Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada.
Posts: 818
|
I'd read it as the GM's version is correct within the GM's game.
But that the player's version would be correct if they wanted to take it elsewhere or retire it, etc. |
#11 |
Senior Member
Lone Wolf Staff
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 8,232
|
Quote:
Some players have no problem with a GM saying "hand over your character", then taking it, making changes, and handing it back. Others would take offense and leave the game. And there's a wide swath of "grey" in how GMs can handle that well in a social context. However, if we just gave GMs "free reign" to muck about with a PC, it would take "hand over your character" to an even further extreme, since the player would not necessarily even know about it. So we need to take everyone into consideration and devise a model that is reasonable and predictable for all involved. That's on the roadmap, and even core to how the underlying code has already been written, but we haven't gotten it into place yet in the UI. |
|
#12 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 52
|
Rob, I really like the idea of what things are able to be edited are governed by the campaign itself, that way, HLO can just have a pop up that players agree to when they join the campaign, and there's no surprises.
|
#13 |
Senior Member
Lone Wolf Staff
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 8,232
|
That is EXACTLY the plan. Full disclosure for everyone up front. No surprises regarding what to expect. Everybody is happy and GMs can exert as much or as little control over the players as they want.
|
#14 |
|
|