Prev: Re: [FT] New FAC? Was "New IF ships" Next: Re: New IF ships

Re: New IF ships

From: Randall Joiner <rljoiner@m...>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 22:12:08 -0700
Subject: Re: New IF ships

>Back to the meaning of 'is" I mean "multiple" <grin> but I second this
>logical thought.  

Bah, I won't even comment on that ex-(thank the stars)-president.  Not
we got a better one in the deal, mind you...  

>Most of us are  most of the time able to work these things out.  

You don't know this group well...  

>It's an open game format - if it leads to unbalanced or abusive play
>the 'adults' get together and make changes as necessary, right?

Again you don't know this group well...  There's several types of
around... Red-breasted rules lawyers, Pigeon power gamers (Me, or so I'm
told), etc...

Unfortunately, like most children, we tend to want to go running to
and Daddy to solve our fights...  Well, ok, really we just want them to
side with us so we get to stick our tongues out and go "NAYH-NAYH"

Ok, we're not that bad, but it can seem that way.  I admit, I haven't
around in a while, but it sure sounds like things haven't changed.

Makes life hell for those people that just want to have fun, who are
than willing to be perfectly reasonable, but who don't want to get
out of having fun.

>Hopefully never again but I have been feverish lately...  That may
>account for the optimism.

Cynicism is best, no surprises.  

>Concur - let Jon game test and make the rules as good as reason and
>imagination allow with hopefully no glaring errors and then let the
>participants work it out.

I'd _pay_ to get FB/FT3!  Oh wait, I'm gonna have to do that anyway...


Prev: Re: [FT] New FAC? Was "New IF ships" Next: Re: New IF ships