charging

Kalphoenix · Post by **Kalphoenix** » Tue May 12, 2009 1:50 am

Woden wrote:God I hate this game.

*hums* I wonder if Travis keeps track of every time I say that...

But seriously, I think that was a pretty damn concise and specific list, Todd.

Post by **GM-Mike** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:31 am

Yeah, me too. Todd, this is the first time we've ever agreed with you.

And just to expound on what he said, I would have to say that it's not brain science either.

Post by **GM_Chris** » Tue May 12, 2009 7:17 am

Literalists just have a hard time with the concept of generalities. That is not a put down it is just a fact that people's brains work differently which is why I want the video demonstration.

The cheese weasles on the other hand just pretend not to understand and think the lack of a 3 page definition on charging is a game feature to be exploited.

"I know it said no sex at Final haven, but there was never an exact rule about going up and licking random people"

"I know you said no drugs but is sniffing glue really a drug?"

"I know I am immune to normal damage to the front, but since you have no exact definition of what 'front' and 'back' is, I really thought that hits to my spine were the back and everything else was the front."

"There was never specifically said about administring choke holds on people!"

"Having to role play is not exactly a rule is it?"

"Never saw anything on not starting forest fires in the rule book"

I have actually had some of these things said to me over 15 years. I could keep going. It is this type of crap I feel like we keep doing to the FH rules.

"The player is correct it never really said you couldn't do that so lets add some more fine print"

Is this what we really want? Do we really want to keep adding fine print ever time something is not spelled out?

Should the GM staff just start kicking people out by using the "You should have known better clause."

Oh and I hope people know I am not upset or anything. Big smiles

General Maximus · Post by **General Maximus** » Tue May 12, 2009 7:27 am

Here Here Chris. There has to a level of common sense expected by the players. That is why there is an age limit to the game. My 5 year old could play by the FH rules and know what is right and wrong.

Now I say give the benifit of the doubt to all new players and help them understand the world and rules that is FH. But long time members of FH should know better.

It feels FH is trying to cater to Kindergardeners. Grow up people and take responsiblity for your actions and use some common sense. Be a grown up. Most players do follow the rules and apply common sense to them but there is a small percentage that does not and it hurts the rest of people playing the game.

Post by **Zydana** » Tue May 12, 2009 11:17 am

Okay, we are getting off subject of the thread here but I'd like to point out that during the event I cracked open a field guide and read out loud a rule.

I looked up and asked, "does that mean, XXXX? or does it mean, YYYY?"

Now what I honestly thought the rule intended was different from what the other person honestly thought it was trying to say.

With the rules, common sense can only take you so far. Sometimes the rules are just worded poorly.

Now please, can we just get back to the subject of Charging?

Otherwise you can start a new thread with a new subject.

Atrum Draconus · Post by **Atrum Draconus** » Tue May 12, 2009 12:20 pm

I think people expect players to know what charging is, well most of the people playing this game now have never fantasy larped or are very raw at larping at all. I still think a combat class should go on, you wouldn't have these issues if people were taught how to do it right. You have to go through training at any job you go to, they don't hire you, give you a cubicle and then get all crazy upset that you don't know what you're doing. If they do you probably quit that job before too long. If everyone interpreted other people words the same we wouldn't need nearly as many lawyers, judges, tech support, religious leaders etc. Probably 10 -15 % of the jobs in the world are there because people don't interpret other peoples word the same way.

Post by **GM_Chris** » Tue May 12, 2009 1:14 pm

Erik that is a great idea as well!

Kalphoenix · Post by **Kalphoenix** » Tue May 12, 2009 1:31 pm

GM_Chris wrote: "I know it said no sex at Final haven, but there was never an exact rule about going up and licking random people"

You are SOOO going to have to kick me out.

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:13 pm

Mike, that's absurd.

seeing as I was the original instigator of this rule...

The two foot rule avoids splinters and bashed knuckles from impact with shields (Mike should know this well). Also it prevents Nelkie and me from going shield to shield and whacking each other in the back, cause that's gay. It also prevents the 'bear hug' type dual weapon attack which is horrendously dangerous.

Now, originally it was either a weapon OR 2 ft. Later it was prompted for AND or removal of the 2ft rule portion. However, there are some issues with that as mentioned above.

For the original discussion:
http://www.finalhavenlarp.com/phpBB2/vi ... php?t=1903

While I like Todd's deal, it would allow for the 'bear hug' which is bad.

Post by **GM_Chris** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:20 pm

THATS THE POINT!!!

THERE IS NO BEAR HUG!!!

There IS NO 2 FEET

Work on rapping your mind around that.

Eric there is no rule against licking people should we add that in?

Post by **GM-Mike** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:26 pm

Actually the "no putting someone in position to cause physical contact" would encompass the bear hug in my opinion. I believe Todd's three point definition is all that needs to be said, in my humble opinion.

Post by **GM-Mike** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:28 pm

As an aside, in the past two days, Chris has agreed with both Todd and Travis (the latter on the GM forums). I don't know what it means, but thought I would mention it in case anyone wanted to take cover as the end of the world fast approaches...

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:35 pm

GM_Chris wrote:THERE IS NO BEAR HUG!!!

Tell that to the dent in my helmet from Colin's head.

Todd's version will result in something akin to the kid in the backseat going "I'm not touching you" till they aren't paying attention and face plant themselves into a shield or helm, losing a couple teeth.

Just because Mike got called for charging isn't a reason to change the rules. They are there for safety.

Ovak Stonecrusher wrote:Actually the "no putting someone in position to cause physical contact" would encompass the bear hug in my opinion. I believe Todd's three point definition is all that needs to be said, in my humble opinion.

exactly, it's based on opinion, which was the issue previously. Opinions differ.

Smitty19 · Post by **Smitty19** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:37 pm

...*looks around in horror

You mean...

He agreed...

With both of them...

OHH The End is Nigh!!!!

(c:

Post by **GM-Mike** » Tue May 12, 2009 2:52 pm

Just because Mike got called for charging isn't a reason to change the rules.

I disagree. Considering the amount of work I put into the game, if changing the rule makes me happy, I think that's more than enough reason to do so. (I hope that's not read as an arrogant statement. Thos who know me know I'm anything but.)

People's perception of two feet differ too. There should not be a number there. I apologize if that hurts people who need everything to be absolutely precise. It was there to be safe, not add to the ability to be cheesy. I can safely fight one foot from a person, it's not about distance, it's about using your head. You and Aaron work into every conversation on this forum about people cheating, whether it is appropriate or not, so why would you want a rule that makes it easier for someone to cheat? Liek I said, the number needs to go, and the number will go. The sooner everyone accepts that, the sooner we can move past this and come up with a definition that is pleasing to most.