== A sample Rules Committee charter == by John Eure * What this is * Below, I've included a rough draft of what my current thoughts are like. I'm only providing it because discussions are often helped by having something concrete to work with - that way, instead of talking generally, we can say "I don't like this" or "you should add this". If Brad can come up with something too, then we'll be able to take the best parts of both... In this draft, I say that proposals require a 2/3rds majority to pass. I specifically mention that it's possible for interpretations to contradict the rules if necessary, but I leave the details unspecified. I include a short list of qualities that we can focus on when discussing a topic. And I give a brief outline of the community review procedure that Sam Sherry suggested; again, I leave the exact details unspecified, so that we can easily make improvements. Also, I say that votes aren't secret, and must be provided if requested, but that they shouldn't be announced. This seems like a decent compromise, and is basically what we've done for the last 4 years... * A potential starting point for a charter * The Rules Committee has four primary duties: First, its members act as Rules Marshals during games. Second, it issues rules interpretations as needed. Third, it hears character proposals for racial kits, Heroic Honor codes, etc. Fourth, it hears rules change proposals. It also handles any other miscellaneous rules-related tasks, such as advising GMs who want to add special rules to their game. While individual votes should not be routinely announced, votes are not secret, and must be provided by the Chair upon request. Rules Marshalling: The duty of a Rules Marshal is to handle rules disputes during games, so that game play proceeds smoothly and fairly. The important factors are consistency, speed, and on-the-spot fairness. Rulings should remain consistent within a game, but should be addressed by a (possibly contradictory) rules interpretation before the next game. Rules Marshal players may not adjudicate disputes to which they are a party. Rules Interpretations: The RC issues rules interpretations to address ambiguities in the rules. (Direct contradictions in the rules are considered errata.) The important factors are consistency, simplicity, and balance. Interpretations are normally decided through consensus (or lack of objection), as determined by the Chair. Interpretations that are sharply contested are decided by a formal majority vote. Interpretations are permitted to contradict the actual text of the rules, when necessary. Character Proposals: The RC hears character proposals for racial kits, honor codes, etc., as they arise. The important factors are balance and responsiveness. Character proposals are decided by a formal two-thirds majority vote. The results of all character proposals are public knowledge. While all proposals must pass through a normal open discussion, they may do so anonymously, and the proposal may undergo an initial round of closed discussion with only the RC. Rules Change Proposals: The RC hears rules change proposals that are brought before it. The important factors are fun, distinctiveness, balance, ease of use, and ease of transition. Rules change proposals are decided by a formal two-thirds majority vote. Rules changes are passed individually, and implemented in batches at the beginning of a future Quest year. The RC should carefully control the number and/or scope of the changes being implemented in any given year. The Quest community must be given at least a month to review and give feedback on a passed change. The Rules Chair will collect all such feedback, and near the end of the year send it to the list for discussion. If more than 1/3rd of the committee feels that a change should be reviewed, it will be removed from the list of changes and re-proposed. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * More detail? * If we wanted to go into more detail about the reasons for doing each of the 4 things, we could add the following (or something similar): Rules Marshalling: The important factors are consistency, speed, and on-the-spot fairness. Players should spend their time role-playing, not arguing over rules. Rules Interpretations: The important factors are consistency, simplicity, and balance. Interpretations should ideally follow existing patterns in the rules, follow a simple line of reasoning from the text of the rules, and should not cause power imbalances. Player Proposals: The important factors are consistency, simplicity, and balance. The RC should ensure that all PCs have balanced abilities, and should serve the player base as well as it can. Rules Change Proposals: The important factors are fun, distinctiveness, balance, ease of use, and ease of transition. Rules should be fun to use, should produce fun as a side effect of both their existence and their use, and should allow GMs to run fun games. Rules should enhance the distinctive character of Quest's game system, and should set Quest apart from other game systems. Rules should be balanced, especially in that no ability (or spell) should be clearly superior to another of the same cost (or level), and that no type of player should have an unfair advantage over another. Rules should be easy to use: they should follow consistent patterns, should involve a minimum amount of memorization by players who don't use them, should be easy for new players to learn, should be familiar to older players who return, and should not make it hard for GMs to run good games. Rules changes should involve an easy transition; there should be little effort required to convert characters to the new rules, and no characters should unintentionally be rendered unplayable. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Some of where that came from * This is an incomplete list of "things that make a good rule", which was part of the discussion at the post-rules-change Board meeting in 2001. The Rules Should be Simple · We should re-use rules in multiple locations. · When rules follow a pattern, there should be no random exceptions. · Rarely used rules should not be complex. · Rules that everyone needs to know should not be complex. · Players should not have to remember many numbers. · Important rules can be complex for the people who are using them. · Players should not have to remember complicated rules while in-game. The Rules Should be Balanced · No ability should be clearly superior to other abilities of the same cost. · No spell should be clearly superior to other spells of the same level. · New abilities with unknown effects should start our weak, but be strengthened over time to reach the proper balance. The Rules Should be Friendly to Game Masters · GMs should not have to do "rules work" for their games. · GMs should be able to create a sense of danger. · PCs should not be able to high-jack a game. The Rules Should be Friendly to New Players · You should be able to do useful things at your first game. · New players should not be trapped by using poor abilities/spells. Nor should they be held to their decisions at their first few games. · Names of abilities/skills should, when possible, give an accurate picture of what they do. · New players should not be presented with many options which are only slightly different. The Rules Should be Friendly to Returning Players · When changing names, the new names should be clearly superior to the old names, and, when possible, should be similar to the old names. · Don't make players deal with too many changes at once. · Don't force players to learn complicated new rules (even if they replace complicated old rules). · Before implementing major changes, solicit feedback from the player base and be sure all relevant issues are addressed in the subsequent change.