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