Sturn said:

I'm with DM, not looking to start a war. There's nothing inherently wrong with dissent or criticism. Like I said, there's spectrum and the ideal area for rules relies on player preference. However, dishonesty and direct hostility, those do cause problems.

For example If I dissented and got a PM that included lines like:

"If you honestly think you can do a better job [than the author], put your money where your mouth is and [create your own product] and be ready to defend your choices when someone whines about how you got [certain topic] wrong because they didn't match up to their idealized version of ."

then that *might* cause problems.

-WJL

LethalDose said:

Hypothetically speaking, of course. No one should assume I actually recieved a PM with those contents from any poster on this site.

-WJL

Sturn said:

I'm fully with you on the backpack, but the belt… why couldn't someone make it harness styly with the clips going down the sides? Like suspenders with packs. I could argue that you could get 2 (at least one) slot(s) out of that.

Also cargo pants…. gotta be worth another slot.

Basically pockets help alot.

Just my .02… thinking outside the box, but using common sense is a must, for instance you're not putting a 12 pound item in your cargo pants pocket your pants would fall down the first time you botched a roll. Hey, I gotta remember that!

About Rule 0…

For several Indy games, it's "Don't be a ****"
For many traditional games, it's "The GM is always right"
The term itself is meaningless without either context or being spelled out within the ruleset, and I don't recall seing either in the rules

As for common sense, it's bloody rare. And not a good substitute for a simple rule addition.

I kinda ge the impression that this whole debate "on encumbrance" is splitting hairs. It's kinda the very thing this system was intended to avoid, like languages etc…

The encumbrance score is for large items, and to prevent one character from running around with turbo blaster batteries attached to their arms. That is why smaller items don’t even have a score. If the smaller item does have a score it is because it is meant to be carried in their hand, or disrupt their ability to do other things at the same time (like a gun). Rifles are large and bulky, etc…
As long as the person has a reasonable way to carry what she has, then who cares? A backpack can hold rations, a datapad (heck you can even go the "halo route" and have it built into the forearm of armor), that kind of "don't need immediately” stuff, clips, batarangs, etc.. are on the belt, or banana clipped, etc… as long as the players are not trying to say they have 500 clips, they can keep them in a pocket for all I care.

Now if they are trying to pick up a coffee table and run around with it, then yes, some amount of math has to take place. It's a large item, even if it isn't that heavy. But why get all buggered down if you don't have to?

If your players can't adjust to common sense, then perhaps get some new players, or play HackMaster where every wee item is accounted for. For myself, and my group, it just isn't that big of a deal, and we haven't run into any problems, not even one, in the 4 month campaign we have had going. We come to a consensus and that’s the end of it.

$hamrock said:

I guess it's a question of whether you see it as debate or discussion . I'd say there's a fine line between the two, but I think in this environment its pretty blurry. In discussion the parties can express opposing or disparate viewpoints to evaluate the merits of those opinions, but aren't neccesarily trying to convince the other party to change their view points. In debate , the parties are trying to convince the opposition to change their views or to prove the opposition's view to be erroneous. I think the separation is blurry

When I'm presenting ideas like the ones above (e.g. "one backpack or utility belt bonus per character", or "add a small rule"), I'm trying to discuss and explain and support a point of view, not trying to prove anyone else wrong. I will try to point out why I may have opposing points of view with others, and if people come around to my point of view, fine. But really, there are very few people I'm trying to convince about many smaller points of the game.

Debating is substantially different. For what my debates look like, go back at the Beta threads and pay attention to debates on skill costs and autofire activation in particular. I was trying to show why particular rule was problmatic/broken/etc. And really the only party that it matters to convince are the devs, because they're the ones with the final say over the product. Anyway, that's how I look at it.

As a final comment, I will say that I think anybody has the right to correct anything they catch as factually incorrect, whether it's intentional or not. If we're not having discussion or debates based on the truth or rational though, then we're not having intelligent or rational discussion or debates, which is a waste of time. We should appreciate it when posters catch mistakes.

-WJL

LethalDose said:

We are going to have to agree to disagree between debate and discussion, as I see it a different way entirely. Debates by no means insinuate hostility (though some result in it, especially in gamer threads) but to debate requires supporting data, evidence, a goal, etc… In a discussion, participants could talk about anything, and often derail into various topics, with no actual goal in mind. Anyway, call it what you will.

As to the quote, I'm all about catching errors, however if FFG were to "correct" this specific error, or add the "small rule", they would be in the wrong. In my previous post I agreed about the backpack, but not so much the belt. Well, belt in the word itself, but not the limit. I have since posed this same topic to my group and some of them pointed out that backpack would also be incorrect to limit to 1. Again, in name, yes, but not in purpose.

A satchel, murse, and large purse are all essentially "backpacks" in regards to the space they allow. Walk onto any college campus and you will see girls wearing purses and backpacks in conjunction with each other, essentially wearing 2 backpacks. You will see the same with guys and murses/satchels. Wearing them, with both hands free. Heck if done correctly, they could use the straps of the backpack it ensure that the shoulder strap of the side hanging device doesn't slip, or move down on the shoulder, thus increasing its use. So while the "backpack" is essentially limited, one could easily come up with a backpack by another name with a different method of carrying it, and essentially get the same thing.

A harness is essentially a method of wearing 3 belts at once, actually more like 2 in regards to space on the lateral straps. Again, a name deal.

If one really wished to "split hairs", a trando or wookie player could argue the ability to wear 2 or 3 satchels, at the same time, because of their longer frames (7-9 ft tall), and varying lengths of the straps. Heck the 3 satchels wouldn't even impede access to each other if worn correctly.

See why I say it is kind of a common sense thing? I, personally, wouldn't stop any of the aforementioned methods (perhaps the wookie 3 ordeal). There is no reason to. If a player could draw me a picture, or physically show me how this is supposed to work, I really don't have a problem with it. It isn't like it is game altering or anything; they can't fit a back up sniper rifle in either of them.

More to the point, if they added said rule, then they would have to add these other items to the gear lists and I certainly don’t require that. I can make an educated guess as to prices and legality.

I think this is a topic that if it is important to the group, should be addressed prior to the campaign, when they first sit to start playing, or when it comes up in game. Address it, come to a consensus, and move on. Shouldn’t take more then a minute, or two, to get to an answer.
Each group is going to see things differently, and that is great, but what works for one may not work for another. I have a few D&D/pathfinder players in my group that tend to want a "in game printed rule" for everything under the sun. Personally, it’s that very mentality that drove me away from said games. This game, FFG star wars, has made it a mute point. Like I said, it hasn't even come up, as an issue, in our 4 month campaign. It might, now, that I brought it up.

Anyway, Good day to you, Sir.

I'm really not sure if you're saying you disagree with me on the matter of stacking backpacks or definition of the words discussion & debate . The only point was trying to make above was that I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything on this thread, just trying to explain a preference. I don't understand why it led to the "

But since this part of the discussion has lost all meaning at this point and wasn't even the OP's question, I'm sorry I even brought it up and wasted space on his thread.

-WJL

I'm not sure the backpacks "bonus" to encumbrance threshold is solely due to extra space, but also because its ergonomically designed, straps on tight and doesn't move about when running and jumping and the like. Therefore utility belts and/or harnesses would have a similar function. A bag, sack or murse/satchel on the other hand does provide space, but not the same functionality to prevent them from hindering movement and decrease mobility - they do not so effectively provide extra space so that it lets you carry more effectively without "feeling the weight". I mean, I rule that most of my players have at least a satchel (or similar item) to keep stuff in, but this satchel doesn't offer increased encumbrance threshold as such. They need to keep their comms, extra reloads, grenades, id-papers, datapads, senors, etc somewhere, they cannot carry it all in their hands… If they want a backapck, sure, they can buy it and benefit from the increased encumbrance. I also rule that 2 backpacks does not increase the threshold twice, because a backpack in front, or another attached on the back, does affect mobility more than one backpack does. They can still carry more, but they also receive the penalties from carrying more than they should.