Master Mines

We’re digging RPGs

Idea Venting

So, Mike’s brought up a good point with his last post. How do we want to handle little idea vent posts like this? Maybe tag them with some other category, so they aren’t mixed in with our game-specific development posts? Or would they be too distracting for us?

If we’re going to keep them, how should we comment? I know that (for me, anyway) I want to stick with posts that I either want comments on or want to alert ya’ll to (like my post about the playtest & why I won’t have another substantial comment for a few days). I didn’t do the best job of declaring what I wanted out of my Power 19 post when I posted it up, and Paul called me on that because he needed to know how to comment.

I don’t want to say “Dude, you can’t post up about that,” because we’re ideally a support network, but at the same time I don’t want anyone confused about which game we’re talking about or muddy the waters with lots of side-talk. That’s just me, though. What do you want out of Master Mines regarding these sorts of posts? You all have an equal stake in our success as a group. Speak up and be heard!


June 20, 2007 - Posted by | The Rules


  1. As I stated in the comments to Mike’s last post:
    A proto-idea category wouldn’t be a bad idea, as long as we declare which game is it we are working on and make that the main effort. For example, if Mike wanted to switch from Outside Men to Bloody Subjects, that would be fine, but he’d have to declare it, and then we’d need to have some sort of rule as to how often switches like that can happen so we don’t have a ping-pong effect.

    Comment by Daniel M. Perez | June 20, 2007 | Reply

  2. I don’t think we need to over-determine this with rules – if I really got squirrelly off track from my announced, official project, I trust that you guys would let me know.

    The link to which I linked is already having profound effects on my Outside Men design thinking as well. More on that to come, hopefully tonight.

    Comment by misuba | June 20, 2007 | Reply

  3. Okay, cool, let’s leave it like that again, unless someone has any objections (now or in the future). We can also deal with this in the monthly check-ups, if someone raises the point.

    I do the same thing, and just posted up more about Flood on my journal.

    Comment by Ryan Macklin | June 20, 2007 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: