From:	Terry Amburgey <xanth@****.UKY.EDU>
Subject:	None
Date:	Wed, 13 Sep 1995 12:10:44 -0400

Adre wrote:

>}Let me be the first to point out that you're not supposed to think of the
>}relationship between gamemaster and players in terms of winning/losing.
>}Everything the gm does is for your benefit. 'Win/lose' is a cognitive frame
>}possessed only by munchkins and those unfortunate individuals who once
>}played war games. The only known cure is to become a gamemaster. Terry
>
> I used the term 'win' in the wrong context. I should have
>probably said that he persuaded us to change our point of view, by
>giving reference to the real world effects. Happy ;-). The one point
>that we make sure in our games at least is that if there is plauasble
>explination (that and the use of democrasy). As for our benefit, well
>the players might agree, but how would you like stuck with a shifting
>genetic code, hence the characters disagree added to this the players
>allways look out for the well-fair of the character, hence role-
>playing

I have to admit that one of the things I like about my current campaign is
the diversity of backgrounds. Most of my gaming has involved people that I
went to school with and/or worked with. It's nice to have an engineer, a
geologist, a forester, and a whatever-you-call-an-english-literature-major
:). You get a lot more 'plausible explanations' with this crew than with 6
sociologists.

Personally, I wouldn't like to be stuck with a shifting genetic code. But it
sounds like you talked it over and if the PLAYERS agree, the fact that the
CHARACTERS disagree will probably just add spice to the game. Terry

Terry L. Amburgey Office: 606-257-7726
Associate Professor Home: 606-224-0636
College of Business & Economics Fax: 606-257-3577
University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY 40506