Re: Continuing anger from game to game

From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)

Date: Tue, 02 May 1995 00:00:00 +0000

In article <799282325snz@sandj.demon.co.uk>,
Simon Reed <simon@sandj.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>What discussions have occurred about players carrying greivences from one
>game to another in Galaxy or any other games?  I ask since this may be
>about to happen to me.  I am in two Galaxy games and role-playing both
>positions as *very* different characters this feels not right.

Well, this sort of falls into the category of cross-gaming. Most folks
seem to agree that it's wrong to retaliate against someone in game B
as a result of a stab in game A. But as far as grievences go, there
are some subtlties. Some folks claim that every game should be totally
separate, so you should pretend that you know nothing about "Oleg the
Loudmouth" when you see him for the first time in a game. Other folks
claim that you can't help but accumulate information about a player's
playing style, so you might mistrust someone in game B after seeing
them stabbing people in game A.

My face-to-face gaming group goes with the second option -- I know
everyone's playing style, and so I'm more likely to trust some people
than others. But I've allied with all of them at one time or
another. Some residents of this group like the first option, and get
upset when someone cites a previous game as a reason for
mistrust. It's not clear which category your complaint falls into; do
you think that no one should know that you have ever backstabbed an
ally, or do you think that your ex-allies from game A shouldn't start
game B with immediate all-out war against you?

I've been a victim of that in the past. In a game of Tony Lovell's
Battleship, the losers of a previous game began by shooting at the
people who had defeated them in the previous game. As a victim, I
found this to be in poor taste.

-- greg

References

Continuing anger from game to game
simon@sandj.demon.co.uk (Simon Reed)
Sun, 30 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0000