Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site iddic.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!qantel!hplabs!tektronix!orca!iddic!dorettas From: dorettas@iddic.UUCP (Doretta Schrock) Newsgroups: net.games.frp Subject: campaign standardization Message-ID: <2218@iddic.UUCP> Date: Fri, 4-Oct-85 15:42:52 EDT Article-I.D.: iddic.2218 Posted: Fri Oct 4 15:42:52 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 6-Oct-85 14:37:20 EDT Distribution: net Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR Lines: 24 [no preamble here] A few years ago in one of the gaming magazines (maybe "The Space Gamer"?), there was an article regarding the standardization of campaigns by rating each one with an [AD&D] alignment-like system. Thus a campaign might be realistic (natural laws as you'd expect them), lawful (natural laws, though you may not know completely how they operate) or chaotic (you never know when things will change on you); good (white hats), neutral (give a monster/ an adventurer an even break), or evil (your vampires will have more fun than your paladins); complete (many towns have names and customs, NPCs, etc), sketchy (there is a town/kingdom, but mainly you're underground), or limited (there is a 10-level dungeon and a magic shop outside); etcetera... Question: whatever became of this idea? It would seem to be a good safeguard when thinking about playing with a new group or moving to a new city. Have any of the gamers organizations picked up on this? Is it a feasible idea? Surely with a net-full of gamers we could come up with a suitable system along these lines, no? Has anyone tried this? Is anyone out there? (All I hear are mumblings from net.philosophy and screams from net.flame...) My address is changing momentarily, so posting to the net is probably best... livens up the discussion, too! High Fives to all. Mike Sellers