# Midnight threads moved?



## Desdichado (Sep 24, 2003)

Just curious -- I noticed lately that _Midnight_ threads have been moved from General RPG Discussion to d20 System Games.  But isn't _Midnight_ more accurately a D&D setting rather than a seperate d20 System Game?  I'm not complaining, but I guess I fail to see the logic of it.  Do _Oriental Adventures_ campaigns also need to be moved because they feature all new races and several new core classes, a new magic system, etc.?


----------



## Henry (Sep 24, 2003)

The rule of thumb is if the product is produced by way of the OGL, or if it is a d20 game separate from D&D, it goes in d20 systems games. Thus, even Scarred Lands materials goes in d20 systems. Oriental Adventures would go in General because it is not OGL and it is produced by WotC.


----------



## Desdichado (Sep 24, 2003)

Oh, really?  Is that a recent definition of the forums?  Seems that SL and Midnight discussions on General used to be fairly common.


----------



## Henry (Sep 24, 2003)

A little amendment to that...

I clarified with the admins - Midnight WOULD go over, because there are sufficiently changed custom rules it uses. Scarred Lands, however, technically wouldn't, because it is pretty much a plain vanilla D&D setting, rules-wise.

The closer to the core rules it is, it's more likely for all its threads to stay in General.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 24, 2003)

Might want to add Midnight into the d20 Forum's definition then, as it seems to be the exception.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 24, 2003)

I just closed a thread on this topic in General, linking it here.  We'd like to hear peoples' opinions on this, because I'm not sure that it's entirely set in stone. Our logic (mentioned in that other thread) is that some products are a little hard to tell whether it's actual D&D or something a little more exotic. Scarred Lands? Plainly a campaign setting, with no fundamentally unique rules. Monte's AU? Clearly an OGL product. Midnight? Considering the variant rules for magic, clerics, and general character classes, we've decided to slide those into the d20 forum.


----------



## KnowTheToe (Sep 24, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> I just closed a thread on this topic in General, linking it here.  We'd like to hear peoples' opinions on this, because I'm not sure that it's entirely set in stone. Our logic (mentioned in that other thread) is that some products are a little hard to tell whether it's actual D&D or something a little more exotic. Scarred Lands? Plainly a campaign setting, with no fundamentally unique rules. Monte's AU? Clearly an OGL product. Midnight? Considering the variant rules for magic, clerics, and general character classes, we've decided to slide those into the d20 forum.




You're supposed to be gone for three weeks   

I feel it is a legitimate D&D product such as OA.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Sep 24, 2003)

KnowTheToe said:
			
		

> You're supposed to be gone for three weeks
> 
> I feel it is a legitimate D&D product such as OA.



If the creators' opinion matters, we consider it (and refer to it as) a campaign setting.  It was not conceived of or designed as a d20 system game, rather as a campaign setting. I'd prefer it not be lumped in with other games, but rather with other settings.

Thanks!


----------



## Dinkeldog (Sep 24, 2003)

I've been developing an opinion over the last couple weeks that just about all of the campaign setting stuff could go into d20 games, with a slight modification of the title and/or description there.  To me, this would include things like Midnight and Scarred Lands, but also Dark Sun, Ravenloft, and even Forgotten Realms stuff.  Especially since most of the FR stuff that comes up has to do with rules and/or systems exclusive to FR (like Spellfire).  I'm not definite on it.  

Mostly, I think there's not a whole lot of benefit to something going into General.  I think the quality of answers that people get is higher when things go into a different forum.


----------



## Cthulhu's Librarian (Sep 24, 2003)

I'm going to fall in with those that see this as a campaign setting, and ask that it be allowed to stay in General Discussion. While there are differences, at its core it's still a D&D campaign setting, no different than a heavily modified homebrew world. The examples you give (races, classes, magic) are all things that still revolve around the core PHB, not a stand alone book like AU. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Arnwyn (Sep 24, 2003)

From everything I've heard, I've always considered it a setting.

Weird.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 24, 2003)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> If the creators' opinion matters, we consider it (and refer to it as) a campaign setting.  It was not conceived of or designed as a d20 system game, rather as a campaign setting. I'd prefer it not be lumped in with other games, but rather with other settings.
> 
> Thanks!




Ditto.


----------



## Desdichado (Sep 24, 2003)

The benefit, as I see it, is that you get a lot more replies in General.  Sure, you may not get the same signal/noise ratio, but at least you're getting lively discussion.  It seems a thin line to cross -- _Oriental Adventures_ also has unique races, classes and magic system, yet it's not considered a d20 game vs a D&D setting.  Re: Dink's post, does the creation of a setting forum make any sense, or is that just silly?


----------



## WizarDru (Sep 24, 2003)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> If the creators' opinion matters, we consider it (and refer to it as) a campaign setting.  It was not conceived of or designed as a d20 system game, rather as a campaign setting.



I would generally agree with this.  I consider Midnight to be a variant D&D campaign, with some minor rules changes for flavor, not a completely variant system.  Scarred Lands, for example, has some very slight differences in spellcasters (Is it warm in here?) but is still clearly vanilla D&D.  FR has several non-standard elements, such as regional feats, spellfire, chaos magic and the weave, but still is clearly classic D&D.  Mindnight is a little more in the muddied waters, as it were, but for the most part still, IMHO, a D&D campaign setting, much the same way that I'd view OA.  I realize that OA is the exception, as it's from WotC...but I think that even if it weren't, I'd still look for it in general, if I had my druthers (or Druthers, if you prefer).


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 24, 2003)

Not gone yet - or rather, gone and briefly back.  

Dinkeldog, from my point of view the main problem with that suggestion is one of moderation. I sure don't want to have to pick through each post and decide whether or not it's about a campaign setting; that would suck on toast! We'd have to move a bunch of threads, it would annoy people, and the delineation wouldn't be anywhere near as clear-cut as I'd like. I'm a big believer in simpler is better, and there's certainly a thing as too much specificity in forums.

Anyways, it's some food for thought.  Wil, we'll take your opinion into account when we finally make up our minds.


----------



## Nifelhein (Sep 24, 2003)

KnowTheToe said:
			
		

> You're supposed to be gone for three weeks
> 
> I feel it is a legitimate D&D product such as OA.



Yeah, so it was three weeks after all, shoo shoo be gone!!! (just joking, of course!)

As for midnight, it is not different than D&D, it uses the D&D core rules as a base and subsidiary, enough that the PHB is needed for character creation and the other books in the usual manner.

I lost my answer due to lack of energy, but I summarised here:

Races and Classes: The changes are normal for a setting that has specifics of its own, Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms have entirely new races, Oriental Adventures has new classes and disconsider others.

CLeric, Spells and Midnight: This is the place that midnight is changed the most from D&D, but spells are kept the same, the casting works the same way, the system for gaining and stating how much spells you can cast are the difference, but it cannot be considered too far from elements of magic, for that matter.

UA and Midnight: I am not familiar on how UA is or works, I know it has a completely different approach to spell system, races and classes, maybe if I knew why it was under the OGL & D20 forum I would understand why midnight is being put there...

Anyway I also think midnight is mostly a setting, while UA is mostly a new D&D approach, maybe I am wrong, but would want to know why the moderators think midnight is enough different to be put under the oted forum and not under general. What makes midnight not D&D but something else that is not true for FR, OA and other D&D settings that are not the default?


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 24, 2003)

I think the most simple answer is: If you need the Player's Handbook, it is a setting. If you don't, it goes to the d20 forums.

Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, OA, Dragonlance, and Midnight need the PHB.

Wheel of Time, Star Wars, and Arcana Unearthed do not.


----------



## Varianor Abroad (Sep 24, 2003)

Dinkeldog said:
			
		

> Mostly, I think there's not a whole lot of benefit to something going into General.  I think the quality of answers that people get is higher when things go into a different forum.




The amount of views does drop dramatically when something gets shifted out of the General forum. From what I've seen, AU threads see a lot less contentious replies now, but fewer people who aren't fans look at those threads. Kind of a no-win situation.

I wonder if the forum title has anything to do with it. "D20 games" don't have brand identity because they refer to a shared license, not a manufacturer. The forum may suffer from the same problem. What about relabeling it? (Of course, I'm trying to wrack my brain for good potential titles that avoid "alternate" or "other", words that automatically devalue the next word in the sentence, and haven't thought of any yet.)


----------



## Nifelhein (Sep 24, 2003)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> I think the most simple answer is: If you need the Player's Handbook, it is a setting. If you don't, it goes to the d20 forums.
> 
> Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, OA, Dragonlance, and Midnight need the PHB.
> 
> Wheel of Time, Star Wars, and Arcana Unearthed do not.



Dito!

I hate when someone makes order out of my chaos, I guess that was something that I tried to say in my former post, but not so clean, clear or defining.


----------



## Henry (Sep 24, 2003)

I could live with that definition; it would save us from having to sort out everything from Scarred Lands to Testament. The only problem is that some things, such as Spycraft, technically DO need the players' Handbook; but I understand what you mean by that definition. If it does NOT use the majority of the core PHB rules, then it should go into d20 Systems.


----------



## Cthulhu's Librarian (Sep 24, 2003)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> I think the most simple answer is: If you need the Player's Handbook, it is a setting. If you don't, it goes to the d20 forums.
> 
> Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, OA, Dragonlance, and Midnight need the PHB.
> 
> Wheel of Time, Star Wars, and Arcana Unearthed do not.



I wish I could have said it that easily.


----------



## Varianor Abroad (Sep 24, 2003)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, OA, Dragonlance, and Midnight need the PHB.
> 
> Wheel of Time, Star Wars, and Arcana Unearthed do not.




This doesn't work as an acid test for me. AU requires the Monster Manual and DMG, as does Wheel of Time. Star Wars does not. OA does not always require the PHB because you could photocopy a few relevant items and stuff those inside the cover. (In fact, I wish that product had included the complete generation rules and relevant spells, magic items and equipment so that I could use it stand-alone since it has lots of neat flavorful things.) The d20/OGL descriptor seems more accurate.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 24, 2003)

Varianor Abroad said:
			
		

> I wonder if the forum title has anything to do with it. "D20 games" don't have brand identity because they refer to a shared license, not a manufacturer. The forum may suffer from the same problem. What about relabeling it? (Of course, I'm trying to wrack my brain for good potential titles that avoid "alternate" or "other", words that automatically devalue the next word in the sentence, and haven't thought of any yet.)




I'd be happy to relabel it, if anyone can offer some good suggestions.


----------



## Cthulhu's Librarian (Sep 24, 2003)

Varianor Abroad said:
			
		

> OA does not always require the PHB because you could photocopy a few relevant items and stuff those inside the cover. (In fact, I wish that product had included the complete generation rules and relevant spells, magic items and equipment so that I could use it stand-alone since it has lots of neat flavorful things.)



In other words, OA DOES need the PHB.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 24, 2003)

Thats also why I said *PHB*, instead of DMG or MM. Technically, you could play the game with nothing more than the PHB.

The need for any part of the Player's Handbook makes it a setting in my opinion. If you can play the game without ever touching the PHB, it goes to the d20 forums.

Thats how I always saw it.


----------



## shouit (Sep 24, 2003)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> Ditto.




Ditto on the Ditto


----------



## WizarDru (Sep 25, 2003)

shouit said:
			
		

> Ditto on the Ditto



Is Tritto a word?


----------



## Varianor Abroad (Sep 25, 2003)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> Thats also why I said *PHB*, instead of DMG or MM. Technically, you could play the game with nothing more than the PHB.
> 
> The need for any part of the Player's Handbook makes it a setting in my opinion. If you can play the game without ever touching the PHB, it goes to the d20 forums.
> 
> Thats how I always saw it.




I really fail to understand how use of the PHB makes it an easier to quantify or clarify which belongs in which forum. Since we're on the subject of Midnight, I'll continue with it. (Disclaimer: I don't own Midnight yet, but it will probably wind up on my shelf soon.) Here's the description from the FFG website:



> Midnight...is fully compatible with the d20 System but features many new and exciting rules expansions and alternate systems. Players can choose from all new character classes, such as the channeler and wildlander. They can select heroic paths for their characters, such as the ironborn and dragonblooded, that give them the unique gifts of truly legendary heroes. Players can also explore new rules for learning and casting spells that allow any character to wield the power of magic. Best of all, this new magic system is seamlessly integrated with the hundreds of existing spells designed for the d20 System core rules.




So, it has new character classes, new magic systems and new rules for spells, expansions on existing rules, that require me to use two physical books at my table to play the game: the PH and Midnight. AU only requires one physical book that also contains new magic systems, new character classes, and new rules which are compatible with the core system. Doesn't the current d20/OGL definition seem a fairer classification system? YMMV.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Sep 25, 2003)

shouit said:
			
		

> Ditto on the Ditto



Ditto on the Ditto on the Ditto.   

I also agree Ashrem Bayle on the PHB definition as it makes sense and is very sound to me.  

As for just a re-label, as long as Midnight gets it’s “props” and is high on the marquee I think everything is good to go.


----------



## Desdichado (Sep 25, 2003)

Varianor Abroad said:
			
		

> So, it has new character classes, new magic systems and new rules for spells, expansions on existing rules, that require me to use two physical books at my table to play the game: the PH and Midnight. AU only requires one physical book that also contains new magic systems, new character classes, and new rules which are compatible with the core system. Doesn't the current d20/OGL definition seem a fairer classification system? YMMV.



Everything you said also applies to the _Oriental Adventures_ book.  Would have applied to a certain extent to Planescape back in the 2e days, for that matter.  Are you saying they shouldn't be considered D&D settings?


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 25, 2003)

That definition also applies to Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Dark Sun etc...etc...


----------



## Varianor Abroad (Sep 25, 2003)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> Everything you said also applies to the _Oriental Adventures_ book.  Would have applied to a certain extent to Planescape back in the 2e days, for that matter.  Are you saying they shouldn't be considered D&D settings?




Every one of the products under discussion (except Star Wars) qualify as D&D settings IMO. It feels like an artificial distinction to say that by virtue of requiring the PH for certain mechanics one qualifies as a General forum item, yet those fantasy gaming products that require the core system _except_ the PH should go elsewhere. By this same logic a modern fantasy setting with a manual that reproduced classes from d20 Modern, but otherwise used the PH, would go into General. Yet d20 Modern itself would go in d20/OGL. (Yes I know d20 Modern has its own forum, but if it didn't that's what would happen.)

On the concept of relabelling, I gave it some thought. The best idea that I came up with was something to the effect of "Expanded D&D/d20/OGL games." Alternate D&D Games & Settings was my second-best suggestion. Until I had occasion to follow a product that was put into the d20 forum, I never saw a need to look in there because the forum title didn't pique my interest. (Sadly, I didn't read the very tiny print subheads either until I got a larger monitor.)


----------



## Desdichado (Sep 25, 2003)

There's no distinction that isn't artificial and arbitrary, though, is there?  We can all take one point of view to it's farthest possible application and show how it's ridiculous.  However, in this case, I don't think pointing out that all of the D&D settings ever produced would fail to qualify as General discussion on a D&D message board is really taking things very far out there.  _Midnight_ certainly isn't as "out there" as _Dark Sun_ in terms of mechanics, for example.

Deciding that d20/OGL games differ from "campaign settings" based on whether or not they are self-standing (or use a different standard than the PHB) certainly makes more sense to me personally than any other scheme I've seen proposed.  In fact, I always assumed that was the general rule already.  But at the end of the day, what makes sense to me personally isn't the standard used around here, unfortunately.


----------



## WizarDru (Sep 25, 2003)

Varianor Abroad said:
			
		

> Every one of the products under discussion (except Star Wars) qualify as D&D settings IMO. It feels like an artificial distinction to say that by virtue of requiring the PH for certain mechanics one qualifies as a General forum item, yet those fantasy gaming products that require the core system _except_ the PH should go elsewhere. By this same logic a modern fantasy setting with a manual that reproduced classes from d20 Modern, but otherwise used the PH, would go into General. Yet d20 Modern itself would go in d20/OGL. (Yes I know d20 Modern has its own forum, but if it didn't that's what would happen.)



The way I see it, if the game is self-contained, such as AU, d20 modern, Babylon 5, Wheel of Time or Everquest, it's clearly d20 material for the d20 forum (d20 modern being popular enough for its own forum notwithstanding).  If it's a game that is really D&D with trimmings, such as FR, SL, Midnight, OA or similar settings, then general is just fine.  

Note that settings like Midnight supplement the PHB, not replace it.  There are plenty of fighters (more than a normal D&D setting) within Midnight, but they are NOT detailed in the Midnight setting.  There are no Fighters in d20 Modern or Babylon5.  You can't be a PHB wizard or ranger in Wheel of Time, normally.  AU is compatible, but then, presumably so is Mutants & Masterminds or Godlike.  That some classes are restricted in a setting such as Midnight is not quite the same thing as saying they're not basic choices avaible to players at all, IMHO.

A game such as Hijinx or the Polyhedron d20 Pulp game, which has replacement classes for the core and some very divergent mechanics (musical combat, for example), I would consider to go to the d20 forum.  A game like the SpellJammer game, I would put firmly in general, as it's just a D&D setting where you cross out 'sea-faring' and write in 'space-faring'.

Is it a bit arbitrary?  Yes.  But I think it simplifies the analysis, somewhat, and makes management easier.


----------



## zenld (Sep 25, 2003)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> Thats also why I said *PHB*, instead of DMG or MM. Technically, you could play the game with nothing more than the PHB.
> 
> The need for any part of the Player's Handbook makes it a setting in my opinion. If you can play the game without ever touching the PHB, it goes to the d20 forums.
> 
> Thats how I always saw it.




*Stands and appluads*

Agreed. 
Just wanted to add my vote.

zen


----------



## tetsujin28 (Sep 25, 2003)

I'm for Midnight remaining in the General Forum. I hardly ever look at any of the others.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 25, 2003)

Three seperate forums:

*General Dungeons and Dragons Forum*
*Setting Specific Dungeons and Dragons Forum* (For discussion specific to a certain setting.)
*d20 system and OGL Games Forum* (Remains as is.)

That's the best idea I've got. Midnight is clearly a D&D setting as it is impossible to play without the core D&D books. If Midnight absolutely cannot stay in General, I see no reason why ANY setting should be able to do so. Why would it be singled out?

You can play Starwars and Wheel of Time without ever seeing any of the three core books. You just can't do that with FR, Greyhawk, Midnight, OA, etc. The requirement of the D&D Player's Handbook is the only way I see you can draw a line and say "You are either in or out."


----------



## Nifelhein (Sep 25, 2003)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> Three seperate forums:
> 
> *General Dungeons and Dragons Forum*
> *Setting Specific Dungeons and Dragons Forum* (For discussion specific to a certain setting.)
> ...



That would be good, but you would have to divise things anyway and if already doing that, why not just leave them at general?

I was also wondering about non 3rd edition settings, they could be one that is ABSOLUTELY differerent than the core rules, not because they use older editions, but because its default is away from the norm, would they be d20 and OGL? No? General? Why? It is a setting and being updated or not shouldn't make it go somewhere else.

I think that either settings stay at general or ALL of them are moved to d20 and OGL, which should become: Settings, d20 system and OGL Standalone Games.

But what about homebrews? Would discussions about them fit in general or that new one?

Wanna know? It is easier to let settings in general, standalones and d20 system other than D&D can be defined easier and also would result in less frequent problems... midnight is a setting, many fans around here are just stating it, and what amazed most of us was exactly how Midnight tweaked a bit of the core rules and got a completely different mood, the rules are quite the same, the mood is far from it.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Sep 25, 2003)

Trust me, Ashrem, it wouldn't be because someone here wanted to squash all mention of Midnight.  The virtue of a setting isn't determined by whether people discuss specifics in General or in d20 games.  Honestly.  I promise.


----------



## Starman (Sep 25, 2003)

Dinkeldog said:
			
		

> Trust me, Ashrem, it wouldn't be because someone here wanted to squash all mention of Midnight.  The virtue of a setting isn't determined by whether people discuss specifics in General or in d20 games.  Honestly.  I promise.




Suuure. We all know you're still upset that FFG didn't want anything to do with you're setting, Middle of the Night, which melded the BoEF with LotR. Fess up, now.  

Starman


----------



## KnowTheToe (Sep 25, 2003)

If we pull all campaign settings from the general forum, don't we start makng the General forum a little vanilla?


----------



## Nifelhein (Sep 26, 2003)

KnowTheToe said:
			
		

> If we pull all campaign settings from the general forum, don't we start makng the General forum a little vanilla?



Yeah, I believe in it too, General should have all settings and that is why creating a setting forum, or moving them elsewhere wouldn't truly improve the forums, in my opinion it would be dedtrimental.

By the way I love ENWorld forums far more than others, specially those for my country, they truly don't catch my attention.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Sep 26, 2003)

KnowTheToe said:
			
		

> If we pull all campaign settings from the general forum, don't we start makng the General forum a little vanilla?




Aside from new releases, there's really not a lot that goes there setting wise.  

I wouldn't worry about it, though.  It's not going to happen.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 26, 2003)

Dinkeldog said:
			
		

> Trust me, Ashrem, it wouldn't be because someone here wanted to squash all mention of Midnight.  The virtue of a setting isn't determined by whether people discuss specifics in General or in d20 games.  Honestly.  I promise.




Oh, I know. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 30, 2003)

We ever come to a conclusion on this?


----------



## Nifelhein (Sep 30, 2003)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> We ever come to a conclusion on this?



 I guess we were trying to talk to the moderators but since not many of them have given their opinion and that they are the ones to decide... no, we have not...

And mind you? I would like to know what they have decided or if they haven't yet discussed, but at least know...

Any moderator around here who can tell us???


----------



## d20Dwarf (Oct 1, 2003)

Dinkeldog said:
			
		

> Aside from new releases, there's really not a lot that goes there setting wise.
> 
> I wouldn't worry about it, though. It's not going to happen.



Right, Midnight is the only setting that's getting moved.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Oct 1, 2003)

Last I heard Midnight isn't going to be up in General.


----------



## Nifelhein (Oct 1, 2003)

And is the forum title contain midnight?


----------



## Dinkeldog (Oct 1, 2003)

I imagine when Morrus has time (or one of the other admins), Midnight will be removed.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Oct 1, 2003)

Dinkeldog said:
			
		

> I imagine when Morrus has time (or one of the other admins), Midnight will be removed.



Removed from where?


----------



## LightPhoenix (Oct 1, 2003)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> Removed from where?



Existence.  Morrus will fly to your house, strong-arm you, and steal your books.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Oct 2, 2003)

LightPhoenix said:
			
		

> Existence.



It seems some people would have it that way.


----------



## Nifelhein (Oct 2, 2003)

Midnight is now written under the D20 & OGL Forum, so it is set, we are never gonna see midnight threads in general again.

A pity that the mods don't agree with us, a setting is now D20... even though the magic differences is on the casting and learning, not on the levels and spells...


----------



## KnowTheToe (Oct 2, 2003)

It is a sad day 

I must find Ninja Dog and help him with his violent upheavel of the management.

I shouldn't have said that out load, please ignore above statement.


----------



## JoeBlank (Oct 2, 2003)

For what it is worth, this decision will change the way I read the Boards. My normal habit is to read General; Rules; Books, Movies & TV; and usually Meta. If I have time, then I poke around in some of the other forums, but these are the ones I read on a daily basis.

Now I am training myself to include D20 Systems in my daily reading. However, old habits die hard, and I sometimes forget. I am willing to bet that most people rarely read the D20 Systems forum, and for that reason discussion about Midnight, and other settings, will now fly under their radar.

Truth is, reading about books such as Midnight, AU, and Scarred Lands on EN World heavily influences my purchasing decisions. The more of these we remove from General, the less exposure they will get.

And a question: Is there a way to chart viewership of the various forums? I would think so, since the thread views are kept. Just curious if others read the boards in a manner similar to my own.


----------



## diaglo (Oct 2, 2003)

there are other forums?  

i goto Story Hours, General, Meta, and rules...


----------



## d20Dwarf (Oct 2, 2003)

diaglo said:
			
		

> there are other forums?
> 
> i goto Story Hours, General, Meta, and rules...



I have an idea, since OT threads are acceptable, just use this tag when you want to post about Midnight in GeneralRPG:

[OT, Midnight]


----------



## KnowTheToe (Oct 2, 2003)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> I have an idea, since OT threads are acceptable, just use this tag when you want to post about Midnight in GeneralRPG:
> 
> [OT, Midnight]





You incompentent twit, because you are retarded and can't post your Midnight thread in the right area, I am going to delete it and suspend your membership to the boards.  If you even much as show up here again, I will send my lackies out to wipe out your fish.  Do you have fish?

Impersonation of typical mod post


----------



## Piratecat (Oct 2, 2003)

Bad Wil.  No biscuit.  And I think we've just seen why KnowTheToe isn't an admin here.  

Folks, we're discussing this in our secret Superfriends headquarters, and we very well might decide to keep Midnight in General... but until then, please post them in d20. 

Thanks!


----------



## d20Dwarf (Oct 2, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Bad Wil. No biscuit. And I think we've just seen why KnowTheToe isn't an admin here.



*dumps out his gravy train and walks away muttering*


----------



## Nifelhein (Oct 2, 2003)

Could you just say why you decide A or B when you do  her ein this thread? Just that we, complainers of all sorts, want to know why...

As for my routine: General, Meta.

Now I have added, recently, D20 & OGL and rules forum, but rules tend to be a little flamer than the others, also people there are so literal that I just watch most of the time...


----------



## LuYangShih (Oct 3, 2003)

Midnight seems no different to me than Scarred Lands, OA, or Forgotten Realms.  It is a campaign setting, not a different system.  Given that, I would also vote to keep Midnight threads in the General RPG section.


----------



## Piratecat (Oct 3, 2003)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> *dumps out his gravy train and walks away muttering*




I'm dumping my gravy train RIGHT NOW.

We're going to be moving Midnight threads back to General, folks. Thank you for your patience and opinions, and expect things to be set by the end of the weekend.


----------



## Cthulhu's Librarian (Oct 3, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> We're going to be moving Midnight threads back to General, folks. Thank you for your patience and opinions, and expect things to be set by the end of the weekend.



Yay! 
Thanks for listening to the little revolt here PC. It's greatly appreciated.


----------



## KnowTheToe (Oct 3, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> I'm dumping my gravy train RIGHT NOW.
> 
> We're going to be moving Midnight threads back to General, folks. Thank you for your patience and opinions, and expect things to be set by the end of the weekend.





I changed my mind.  After further thought I have decided they should go into the d20 systems forum.  Let me explain....





Just kidding.  I kill myself.  Did I ever tell you the one about.....


----------



## Nifelhein (Oct 3, 2003)

Great!!!!

Thanks Piratecat and also for all the moderators involved in that deabte/decision...

We are glad to see Midnight in general again!


----------



## LuYangShih (Oct 4, 2003)

Thanks to all the Moderators.  It is appreciated.


----------



## JoeBlank (Oct 4, 2003)

Way to be open to input and suggestions for change.

And hooray us for suggesting change in a calm, reasoned, non-argumentive fashion.


----------



## AshremBayle@Home (Oct 4, 2003)

You see? This is why I love ENWorld.  

Thanks guys!


----------



## Desdichado (Oct 4, 2003)

AshremBayle@Home said:
			
		

> You see? This is why I love ENWorld.



Me too!  It just wouldn't be the same if I wasn't get updates from Moderators who are Moderating on the john and letting us know about it.


----------



## Olive (Oct 6, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> We're going to be moving Midnight threads back to General, folks. Thank you for your patience and opinions, and expect things to be set by the end of the weekend.




So does this mean that the 'if you need a PHB to play it' rule applies?

I've always thought it should be like that myself...


----------

