticed it.  Is this true?  Seems that is where
> sci fi games should go.  But if this is true, then the
> hierarchy should be r.g.rpg.fantasy.* and r.g.rpg.sf.*.

Sorry, but rec.games.rpg is a bogus newsgroup. Don't go looking for it,
because it only propagates to about 10% of the net, and in the rest of
the net whatever you post on it shows up in rec.games.frp.misc instead.

On the other hand, if you would like to propose a new group vote for
rec.games.frp.space and rec.games.frp.pseudo-medieval or whatever your
chosen names are then either talk about it in .advocacy for this is not
the group for it or actually make it an official RFD in
news.announce.newgroups.

By the way, there was plenty of battletech discussion in rec.games.board
this summer. Why not take battletech and warhammer 40k discussion to
that group, for despite their audience which is primarily of roleplayers
those games are actually boardgames (aside from Mechwarrior which is
fair game for rgf.misc).

And another thing, the polls taken before the recent split vote
indicated that of all possible split schemes the one with the least
support was a wholesale split along company lines. Please don't raise
this dreadful spectre again, and please, direct your opinions on why
this board should split to .advocacy where they and the resulting flames
might be welcomed.

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
The more corrupt the government, the greater the number of laws -- Tacitus
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc