FK World

[Horace]

Often times I hear FK isn't FR. Which is true, and it shouldn't be. Having a world that is able to be affected by PC actions is exactly what was intended by the creators of the hobby we enjoy, with the setting being the preconstructed back drop so we don't have to worry about creating /everything/ in the campaign world. But I think what needs to be established is: what exactly is different?

I hear it as disclaimers often, or when speaking to others ooc about FK. It's often times used as a defense mechanism, almost as if declaring such explains why the person isn't interested in learning more about whatever is being spoken of.

I believe if we can have a thread, where IMMs/Admins can post short lines explaining major differences, it will allow players to RP with confidence about canon sources - and not be ridiculed by players out of character saying that isn't the way it is in FK.

As with all preconstructed settings, the campaign should be the default - anything different (or "house rules") should be posted for all to see so an answer can be quickly found.

So I propose a sticky post. "House Rules"

I can't think of a reason for this to not exist, other than the maintenance it would take to keep it current. Of which, I know plenty of players who are more than willing to offer their time to keep it up and running.

[Kelemvor]

I think this could be a useful addition to the discussion boards, but worry that it might become unwieldy; or worse it might be used for exactly the purposes you refer to above as a stick to beat someone with.

Forgotten Kingdoms deviates in quite a number of ways from FR, but many instances are quite minor and often the result of code limitations or as a means to smooth play.

My preference would be for any 'House Rules' post to become a reflection of the other forums - a summary of decisions made in the various threads.

I know I personally struggle sometimes to confirm a rule or policy that may have been decided in the middle of a discussion post from months back.

That way, anything remaining unclear or requiring discussion can be tackled in its own thread rather than on the House Rules page. You could even link that page to the discussion thread to allow newcomers to comment or old topics to be debated again at a later date.

[Harroghty]

My preference would be for any 'House Rules' post to become a reflection of the other forums - a summary of decisions made in the various threads.

I agree with the spirit of your comment. I believe that this would be a helpful way to compile such a document as Horace is suggesting, however; I believe that you might have difficulty finding decisions in many of these threads. There is still value in gathering these threads together in one place, but more value, I think, "to allow newcomers to comment or old topics to be debated again at a later date," than to provide any consensus on the issues.

[Kelemvor]

I don't think it would be possible to summarise all the many and varied threads we've opened on rule and setting questions

My thought was merely to gather together some of the more common ones and the ones which we've resolved that might differ from canon sources.

eg My instructing my faithful that it's okay for them to be raised without asking for my permission/intervention.

Threads which have not resulted in a decision or which were left open to player interpretation would, by definition, not be House Rules.

[Harroghty]

I agree.