| From: | Tim Kerby <drekhead@***.NET> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Munchkin Definition (again :) |
| Date: | Wed, 13 May 1998 12:07:51 -0500 |
> Once upon a time, Tim Kerby wrote;
>
> >On 13 May 98 at 8:16, David Buehrer wrote:
> >
> >> How about: A munchkin may be defined as a player who's *characters*
> >> consistently have a negative impact on the game that far outway
> >> their positive impact on the *game*.
> >
> >That is about the best all around definition I have seen. Let's put
> >it in the FAQ. :)
>
> I disagree wholeheartedly. It reads like a blanket of immunity
> so no one can be called one. In other words it would ultimately mean
> nothing.
How do you figure? If someone's character is taking away from a game
more than they are contributing to the game, their a munchkin.
David's definition is more inclusive than exclusive. At least, that
how I see what he is saying. How do you see it, MC?
--
