Re: Olympia Question

From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)

Date: Sun, 07 May 1995 00:00:00 +0000

Dave806459 <dave806459@aol.com> writes:
> More important, however, is the possibility for future expansions to the
> game:  new lands, spells, skills, etc.  Rich told me that when he makes
> additions to the rules some players write him to piss & moan about the
> unfairness of it all.

As far as I know, zero new lands or spells, and precisely one new skill,
has been added in the course of the game.  And I would be surprised if
anyone has objected to that one skill.  I think you are confusing rather
different issues.

I think that there are two things which are true.  First, there are
players who say, "I spent a lot of time developing X in order to do Y.
Now, I will be upset if you change the rules so that I can't do Y any
more."  This is a reasonable objection, and clearly has to be considered
and dealt with, on a case-by-case basis.  Taking something *away* from
the game, is different than *adding* something to the game.

Secondly, there are rule changes that just suck.  Completely independent
of my position, there are some things that Rich has considered which I
think are bad rules, which would make the game less fun to play.  Why
shouldn't a player who doesn't like a particular rule, say so?  That's
not "whining," that's expressing one's opinion about what is fun for
that person.  Everyone should have just as much right as you do, to say
what one likes and doesn't like.

> The attitude of these kinds of players seems really petty to me: they
> want the game to remain static because they've got a big piece of the
> Olympian political pie & fear change might hurt their faction.

If you don't even know the players, how do you know their "attitude" so
precisely?

I am fairly certain that there is not a single player in the game whose
attitude is as you describe it.  I certainly don't know any.

> & I think Rich would have the high ground anyway,
> since the rules state that Olympia is subject to change over time.

I think that everyone agrees that Rich can change the rules any way he
wants, at any time.  I think that everyone also agrees that no one is
obligated to keep sending Rich their $2.50/turn, if the rule changes
result in a game that one doesn't enjoy playing.  Rich is running a
business, and has to make business decisions, some of which are not
always going to be easy.

David desJardins
--
Copyright 1995 David desJardins.  Unlimited permission is granted to quote
from this posting for non-commercial use as long as attribution is given.

References

Re: Olympia Question
bonar@math.rutgers.edu (Doug Bonar)
Thu, 04 May 1995 00:00:00 +0000
Re: Olympia Question
dave806459@aol.com (Dave806459)
Fri, 05 May 1995 00:00:00 +0000

Referenced By

Re: Olympia Question
bonar@math.rutgers.edu (Doug Bonar)
Thu, 04 May 1995 00:00:00 +0000
Re: Olympia Question
dave806459@aol.com (Dave806459)
Fri, 05 May 1995 00:00:00 +0000