Clean up the Rules of Rank?

[Rand alTan]

So I searched for "Overlord Grant" in the Rules of Rank and found the following paragraph:

The Overlord's Grant

As the Supreme Duelist, the Overlord's opinion is the most highly regarded as to which duelists are showing the most promise within the Arena. For this reason, the Duel of Swords officials honor a challenge to a Baron by an individual appearing on the standings of any rank (Warlord to Commoner), as decided by the Overlord, once per cycle. (See the Overlord Terms for details on how the Overlord grants this right to challenge.)

The endowed duelist has one week following the Overlord's public declaration upon the Public Notice Board to challenge a Baron. This challenge will not supersede any outstanding challenges, cannot be denied for any reason, and will follow the "Universal Terms of Challenge" with regard to response and dueling date.

If a challenge is not made within the allotted time, the duelist forfeits his or her right to challenge. The same Overlord may not grant a challenge right to another duelist for the remainder of the cycle, but if he or she is dethroned prior to the cycle's grace period, the new Overlord may grant a challenge right before said grace period begins.

Which doesn't mention anything about restricting the Granting around the WLT. Of course, it does mention it later in the thread, where G pointed it out. A little bit confusing and frustrating, because now I look like an idiot and people get to be all dramatic.

[Rand alTan]

Yes, it has a parenthetical to see details. I missed that the first two or three times. Yay, now I look like a bigger idiot.

[DUEL Gabby]

To G's player...

I would like to say THANK YOU for that entire weekend you spent in March cleaning up the rules and getting everything streamlined and organized while everyone else was dueling and enjoying themselves. You did a fabulous effing job and I'm damn proud of how much work you put into it as a volunteer.

[Rand alTan]

Well geez. I'm beginning to see more and more why people are leaving rather than joining.

I meant no disrespect by asking for improvements. I missed rule. I found it less than obvious to find the rules I was actively searching for before posting.

I have great respect for G's player and all the work he puts in. Just because someone does a lot doesn't mean there isn't room for more improvement though does there?

Maybe it's unfounded but I don't feel mutual respect being given equally to all players in this game. I do my very best to separate feelings about Rand and feelings about me. maybe I'm failing that but it certainly doesn't feel like a welcoming environment currently.

[Kalamere]

Rand,

You're not wrong, but that parenthetical to see elsewhere might be one of the better options.

The DoS rules of rank are pretty long and there are a bunch of things that rely on other things. It's messy. Personally I like the messiness and the complications, so I'm not really here to propose a new simplified ruleset. I'm just saying with the combination of clauses and options, the organizational layout isn't an easy task. I don't think anyone would argue things are perfectly arranged.

I think it's one of those things that (a) if someone misses a clause they should not at all feel stupid for it the first time and (b) if you (generic) think something is confusing, make a suggestion on how you would fix it. G and others have stared at the rules long enough to make their eyes bleed and this is what they've currently come up with. Sometimes it really does take a fresh set of eyes to see how a thing could be better laid out.

~Kal

[Sylus Kurgen]

Rand, you're not the first person who had difficulties finding specific areas of the DoS Rules and you won't be the last. Not your fault if you can't see something in that blinding wall of text.

The DoS rules have been a chaotic mess, in general, for years. G and his band of merry elves have done a lot to try and clear up areas, implement more of an information flow to it, and overall made it damn near a labor of love getting it this far.

Kal's right, sometimes it takes new eyes to pick up on something. For the longest time the rules, and even now, is a giant Wall-o-Text. Why not directional links to specific areas of the document, inside those portions of the rules? Break it up into different web-pages. Just my thoughts.

[Sabine]

I make mistakes all the time because I confuse things or read the wrong thing or misunderstand or couldn't find exactly what I was looking for.

It happens!

I'm pretty timid so seeing a correction to my mistakes on the public forums is pretty horrifying and embarrassing for me.

Don't feel salty though, it happens. Whether new or old, we'll make mistakes.

I for one am super happy to see your character out and about Rand. I've missed your presence in the community.

[Gabby]

Well geez. I'm beginning to see more and more why people are leaving rather than joining.

Actually, since this appears to be directed at me, people were leaving before I became AC. I brought some back.

I have great respect for G's player and all the work he puts in. Just because someone does a lot doesn't mean there isn't room for more improvement though does there?

That is not how he was feeling last night, hence me posting a thank you to him. Of course it doesn't mean there isn't room for improvements and I didn't state such. I was merely encouraging G's player.

Maybe it's unfounded but I don't feel mutual respect being given equally to all players in this game. I do my very best to separate feelings about Rand and feelings about me. maybe I'm failing that but it certainly doesn't feel like a welcoming environment currently.

I treat everyone equally. There have been many, many times that I have dealt with people that I do not get along with on a personal level but have been very helpful and cordial to them as the AC. Me encouraging G's player wasn't meant as disrespect towards you. Was I upset last night? Yes, I was because he felt like fingers were being pointed at him for the reason you missed the rule. He worked really hard on cleaning them up and I wanted him to feel that someone appreciated it. Not sure if you realize this but it is a rare occasion that he hears the words "thank you." People are really quick to point out his mistakes, and maybe he deserves that sometimes, but he also deserves some respect. So maybe in that sense you are absolutely correct that there isn't mutual respect being given.

I felt like you could have come to one of us and said "Hey, this is really difficult to understand, could you clarify or work on this." I would have been VERY polite to you. I can give you a list of people that have needed my help and NO MATTER WHAT was going on at the moment, whether crisis, being in the hospital, being at work, or anything, I dropped what I was doing and I assisted them...kindly. So, having this one interaction, where I didn't even say anything disparaging to you, and being basically accused as the reason people are leaving and that I am not treating people respectfully is hugely disheartening to me. I have done a lot for this sport...a sport I do not even participate in. I care about the people behind the screen names and I care about the sport as a whole.

Again, I wasn't being disrespectful towards you by trying to encourage G's player. I never said you were an idiot, you did. I didn't agree that you are an idiot. I didn't say anything one way or the other; I addressed the feelings of someone feeling down in regards to all of this because of the way the issue was presented.

We are ALL in agreement that there is room for improvement. There always is. I think there is also room for improvement in the way the players interact with the staff as well.

[JewellRavenlock]

I think there are ways to suggest changes to the rules while, at the very same time, showing appreciation for the extremely thankless work that has already been done on them.

You might feel disrespected Rand, and possibly rightfully so (that's not for me to decide), but I think your original post wasn't quite in the spirit of respect for our often unthanked volunteers. Your third post shows appreciation for the work done, but only after a lack of appreciation was pointed out.

No one is saying that improvements aren't needed, but I think the whole community benefits when we consider how we suggest those improvements.

[Sabine]

I can give you a list of people that have needed my help and NO MATTER WHAT was going on at the moment, whether crisis, being in the hospital, being at work, or anything, I dropped what I was doing and I assisted them...kindly.

True that! Thanks for always listening to my questions and venting and providing answers and sometimes a shoulder too!

[Rhiannon D Harker]

When in doubt about how something is written it's often best to snag G or Gabby and ask. Such was the case when Morgan gave Rhi the Grant a while back. That I could find, there was nothing spelled out about rescinding a challenge to one Baron and challenging another before one had been accepted. I suppose it's one of those rare things.

With regard to Rules of Rank, I found the following on the Game Guide page. This is not addressed on the official rules thread, but perhaps it should be. I never really paid attention to this item before but it might be useful in future:
(*During regular dueling only, Barons and the Overlord are restricted to 4 Fancies versus a dueler ranked Grandmaster or below.)

The way that reads to me is that a Baron or Overlord may use their full allotment of fancies against Warlord and up in regulation duels. Am I mistaken?

[Kalamere]

With regard to Rules of Rank, I found the following on the Game Guide page. This is not addressed on the official rules thread, but perhaps it should be. I never really paid attention to this item before but it might be useful in future:
(*During regular dueling only, Barons and the Overlord are restricted to 4 Fancies versus a dueler ranked Grandmaster or below.)

None of the basic rules in regard to fancies are in the rules thread. Not just this one, but the allotment per rank, etc. I can't speak to the historical reasons behind the split, but the moves and fancy information exist in the game guide, while the Rules of Rank generally applies to challenges and rights of the titled ranks... though it's also sort of a catch all for everything else.

Would you propose merging the two documents?

Personal opinion wise, I kinda like the split. The Game Guide lays out what you need to know as a commoner just starting out, while the Rules of Rank gets you into the more nitty gritty details. Given the overall complication of DoS I think it's good to have the sort of basic starters guide.

The way that reads to me is that a Baron or Overlord may use their full allotment of fancies against Warlord and up in regulation duels. Am I mistaken?

That is the rule as I understand it. It's a shift from the original Overlord rule, but probably makes more overall sense this way.

~Kal

[Rhiannon D Harker]

The quick start guide is needed. How many players that have been involved in the game for a while don't go back to see if anything has changed in the Game Guide because they assume it's strictly for beginners? It's incumbent upon players to keep up with the changes as they happen.

I have to ask, though, how many of those players that weren't aware of how that rule works are callers? Once upon a time, I had to explain and point out the rule regarding a Squire fancy to a caller. Mind you, it wasn't an unpleasant exchange, just one of those, "Shouldn't callers know this already?" things. That has since been added to the rules page.

Bottom line: A merger of the documents isn't needed, but a reminder in the rules thread that the Game Guide exists and isn't necessarily a stagnant document couldn't hurt.

[Andrea Anderson]

The quick start guide is needed. How many players that have been involved in the game for a while don't go back to see if anything has changed in the Game Guide because they assume it's strictly for beginners? It's incumbent upon players to keep up with the changes as they happen.

I have to ask, though, how many of those players that weren't aware of how that rule works are callers? Once upon a time, I had to explain and point out the rule regarding a Squire fancy to a caller. Mind you, it wasn't an unpleasant exchange, just one of those, "Shouldn't callers know this already?" things. That has since been added to the rules page.

Bottom line: A merger of the documents isn't needed, but a reminder in the rules thread that the Game Guide exists and isn't necessarily a stagnant document couldn't hurt.

Seems to be more of a caller issue. Maybe a FAQ posted under the caller board that new callers have to read would be useful. Something with pictures to explain manual changing to the tool for scoring DoM Foci. What to do with Squire Weapons/Mentor Bonuses/Talon/Etc.