Moving PCs -

[SwordSaintMusashi]

Good job.

So just to be clear...
How long do I need to wait?

What? We still don't know... uhm...
Ok, guess i'll just move and see what happens.

30 Days. Until the rule is appended to state otherwise.

[kid]

Good job.

So just to be clear...
How long do I need to wait?

What? We still don't know... uhm...
Ok, guess i'll just move and see what happens.

30 Days. Until the rule is appended to state otherwise.

Paazin said a couple posts ago, 5 is good with him.
Seems like thats HDM approval to move to BG tho isnt it?

[Zelknolf]

It might be useful to clarify "event" in that regard.

Hypothetically, say I were I to run a plot that was four sessions long and it would absolutely require the presence and participation of a character who would typically be restricted from the server by another PC from the same player. I go through the proper channels, and presumably have spent some undefined quantity of time poking my HDM to get his attention. Would wonder whether the PC is expected to remain on server under portaling restrictions while playing 'normally' (and I would thus be responsible for combing the logs for any ill doing), go back to their home server until the next session (and I would thus just be watching them with the greater awareness provided by the DM client while they're on), or just not log in unless I'm about (or until they're allowed to portal back? We do have a vague exception for characters being where they're not allowed when they're making a beeline for the server portal when it's a DM who has to scamper through their own turf to travel). Or some combination of those?

And I suppose the same could be asked for what happens at the end of a session if it's all handled in one sitting. After all, we have players who are making a good-faith effort to use this policy in pursuit of game, but aren't (weren't?) sure what's expected of them, and it looks like many others watching the situations have conflicting ideas about what the expectations are (though from posts here, it sounds like PMs may have already established expectations with the individuals who were directly involved in this one? I'm left a little lost on the tangible actions I'm supposed to take, though, and the matching thread in the DM forum seems to have gone a similar direction to this one).

[Swift]

Good job.

So just to be clear...
How long do I need to wait?

What? We still don't know... uhm...
Ok, guess i'll just move and see what happens.

30 Days. Until the rule is appended to state otherwise.

Paazin said a couple posts ago, 5 is good with him.
Seems like thats HDM approval to move to BG tho isnt it?

He said he would be happy if it was 5. At this stage it remains 30 until otherwise changed.

[kid]

Didnt see anything about a requirment for an "event" anywhere.
So not sure why that is important.

[Zelknolf]

Didnt see anything about a requirment for an "event" anywhere.
So not sure why that is important.

Your problem might be having not read the actual policy, then. You might find it here:
http://www.alandfaraway.org/phpBB3/view ... =3&t=49002

Where the line in question reads

Thirty days must pass before a member can play a PC on any sever where a previous PC of the member has played with the following exceptions:
-In rare instances where an active dm is supervising the pc for a dmed event and the DM immediately removes the PC from the server at the conclusion of the event- this requires HDM approval of the server in question. The DM is to note the exception in the player's notes.

[kid]

Gotcha.
Thanks.

(And yeah, When read the rule back then tottaly misunderstood that line thinking it was about removing someone who's "stuck" on a server. like... not played in a long while, then moved 2ed toon there... but needed an "extraction" from the server for his old dude. Anyway...yup carry on.).

[Adanu]

I am getting rather sick of seeing members who believe rules are there to be followed as being part of the 'anti-fun brigade'.

Believe it or not, our system of rules and our willingness to stick to them and only make slow, evolutionary changes are the reason we are still here as a community when so many other PWs have long since disappeared.

Pretending this is the same ALFA you came into years ago is foolish and drives people away just as badly. I don't think anyone is saying that rules are bad here. What most are saying is that most of the rules we have are outdated and screw players more often than not now.

I hope one day you -and people like you- learn that. As it is, this vendetta is just embarrassing.

And for the record; I didn't know there was a 30 day period... that is pretty bullshit. I agree with paazin for five days.

[Swift]

I think you should look up what the word vendetta means.

I think that many of the rules we have currently are fine. I think some of them are absolutely required. If you think I have a vendetta because I argue in support of the rules I believe we need, then everyone that argues against those same rules has a vendetta of a different sort.

If I actually had a vendetta, I would have run for Admin positions in the past so that I actually had some power to enact rules I think we need.

You told me in PMs that I miss the point of your posts often. I argue that you purposefully misconstrue my posts so that you can try to paint me in a bad light by making posts such as the one above.

[Adanu]

I think you should look up what the word vendetta means.

I think that many of the rules we have currently are fine. I think some of them are absolutely required. If you think I have a vendetta because I argue in support of the rules I believe we need, then everyone that argues against those same rules can be argued to have a vendetta.

If I actually had a vendetta, I would have run for Admin positions in the past so that I actually had some power to enact rules I think we need.

You told me in PMs that I miss the point of your posts often. I argue that you purposefully misconstrue my posts so that you can try to paint me in a bad light by making posts such as the one above.

You're missing what I'm saying. I'm not saying anything about a vendetta against rules: that was an offhand example. I'm saying this is a vendetta born from displeasure against this 2 PC thing that is being applied to this specific situation.

[Swift]

So what is my vendetta then? I have not called for anyone to be punished, I have not called for the 2 PC rule to be revoked and I have not railed against the event that actually took place. I perceived there to be a somewhat casual attitude by a few people to the fact the exception rule had been broken and spoke up about it.

Where are my protracted, hostile acts (which is the actual definition of a vendetta) and who have I performed them against?

A rule was broken which I believe we need and some people's reactions seemed to be "meh". Passionate and occasionally heated debate followed. I see no vendetta here.

What I do see are a few different kinds of ALFAns

1) Those arguing that rules should be enforced.
2) Those arguing the rule in question should not even exist
3) People posting so it is known they dislike drama
4) Danielmn

There is room in ALFA for all kinds of people. It is rather tiresome to see those that generally believe in our rules being attacked by those who think they should be abandoned.

[Adanu]

A rule was broken which I believe we need

DO we need this rule in it's current incarnation (30 day as opposed to 5 day) or do we need it period?

[Swift]

A rule was broken which I believe we need

DO we need this rule in it's current incarnation (30 day as opposed to 5 day) or do we need it period?

Do we need it in it's current incarnation? No.
Do we need it? Yes.

My personal thoughts are that 30 days are too long and 5 days is too short. What fits? I am not sure. If people actually want to have a serious, well reasoned debate about it, rather than just shooting off about how terrible the rule is, I am sure it would be welcomed and considered.

[Castano]

You are talking about 2 rules not one:

(1) timed cool down before completing a swap of PCs on a server
(2) whether 2PCs can ever reside on the same server under DM supervision.


I do not see a problem with 30 Days, it's there to prevent meta CvC mostly. e.g. bringing your lvl 10 Stompy over to get involved in a fight which you might otherwise lose with your other PC.

Of course the usual ALFA recourse is a cross server tell, telephone call, or irc nudge to get your high level buddy to move over. 2PCs just makes it easier since you don't have to ask a favor.

So yeah we need a clock on it and 30 days is good enough for PC swapping. 5 days will be just as bad, any time limit impacts play, and will not allow enough time to pass for meta to not be an issue. We do need a time limit however if these PCs are gonna be mobile.

I don't care if we drop the DM exception thing.

I actually prefer if alt PCs never move, but the community did not like that concept.

[Electryc]

I actually prefer if alt PCs never move, but the community did not like that concept.

I agree. The other day I watched by the forums as one player 'no names needed' traversed to three different servers over a span of 8 hours. What was common with the moves was that a DM was on. As a former DM personally I liked server loyalty. PC Joe only shows up when your DMing and then travels to another server that day after your session is over to get involved in another DM plot is lame. I know some DM's want to fill the ranks up for their plots and do the mass email recruitment. Thats what great about 2 PC rule. Why not roll up another PC for the other DM, instead of trying to get your levels up as quick as possible with your main character.