[OT] GenCon (was Re: GenCon Plans Anyone?)

3 posts ยท Aug 8 2002 to Aug 8 2002

From: Allan Goodall <agoodall@a...>

Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 09:12:28 -0500

Subject: [OT] GenCon (was Re: GenCon Plans Anyone?)

On Thu, 08 Aug 2002 03:32:22 -0500, Scott Siebold <gamers@ameritech.net>
wrote:

> I started roleplaying with something called Dungeons and Dragons when I

> was in service (a

It was a 16K Commodore Pet for me. Started playing D&D in 1977, two years
after playing my first wargame (_Panzer Leader_, got it for my 13th
birthday).

> The reason I stopped was that the people that I regularly

> seemed to have

> gold pieces

You should have played with the _Call of Cthulhu_ crowd. *L* CoC didn't
come around until something like 1981 or 1982, but it's been popular ever
since. In
fact, it is quite possibly _best_ played at conventions, as it really
suits
one-off adventures.

> I signed up to put on events (I think it was two games

That system has changed. It hasn't been in place for a number of years now.

> I was at the formation meeting for HMGS in the midwest. There were

Ah, okay. One of the HMGS-East executives said, on Usenet, that the
formation of HMGS was due to Origins refusing to give a handful of people free
entrance to the con to put on games. That's a paraphrase, but that's what was
said. Thank you for the clarification!

> Strangely enough the midwest chapter never had the total anti SciFi

I haven't been to Historicon, just Fall In. I remember seeing the PEL from a
couple of years ago and reading that they put a cap at 10%
non-historical.
There are a lot of guys in HMGS-East's executive who don't care for
playing anything other than historicals.

> As a side point a Leonardo game, that I played in, was fully allowed at

> Historicon where everything

*L* Well, that _is_ history... of a sort. *L* Some folks just don't get
the difference.

> They didn't want the convention overrun by

Oh, that definitely would be true. I meant that the reason for the continued
ban is Warhammer. Some of them are getting somewhat peeved at Warhammer
Ancient Battles and Warhammer ECW games, but those _are_ historical
games and can't actually be banned.

> I didn't see any ban on "Nuclear Destruction" game (yes it is a card

That would be either "Nuclear War" or "Nuclear Escalation", I bet. I recently
sold NE on eBay. It was the sequel to NW, though also a stand alone game.
Quite popular for a while. It's interesting to see how people categorize
certain games.

> I will go to Historicon (about 750 miles for four days) because I can

> see what's new. I will not go

That makes sense. Since I like playing CoC, and Stargrunt, and FT I will
probably end up going to GenCon or Origins. I will also try to hit one or two
historical miniatures conventions that are only 5 hours away rather than 12.

> A message was sent out by the president of HMGS midwest to get members

That isn't how it works, unless HMGS is paying out of pocket for you. The rule
at GenCon since at least 1996 (and probably a good deal earlier than that) was
that you registered as a judge and submitted your games. You got a judge's
badge. If you ran 16 hours worth of events, you got your registration fee
back. You got the fee right there at the convention. There was a sheet you got
as a judge that you had signed by the guys at Miniatures HQ (I also signed the
sheets for the GZG judges who asked me to; apparently there was no way of
actually checking if it was a valid signature or not). They paid you right
there, before you left the convention.

The problem with asking for historical games at GenCon was that he asked well
after the deadline for getting the events into the pre-registration
book. A
lot of folks won't bother running games if it isn't in the pre-reg book,
because it's hard to fill up the slots. I can't remember if I saw the first
posting before or after the date that GenCon was open for
pre-registering. If
you don't pre-reg right away, due to Milwaukee's housing bureau system,
you may not get a convenient hotel. I don't know, though, if the guy doing the
organizing was going through GenCon's judge co-ordinator. If you did, as
I did the last two times I ran the GZG events, you got preferential treatment
in getting a room. No special rate other than the con rate, but you did get a
better hotel.

Historical miniatures at GenCon has been on a steady decline at least since
1995 (that year the number of historical games was actually quite good for a
generic convention). I think a number of people just threw up their hands and
made other plans. A posting in Usenet and some Yahoo groups isn't going to
make many people change their minds. It's too bad, because one of the reasons
I stopped going to GenCon was a dearth of historical games.

> [quoted text omitted]

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:46:23 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: Re: [OT] GenCon (was Re: GenCon Plans Anyone?)

> --- Allan Goodall <agoodall@att.net> wrote:

> >no perspective (someone had a character that was

Most "modern" gamers use the "gp" the same way the book says to: it's a money
of account, used to keep track of large sums. Actually it would be in a
variety of forms, dependant on the actual setting. Frequently, gems.

The 'A' does NOT stand for accountant.

Also note that weights of coinage vary wildly--the 1st
Edition AD&D had gold coins weighing.1 lbs each, which is nearly twice the
weight of the heaviest coin I'm familliar with.

More common would be something like the Roman standard, where a noumisma
(known in the west as a
"Bezant") weighs 1/72 of a Roman pound.  Very small.

> >As a side point a Leonardo game, that I played in,

I pissed off the local "historical" crowd but hard with the following
conversation:

"Looks like a fantasy game to me." "It's DBM and it's historical." "Well,
you've got those guys on the mailed horses...
"
"Those are Medieval Koreans!" "Right, you've got Koreans fighting guys in
chariots
with half-nekkid infantry.  Aren't those Egyptians?"
"Yeah, New Kingdom Egyptians." "So, Koreans vs. New Kingdom Egyptians. Sounds
like fantasy to me."

The sad part is the New Kingdom Egyptians were winning because the most common
ancients rules (DBM) doesn't make allowances for things like the difference
between steel and bronze, between chariots and cavalry, or any other
technological change.

These same guys would dump in their drawers at the idea of playing a game with
mass drivers or laser rifles.

From: Allan Goodall <agoodall@a...>

Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 14:47:24 -0500

Subject: Re: [OT] GenCon (was Re: GenCon Plans Anyone?)

On Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:46:23 -0700 (PDT), John Atkinson
> <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> wrote:

> These same guys would dump in their drawers at the

I could never figure out how ancients players could sometimes turn their nose
down at sci-fi and fantasy games (not all do; some actually like fantasy
games as they are quite similar to ancients) while fighting battles out of
era. It's
quite common knowledge that DBA/DBM/DBR don't work with anything close
to realism once you play games outside of a given era.

I wonder if they would complain about a SG2/Hardtack scenario based on
Turtledove's "Guns of the South"? I mean, it's muskets on one side (historical
weapon) and AK-47s on the other side (historical weapon).

Oh, and to put this slightly on topic, we're working on tech modifiers in FMAS
so that different levels of technology will be taking into consideration.