From: Patrick F. McGehearty <patrick@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: Looking for info/recommendations
Originator: patrick@wagner.convex.com
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 21:16:04 GMT
Reply-To: patrick@convex.COM (Patrick F. McGehearty)
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <ONEIL.93Jan20134645@husc10.harvard.edu> oneil@husc10.harvard.edu (John O'Neil) writes:
...
interesting stuff about fighting styles and how superior skills overcome
level differentials
...
>
>	Well, Yes the IFGS does have continuing worlds, but it is possible to
>   run a game that is very different from the places previous games have taken
>   place in.  
>
>It simply cannot be *that* different, since you use the same set of
>medieval fantasy rules, which specifies the realities of the game in
>advance.  In a sense, the IFGS *is* the IFGS rules.  The IFGS is a
>heavily centralized organization, with a national set of rules and a
>national system for "approving" games -- which otherwise are not
>'official' IFGS product. If you don't do it their way, you're thrown
>out -- it's happened.  All this serves to constrict the imagination of
>the game designers and the players.

I believe that above statement could mislead the casual reader about how
IFGS works, so I am posting my understanding of how IFGS works.

Calling IFGS a heavily centralized organization is overstating the case.  If
nothing else, being all volunteer keeps anyone from having the time to
"police" everyone.  We rely on the national organization for enough
continuity and coherence in the rules so than a person can go to any game in
any chapter and understand what is going on.  Also, the national
organization provides us buying power for purchasing rules and gaming
insurance.  Many landowners will only allow land usage to a group if they
can provide liability insurance.  New chapters are provided a set of
national guidelines for game design and sanctioning to insure game
productions are viable.  After all, when a game is no good, or a production
falls apart, you have burned a bunch of people with a bad experience.  Those
of us who have been playing for a while want to keep a viable organization
going for the future.  If you burn people too often, they won't come back.

Once a new chapter has some experience under its belt and has shown that it
can run games on a regular basis, all game sanctioning is turned over to its
local sanctioning committee.  These local people control what goes on in a
local chapter.  Only during the training period for a new chapter is there
any national review of local chapter games.

Next, IFGS does not throw people out for proposing new ideas.
I'm not sure what John is refering to in terms of "doing it our way" and
throwing people out.  If someone consistently uses unsafe fighting
techniques, like overhand shots to the head, or shoving people down hills,
or the like, and does not change their behavior when warned, then they will
be invited to go elsewhere.  We are serious about having a safe game.
Likewise, if someone is assigned a NPC role as a 1st level Fighter, and in
the middle of the game independently starts to pretend to be a 8th level
Vampire, I would really hesitate to use them in another game.  So people
have been "thrown out" for cause, but I don't think that is what John means.

If someone wants to write a game that radically distorts the IFGS Fantasy
rules paradim, the first question I ask is "Can you make some changes in you
mechanics so the players don't have to learn new rules?"  One of the things
that the IFGS Fantasy rules offers is an expectation that a player does not
need to learn a new set of rules every game, so the game mechanics are
automatic, and they can concentrate on the game.  This aspect is really
important when you are trying to simulate "live combat", and much less
important for the "roleplaying" portion of the game.  Remembering which
rules are in effect when seconds matter can be very distracting.

Sometimes retaining the rules only requires some creative redefinition of
terms, and some compromise on the details of special effects.  For example,
I know a player who has a raygun instead of a bow (He is from the future, he
fell through a timewarp).  Funny thing, it has a recharge time that matches
that of a bow, and because of the distorting effects of the timewarp, the
damage done by the raygun matches that of a bow.  So he has a raygun for
roleplaying reasons, but it has the effect of a bow for game mechanics.

If the designer is really resistant to adapting to the existing rules,
my next question is "Why use IFGS Fantasy rules and characters if you don't
like them?".  If the designer is being extremely vocal in putting down
the IFGS Fantasy Rules, there is a natural tendency to say "go way, don't
bother me anymore", but that is an issue of interpersonal relations, not
being thrown out of the organization.

If someone wants to come up with a complete set of rules for ongoing
characters and can convince a number of other people to participate, there
is no reason why the IFGS record keeping structure, insurance base,
tax-exempt (non-profit) status, and organizational structure cannot support
that set of rules.  However, the new designer must be prepared to overcome a
lot of inertia.  If someone is having fun with one system, why switch to
another?  Many people will not feel the need to change to for the sake of
change.  Selling a new rule system takes tact and persistance.

For example, there are a set of "unofficial" Undercover rules.  They are
labeled "unofficial" because they are still being refined, and the rule
designers don't want to call them "official" until they feel the rules
are not going to change for a while.  The Undercover rules are intended
for a modern day spy novel mileu, and a number of games have been run in the
Colorado area using these rules.

On the other hand, if the designer is writing a game which involves a large
set of one-shot rules, with all new characters which will never play in
another game, it sounds like a natural of an SIL event.  In that case,
why not run an SIL game?

I see no problem with one person intermixing IFGS games and other games.
You can play in an SIL game Friday night, an SCA tournament on Saturday, and
an IFGS game on Sunday.  Each provides a different mix of roleplaying and
personal skills, but there are lots of people who can enjoy all of
the above.

- Patrick McGehearty
  patrick@convex.com