Talk:Seagate Times - Revision history

Bernard at 23:51, 6 March 2013

2013-03-06T23:51:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:51, 6 March 2013
Line 18:		Line 18:

	It was mentioned & briefly discussed at the gods meeting, though exact figures weren't discussed. However until we see what contributions actually come to and what the Seagate times looks like as a result, it's jumping the gun a bit to call anything excessive at this point. 9,000ep once off won't break the 25 year campaign..... so lets see what our end result is, then evaluate for next time? --[[User:Bernard\|Bernard]] 07:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)		It was mentioned & briefly discussed at the gods meeting, though exact figures weren't discussed. However until we see what contributions actually come to and what the Seagate times looks like as a result, it's jumping the gun a bit to call anything excessive at this point. 9,000ep once off won't break the 25 year campaign..... so lets see what our end result is, then evaluate for next time? --[[User:Bernard\|Bernard]] 07:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
			----
	A thought that may help with getting articles. Would it be possible for the editor each season to have something like... <br>		A thought that may help with getting articles. Would it be possible for the editor each season to have something like... <br>
	* Adventure 1. Short article recieved. Long article possible still.		* Adventure 1. Short article recieved. Long article possible still.
Line 26:		Line 26:
	* Quotes. Full, no more needed, but send good ones anyway.		* Quotes. Full, no more needed, but send good ones anyway.
	* Etc.		* Etc.
	I know it's a bit more work, but it lets people who aren't sure if the scribe sent a report in keep an eye, and bang out something as appropriate if they get time.		I know it's a bit more work, but it lets people who aren't sure if the scribe sent a report in keep an eye, and bang out something as appropriate if they get time.<br>
			--[[User:Bernard\|Bernard]] ([[User talk:Bernard\|talk]]) 16:51, 6 March 2013 (MST)

Bernard at 23:49, 6 March 2013

2013-03-06T23:49:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:49, 6 March 2013
Line 18:		Line 18:

	It was mentioned & briefly discussed at the gods meeting, though exact figures weren't discussed. However until we see what contributions actually come to and what the Seagate times looks like as a result, it's jumping the gun a bit to call anything excessive at this point. 9,000ep once off won't break the 25 year campaign..... so lets see what our end result is, then evaluate for next time? --[[User:Bernard\|Bernard]] 07:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)		It was mentioned & briefly discussed at the gods meeting, though exact figures weren't discussed. However until we see what contributions actually come to and what the Seagate times looks like as a result, it's jumping the gun a bit to call anything excessive at this point. 9,000ep once off won't break the 25 year campaign..... so lets see what our end result is, then evaluate for next time? --[[User:Bernard\|Bernard]] 07:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

			A thought that may help with getting articles. Would it be possible for the editor each season to have something like... <br>
			* Adventure 1. Short article recieved. Long article possible still.
			* Adventure 2. Long Article recieved, nothing further wanted.
			* Adventure 3. Nothing recieved, any article appreciated.
			* Whats Hot. Could use some more.
			* Quotes. Full, no more needed, but send good ones anyway.
			* Etc.
			I know it's a bit more work, but it lets people who aren't sure if the scribe sent a report in keep an eye, and bang out something as appropriate if they get time.

Bernard at 07:56, 27 November 2010

2010-11-27T07:56:00Z

New page

Has the giving out of significant amounts of EP without roleplaying been ratified and agreed? I do not consider it appropriate for someone to decide they can give out EP, the key game continuance mechanism of DQ. Such actions may just destabilise the already shakey grounds of consistent EP awards in DQ.

For example: 3 small articles, on third submittion is 9000ep. That is a significant amount of EP people can struggle to achieve in games, and almost as much as received by GMing an entire session. Whereas good roleplaying for an entire night may raise your EP award for roleplaying from 250 to 500.

On the other hand, SP and healing potions etc I think are fine. It's in-character and less damaging to the whole premise of the DQ system.

--[[User:Neil|Neil Davies begin_of_the_skype_highlightingÂ Â Â Â Â end_of_the_skype_highlighting]] 22:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Anything, ANYTHING at all, that increases the theatre of game so that it is more interesting, engaging and encourages new people to join up is a good thing, and if they were giving out actual money, I really couldn't give a rat's arse.

Experience is an extremely minor resource, in an environment where any resource is not scarce it is the one of least concern. Game money and the stuff you can buy with them are linear in nature. The return you get is 1:1. Experience is almost always spent at a quadratic rate, and simply isn't worth worrying about.

There are some things that it pays to be concerned about. This is not one of them. I'd be more worried by fluffy bunnies.
--[[User:Velcanthus|Jim Arona]]<br>

Consider it roleplaying. At least half a dozen people are wantonly giving out EP any given season.
--[[User:Kelsie2|Kelsie]] 10:12, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

It was mentioned & briefly discussed at the gods meeting, though exact figures weren't discussed. However until we see what contributions actually come to and what the Seagate times looks like as a result, it's jumping the gun a bit to call anything excessive at this point. 9,000ep once off won't break the 25 year campaign..... so lets see what our end result is, then evaluate for next time? --[[User:Bernard|Bernard]] 07:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)