Chapter 1: Q&A / Discussion

[Josh]

That's sad to hear, Jeff! The fun of role playing seems, to me, to be the role playing. At lest, that's how I'm seeing it. Otherwise it would just be my regular day.

That said, everyone should know that I definitely see this as an opportunity for fun, and am personally quite thick-skinned. Whether Grafth is or not, we'll just have to see, I suppose.

[Ed]

edgentry said:

Ed Says:

1) See Oss's text below. Please note that I (Ed) have specifically not read any of the game goings-on that did not apply to me to avoid meta-game temptation. So...Oss would have no clue about Streko.
2) Jeff, you don't mention Oss in this summary. Is he part of this plan?

I think you kind of have to read everything that goes on, and be on your honor to play the game without using information your PC wasn't involved in- it is really burdensome to have to go through the entire introduction, explanation scenario. Anyone should be able to say, for example "Grafth brings the returning party members up to speed, introducing Streko and telling them of what has transpired in their absence" unless there is a specific point to what is being told or not told.

Repeating over three board-pages of dialogue seems a little much, right?

I agree it's ridiculous to repeat over 3 board pages of dialogue. I wouldn't want anyone to do that and would never do it myself.

However, I play these games for the roleplaying opportunity which I think people miss out on if they read situations that their character is not present for. In fact, I think both the person who was not there AND the person who was miss out BIG TIME if everyone reads all the text that doesn't pertain to them.

Example:

Grafth has some encounter with someone that is significant to him while he is NOT with the rest of the group.

If I (as Ed) read that section of the text then yes, I can and easily would not metagame and ignore that. HOWEVER, you as Grafth are missing one hell of an opportunity and I, as Oss, am missing it as well. If we skip over the parts where Grafth explains to Oss where he was and what happened to him, then you suddenly lose the opportunity to:
1) Color the events as Grafth saw them. I know them through Ed's eyes, not Grafth's.
2) Lie about anything that happened.
3) Steer events the way you would want Grafth to do so.
4) Keep secrets which can add depth to your character and the game.

So really, I couldn't disagree with you more on this. I think it's nearly essential that characters be responsible for retelling what happened to them that was not witnessed by others.

That DOES NOT mean that you need to repeat all 3 board pages. Good lord, who would want that? I don't want to read three board pages that don't pertain to my character as it is, let alone have you repeat them.

It DOES mean that you need to summarize them in-character. For Kal's situation (for example), he did a great job summarizing everything we needed to know with a single post of a few lines detailing his plan. In fact, he could have done it with a heck of a lot less. All he needed to add to complete the cycle was introduce Streko. He could have done the whole thing in two or three sentences and it would have still been very natural and suitable to his character.

Additionally, it helps develop characters to see how they interact when telling and responding to these summaries.

Finally, and I mean no offense to Jeff here, but I really believe that the separate Kal/Streko thread as well as the Oss/Pel thread should have been private threads that were not part of the game thread.

I think if we're here to roleplay we need to take advantage of every opportunity to do so that we can find. I plan to continue doing things this way, for one.

-Ed

[Josh]

I'll give it to you Ed, good argument. And I'll give it a shot.

I'm very good at self-censoring, by nature. My job just makes me not listen to things that have no bearing on my work. Oh, I hear it, but I forget it intentionally. So when I read something that Grafth does not know, it almost immediately escapes my mind.

The one thing I'll say is that the only downside to not reading (or not having access to) the posts that have nothing to do with your character is that it does create some missed opportunities.

Example: It would be obvious upon Oss and Pel's return for Grafth to smell the produce she had purchased. If I had not read that it was purchased, I would have had to rely on doing a check, if I thought to do one, or Jeff telling my character what he did or did not smell. In battle or active situations, I would think this sort of thing would be a roll, but for the more passive scenes, it's just part of character-building.

It is inconsequential in this case, but a fun part of the character that I get to exploit. And I've already forgotten the details of everything I've read that didn't pertain to Grafth.

So yeah, I suppose I don't mind some recaps here and there, if it keeps everyone active in the game and keeps it lively.

[Joe]

Ed, I do not believe you responded to my greeting. HARUMPH!!!

I tend to agree to some extent. As it's been a while since I roleplayed, and never online, I HAD to read the story up to the point Streko arrived on the scene in order to figure out how you guys did things (and in fact, I flubbed up a few times anyway). However, I DO see your point and may very well give it a shot.

However, just because Streko is not tall of stature doesn't mean he isn't a big mouth...

;D

[Jeff]

Both good arguments.

I am a bit wary of creating more hidden threads, though. To some extent, I've got to trust you all. Creating hidden areas can get out of hand, and also, where do I draw the line? If one character, wants to go off alone, I can easily handle this in my own DM-and-player thread within the relevant character's private section. But if there's more than one, it gets trickier. In the case of Streko joining the group, he needed to have access to see Kal's mini-adventure in the Deneith enclave to better understand the set-up.

For now, I suppose we'll just keep winging it and experimenting and we'll see what works out best.

[Darren]

I think Ed raises an interesting point, and I think that Josh has a point, and I think Jeff also has a point. I'd hate to see all of this stuff start going into private threads. I think it's perfectly valid to not read the stuff. I think it's also pefectly valid to read it. I think what should be done is posts similar to what I did. I think the characters should have to summarize things to other characters, so that that in-character flavor can be added. But I think it should be valid, in certain cases, to say things like, "Kal goes on to describe his meeting with Lady Korvine," in order to not have to give every detail of it. If Kal intended to leave something out, I could specifically say, "(Kal does not mention X)". I think that gives a bit of the best of both worlds. If someone had chosen not to read up to that point, they could either ask for clarification, or at that point go back and read the older posts.

As for introducing Streko...well, it'd certainly be within Kal's character to have not done that. No offense, Joe. Kal actually really likes Streko.

[Ed]

I think that compromise is a fair one, Darren.

Here's how I'll work it and I think it's a good compromise: I won't read people's own goings-on UNLESS they mention something like "X details his time talking to Y". Then I'll go back and quickly read what happened. Otherwise I'll hope that folks do in-character quick summaries because it can add to the RP experience.

Thanks for the good discussion folks.

Joe, Oss specifically did not return the greeting, actually. Not personal, of course

[Joe]

[Josh]

Sounds good.

[Josh]

This is a serious question. Character roles aside, are we interested in moving forward as a group? It doesn't seem like anyone is willing to just go with the story here.

Not everyone that Jeff creates is going to try to kill us- this is obviously (to me) a point in the game where the true story is coming out... can we roll with it and actually become a "party"?

Without betraying the character of Grafth, I've already made many changes to how I play or how he would act based on the fact that there is a group of us playing a game. Yes, if this was "reality", Grafth would have wandered off long ago to go about his business. But that doesn't really serve the game.

So what's the deal? I'd rather play a game then wait days for people to post and then post things that only serve to obfuscate the path of the story.

[Ed]

Note: I'm channeling Oss a bit in this message so forgive any tone that may appear. I'm not angry or annoyed at all as a person, but Oss's character's frustrations are definitely going to come through in this.


Josh, I think this is a tricky situation. It's tough to say that we should put aside our characters for the sake of the story. That's something I have a lot of trouble dealing with and am not sure how to handle.

Aside from that though, I also feel like the story should continue to move and am a little frustrated that it isn't. From Oss's perspective, I felt like everyone was more than content to just sit around in the inn all day, waiting while he wanted to get something done. This fed into things about his character that are probably obvious by now (at his truest core he HATES authority) and led to his "explosion" that I recently posted in the game thread.

I do not feel that I or Oss have done anything to obfuscate the game. I think everything I've done can be worked into the story - up, perhaps, until storming out of the inn. Though, even that is opportunity for the story. If you want to get things moving along, follow Oss. That's where he is going...to get things moving.

I think it's too easy to say that simply going along with the newly introduced NPCs of power and standing is the only way to move the story along. I don't think that's the case at all. There are a myriad of things we could have done with that entire day in the inn and still could do instead of waiting around for these fancy-pants NPCS to talk so much.

On a related but slightly tangential note, I'd like to say that I think part of the problem is (and this is hard for me to believe that I can say this and have it be true) that there is too much posting going on.

I tried to post once to twice a day when we started. However, I fell off from that because a few people were posting 3+ times per day. Jeff was keeping pace with those people and it just became frustrating and pointless for Oss to speak up. By the time I read through everyone's posts to post myself, the point of action had already been taken. While I stand by my earlier idea of moving ahead once there is concensus among three people, I think that should be moderated by actually giving time for people to post. The last couple of weeks, at least, I've just felt like the rapid, multiple postings of some folks has made the game spin out of my influence as a player. I think it's great that people are that excited about the game but it just makes it hard for those of us who can only post 1-2 times per day.

Note that this is not a complaint but an explanation. The game can easily continue at this pace thanks to some great players who are excited about it proceeding. But for those of us who can't post so much (it seems this is true of myself, Lara and Paul) it just makes it frustrating.

Well...there ya go. Take that for whatever it might be worth.

[Joe]

I agree that this is a tough call. However, being new to online playing, you'll have to pardon me if I post too often...also, it's the first time in about a decade that I HAVE role-played period. Again, my aopligies for any exuberance in posting. Having said that, it would seem appropriate for certain members of the team to seek out those places that might provide the most information. Unfortunately, some characters have a flaw in them that doesn't allow them to play nice with others...so they take matters into their own hands and run off on their own. Makes perfect sense for the characters, but I would think that would make things more difficult for the DM, unless, of course, he WANTS to handle various storylines.

The complaint that Oss has of Kal going to the enclave to get information is fine, for Oss's character...but for the group, again, it works if the DM doesn't mind following numerous storylines simultaneously. My impression as a player, however, is that there is ONE specific storyline at work here...with various focal points that thread out...perhaps nowhere...perhaps back to the main storyline. Of course, it's been forever since I played, so what do I know?

Pehaps there should be a moritorium on the number of posts a character can make in one day? Perhaps certain characters should be made to realize that there is safety in numbers and that every one of "us" is in grave peril. It certainly doesn't seem that way right now. You have one set of characters skulking about, another blustering their way everywhere they go and another sleeping and drinking. (Streko is a blusterer...when he isn't crying...the sissy...)

So far, things are not very cohesive, but certainly every player is in character. At the risk of being a jinx...or getting what I wish for, I certainly wouldn't mind a nice pitched battle to wage.

[Josh]

I think again, the issue of time is a major problem for some people

I don't think that anyone necessarily wanted to "sit around the inn all day", but no one suggested more than one alternative. Go find Fenwolt NOT as a group, or sit around. If Oss had wanted to say, explore the city, or go find something good to do, maybe the group could have agreed on something else?

Also, It wouldn't have been a big deal for the group to just try to wait for Kalarian's return.

(not to mention that he actually invited everyone to go with him... that would have been fine for someone looking for movement and action, right?)

In-game, he was gone less than an hour, but everyone acted like it had been ages. If everyone could have just chilled out for a little bit and let the side story run its course, we could have all been back together and planning. Jeff had asked, as a favor, for us not to split into more than two groups, and we couldn't even do that.

While multiple posting during a day can definitely jump things ahead a little bit quickly, I don't feel like it's done that too much... at least I have always tried to wait for everyone to chime in. But we can't even get a once-a-day post from everyone, so it's hard to say, punish the people who are active and eager to play and adventure.

[Lara]

Some statistics...

I counted something like 20 posts in the gamplay thread between 5PM EDT Friday evening and my post Sunday evening -- around 8 or 9PM, I think. Seems like a lot, even given the number of PCs.

The DM has made 400+ posts; Darren has made half that many; I've made about half as many as Darren.

I went back and checked Jeff's rules for posting: there is no minimum, but there also is no maximum. He said something like "Post as much as you want."

Some consequences...

I had a weekend free of obligations for the first time in over a month, and I elected not to check the DE forums. The penalty I've paid for that is having news of Gurend's book outed by Kalarian to Lady K and getting chewed out by Grafth. I can accept it or rue it.

[Jeff]

Funny how I'm Jeff in the gameplay thread, but I'm just the DM in the out-of-game discussions...

So...it sounds to me like we all need to come to some agreements to better move forward. As the DM, I'm the moderator of gameplay, but I'm just as much of a player of this game as the rest so I'm not going to hand down some mandate. I really need you all to step in here and offer suggestions on this. What kind of boundaries/limitations can we all agree on to better move this forward?

It sounds like we need the most frequent posters to chill a bit (myself included), but also the infrequent posters to show up more often. How to do this? Set a minimum and a maximum, perhaps.

One thing I did ask, in the Schedules/Conflicts thread, is to let us know if you're going to be gone for a period of time (whether that's going on vacation or just opting not to check in on the game at all). If you're not around and we all know it, then no one would expecting to hear anything from you. That just makes sense, no?

From the start, we all had different expectations of the game, I'm assuming. For some, this is a major creative outlet—hence, more frequent posts. For me, it's a means to break up the day job, the means to play in the world I'm writing in, and the means to game with you guys. (I did pick you 'cause I liked you, you know! Deal with it!) For others, its's just one on a list of other such play-by-post games. If so, then it's probably of minimal priority?

Most importantly, to me, I want—need—this game to be fun for everyone. If it's not, something's not working. And if it's a chore to you, please reconsider being here. I don't to drag anyone into being here.

That said, yes, let's set some reasonable expectations. But I'm not going to just state that that should be. I need the rest of you to weigh in on this. Don't just wait to agree with everyone else. Be heard.

[Jeremy]

Here's a point no one has brought up but I'm sure has occurred to most of us:

A lot of the more (perhaps overly) frequent posters, which I know includes me, are doing so to make up for the fact that some of the others are posting so infrequently. It's a natural if not always helpful reaction. There are about three or four of us who are trying to keep this game moving, perhaps to a fault, I don't know.

Of course I understand that some people have obligations that keep them from posting as regularly as they like, but as Jeff said no harm done if you want to reconsider being a part of this game. Can't speak for the others, but I won't take it personally, anyway. Oss and Pellorien, for instance, could storm out of the inn and leave the story for a short while, and while Ed and Lara (I'm only choosing two who in their game posts actually did leave the room, ostensibly for good) maybe take a breather for a while, and can rejoin the game later. Or whoever. That would be easy enough to engineer game-wise. The Gods know anyone who's ever DM-ed has had to manage that before.

I don't feel there's anything wrong with posting two to three times a day, or more if there's genuine action going on. And a lot of the posts are there because some of us are trying to figure out what's going on in the first place! Trying to keep the fires lit, so to speak.

But the thing is we're on the board to have fun and keep a game rolling and why should it be that posting more than once a day is an issue? I myself believe that posting too much is the better problem to have, at least from the GM's perspective. It's easier to tone down the speed than to try to kick it back into some kind momentum.

I'll say this for Goran: What he did was try to elicit a reaction...I guess he succeeded, but he's definitely still part of the game and wants to know what's to do next...he just doesn't like all the fancy talk and snide remarks up there in the 'conference room'. But what I did with Goran was a purely in-game reaction, a character reaction. I'm enjoying this, even if I did think that Jeff (sorry, just keeping it honest ;D) played the Lady a little to the ignoring side, that is, she and Kal seemed to completely ignore almost everything Goran said, and acted as if he'd been reluctant to speak (yea right!) or share any info. It did begin to feel a little "steered", so I shook things up but I wasn't actually revolting against the game, I did what I thought my character would do. And I'm sure Jeff played the Lady that way for some reason. So whatever.

I want to keep up the game, but no harm done if a few of the players want to bow out for a while. No worries at all. This is my only game of the sort, and I keep vampire hours so I'm doing the best I can to stay in it!

Game on!

[Josh]

Jeremy, this is just a hunch, but I believe that Lady Korvine acted the way she did in order to try to get the silent people to speak up. The fact is that until that meeting, not everyone had even given their name (or even a fake name) to the group. I think Jeff may have just been trying to get the less involved people to be more involved.

That said, I'm definitely for a minimum and maximum. Like, no less than once a day, and no more than three times a day? Maybe just two?

Also, if the minimum is once a day, I'd also be happy to see those once-a-day posts be something more than "Grafth agrees." or something like that. The posts in the Q&A section are, on average, longer than more of the game board posts. Its kinda annoying to spend time crafting a good post for Grafth that tries to give players lots of things to respond to, and have people just post murmers, or "______ says nothing, and moves away."

So, posts of substance, PLEASE. Not all the time, just most of the time. Obviously there are times when a short one are necessary.

Also, Jeff's mention of the Schedules/Conflicts thread is important. If you are going to not check the game for a few days, you have to let everyone know so they craft their posts appropriately. If Lara had said "I'm really interested in this conversation, but I won't be on the board this weekend", I doubt that Kalarian and Grafth would have had the same reaction. But instead, many have been working on the game for the last several days (the dinner meeting started on Thursday), and the silence was taken as open refusal to be a part of a group.

Also, even if everyone else was rarin' to go, Jeff could have slowed things down, knowing why we were missing posters.

So, if we institute a min/max, and agree to post in a more descriptive, artistic way, spend some time on those minimum posts, and alert each other to when we'll be away, I think things would go more smoothly.

[Jeremy]

Josh: I agree that probably Jeff was playing the Lady with some kind of direct intent. I didn't think it was meaningless. Nonetheless, these kinds of "intents" are more like a bludgeon than a blade, they have a tendency to sweep through everybody and in such short spaces of time and text, we can't always be expected to understand the subtleties of speech, especially when it's a stranger. Kal's arrogance I'm used to, I know how to read it. Not so with the Lady. Anyway, it's wasn't really ME (Jeremy) being 'pissed off' or any such, I just thought Goran was getting weary of all this grandstanding and Sherlock Holmes stuff.

As to minimums and maximums, I don't agree (except that there could be a maximum...because ten posts a day from one person can hurt the game).

I think that way madness lies, and a degeneration of the game's spontaneity. To me, if you can't be bothered (or legitimately don't have time) to get on the board and get in the game, then this probably isn't for you (using the general "you" here, not naming anyone specific). If you're out of town or whatever then drop a line. On the other hand, let's try to keep this in perspective: It's a GAME. That's all. We are on board to have fun, there is no other profit to be had here. I don't want this to become some weird source of tension in anyone's life, and I'm sure nobody else does either.

But I think once we get into turning this into a systematic churning out of timed responses, it will lose its luster. I mean, it should be about having a 'feel' for what's going on, not "checking in", as if punching a time clock.

That's my vote, personally. I don't like the idea of mins and maxs, I think it's just something that should be obvious: BE A PART OF THE GAME. What's the point in regimenting it? Might as well call it a day, really, if that's what it turns into.

[Jeff]

Right. Don't take my words to mean I want things regimented. That's no good. Don't misunderstand me.

I'm only talking about some level of reasonable participation. It must be wanted, though. Not demanded. I really hand-picked you guys and when you all post, I really enjoy it. I didn't pick badly.

[Ed]

Let me clarify something that I thought was clear in my original post. I think it's fantastic that people can and want to post several times a day. That speaks well of their interest and the fun they want to have.

My point was that I was trying to post once a day and did at the beginning. However, because others posted so much (and my schedule simply didn't allow it) then my character got left behind and left out of any influencing of decisions. When that happened, yes, I got discouraged and started posting less. Should I have said something instead of just shrugging and posting even less? Probably, but it was very discouraging and frustrating. I'm not here to say I did everything right.

My whole point in all of this was to share with you guys, because I like you all and respect what you're doing here, why I have been posting so little.

At one point I played in 4 PBP games. It was miserable. I'm now down to 2 and have been for a while (one of them is where each player posts about 3 times a week, for some comparison). But even given that, my schedule just doesn't allow me to post more than once to twice per day. I think the same is true for Lara.

I don't feel like a "breather" is needed for me at all. It's not a matter of this being a busy time. This is just life for me. My schedule won't change in the near future.

So, given that, and given that there are plenty of posters in this game who CAN and want to post multiple times a day for a really fast-paced game, I think it's reasonably obvious that the two are incongruous.

As I've said (I think 3 times now), I think it's FANTASTIC that people can and want to post so much. Please keep doing so!

But, assuming you do, I think it's best and easiest if Oss is no longer a part of that as I just can't keep up given my schedule and, as I said, it's incredibly frustrating and discouraging to not be able to keep up.

There's no fault here, there's no blame. There's just incongruous schedules. There's nothing wrong with that

[Jeremy]

Right then...


...LET'S PLAY!

WOOHOO! ;D ;D ;D ;D


ADDED: I must add that somehow I missed that Oss was bailing. That is a bummer. Sorry to lose ya.

[Lara]

edgentry said:

[...] I think it's best and easiest if Oss is no longer a part of that as I just can't keep up given my schedule and, as I said, it's incredibly frustrating and discouraging to not be able to keep up.

I would just like to say that I'm bummed, although I perfectly understand your decision.

[Jeff]

But, assuming you do, I think it's best and easiest if Oss is no longer a part of that...

To be clear, I'd certainly rather not have anyone leave.

If some of us tried to chill on the crazy number of posts per day, do you think you can go back to the once or twice per day kind of thing, Ed?

[Ed]

I can definitely get to 1-2 posts per day but I'm not sure that's best for everyone. I'll leave that for everyone else to decide, but if you have a solid base of players who can post 4-6 times per day, I'm not sure you should turn that down. I've never seen that in a PBP game and it could be really great for the game and those players.

[Jeremy]

ADDED: I must add that somehow I missed that Oss was bailing. That is a bummer. Sorry to lose ya.

[Jeff]

Even when I post the most, it can't always last. I will and do have days when I certainly cannot. So I myself wouldn't want to commit to such fast-pacedness. I wouldn't always keep up. And of course the game can only go as fast as I can.

But if I knew you'd be able to drop in daily once—or twice—on a regular basis, that would be great. You and Lara. And Paul...well, just wait on him for a moment.

But Ed, this isn't just about what the game can do, but what you want. If you're enjoying the game and want to stay in, please do. I've said from the start over and over again that I don't want anyone here out of some real life obligation. That's the worst.

[Josh]

I would rather post less personally to have more people involved in the game.

[Darren]

As the second most frequent poster, I guess I should weigh in here. I agree that a minimum and maximum are ridiculous. If you have something to say, you should post. Now, for the most part, I think things have been going reasonably okay. It's normal that Kal is going to talk a lot. It's in his nature. I've tried, or at least feel like I've tried, to not take actions that I thought were forcing the game forwards. Really, only Jeff can do that. When there is something to react to, I react. As Jeff said, some days I can do that a lot, and some days I can't. But I'd hate to think that when someone did something, I wouldn't be allowed to react just because I had already gone over some pre-determined maximum number of posts. I think, even at the speed things have been going, everyone can get their input in as long as they actually post. But when we go for entire days without hearing from someone, we try to move the game forwards despite the lack of their presence. My impression, especially at the beginning, was that if you managed to get in at least one post a day, you were getting to have your input and get your reactions in to most of the events that occurred. I know that sometimes things move a bit further ahead and you didn't get the chance to respond to someone's post. It happens to me, too. I don't think it's unreasonable to go back and respond to something someone said a few posts back, even if the dialogue has moved past that point. I've done it before. As long as the group hasn't moved to a new location or started a fight or something, you can still go backwards a bit without messing up too much of the gameplay. And Jeff controls the speed of those major events, so when he feels like the game is ready to progress forwards, he'll do so.

I agree with Josh that we need to know when you're not going to post. Had I known that Lara wasn't going to post this weekend, Kal probably wouldn't have outed her. I was certainly trying not to. I gave several posts with the specific intention of giving her the chance to say something else. But then people started leaving the room and Pellorien wasn't saying anything and Kal felt his plan beginning to unravel, so he felt he had to take action. I think all of that would have played out differently had we known that Lara wouldn't be posting (not picking on you Lara. It just applies in this example).

I'm rambling, I'm sure. Not sure what else to say on the subject. I really enjoy this game so I'd hate to see it fall apart.

[Josh]

On Mins and Maxes,

I really feel like this wouldn't hurt in the least, to have a min and max. Because really, if you've got a major itch to post and you have already done your THREE, that's a good thing! It'll keep you ready for the next day... and it will give the less frequent people a chance to stay in the action upfront.

So, I'm officially for min/max and everyone making their posts juicy with content, and having a little more patience (megaposters) and a little more drive (miniposters).

[Joe]

Let the circumstance dictate what the characters do...and let the characters dictate the pace of the story. If Oss and Cutter leave the room and do their own thing...then the DM's job (Jeff's job, sorry) is to keep their story line consistant and moving...as long as they are in character, of course. This makes Jeff's job more difficult, but each character then gets to post what they are doing...and must accept the consequences of that post in terms of how the story develops with or without them.

Certainly, Jeff can then privately contact the poster and let them know that they are heading away from the story...or Jeff can steer them back if he has to.

It is frustrating sometimes, to have a character who is so completely ignored by everyone...he suddenly NEEDS to be heard...thus will psot more and might even be more outrageous in order to get his fears and concerns out there. Life, itself, is frustrating sometimes...D&D no less so. Am I haveing fun? LOTS! So much so that I don't want it to end or be curtailed...but, as I am on the west coast and seem to be behind the times in many ways...I will defer to the more experienced players and continue to have fun playing my character as long as you all will have me.

Thanks for the rant time. I'll now.