Digest still alive shock!

From: David Cake <davidc_at_cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 1997 17:21:22 +0800


>This Digest is a great place for hashing out consensus in some
>obscure fields, but IMO this is pointless without an end in view,
>and that end should be well-written, well-thought-out articles
>that explain and enhance aspects of Glorantha for use in gaming.

        Bravo Nick! A lot of the stuff that people talk about on the digest is because people are trying to settle questions that come up in their own games or their own design, and want to talk abou

[there was a bit here where I hassled Klyfix, but I see the comment I was referring to has been adequately refuted already]

Peter Maranci
> What has happened? We used to see NPCs, magic items, plot hooks,
>scenarios, strange creatures, and other fun game-useful stuff on the
>Digest. Over the years there's been less and less of that.

        But the reasons why are not totally bad. One reason that a lot more of the digest consists of chatter rather than game stuff is that there is a lot more of the digest. Should we tell people not to engage in chatter if they don't game ready stuff to contribute? Of course not. But one idea would be to revive the separate daily/ digest concept of Henk - where the digests come a lot less frequently, but are stuffed full of gameable stuff rather than discussion.

        Another aspect is that once the digest was the only place most people could usefully publish their NPCs, magic items, etc. But now we have TOTRM, con books, Drastic, and also innumerable personal web pages, many with great stuff on it. The content is definately out there and available, just as it ever was, but its not all in the digest any more.

        Personally, I think its a change for the better. I'd really rather have issues of Tales, con books, Drastic, and so on, than have the same stuff is ASCII form.

        Cheers

                David


Powered by hypermail