Fw: [HoE] Templar Bad Behavior?

["Meph & Kimberly" <Meph_and_Bunny@email.msn.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Sepulveda, Sam <SepulS@cws.state.ca.us>
To: 'Meph_and_Bunny@msn.com' <Meph_and_Bunny@msn.com>
Date: Monday, March 01, 1999 3:38 PM
Subject: FW: [HoE] Templar Bad Behavior?


>
>
>--}-----Original Message-----
>--}From: Sepulveda, Sam
>--}Sent: Monday, March 01, 1999 3:37 PM
>--}To: 'hoe@gamez.net'
>--}Subject: RE: [HoE] Templar Bad Behavior?
>--}
>--}
>--}
>--}--}>After the game, the rest of the group decided the templar
>--}--}player was being
>--}--}childish and annoying,
>--}--}>though we blamed the Marshal for letting a Templar in the
>--}--}game with those
>--}--}hindrances.  From then on,
>--}--}>we're all a LOT more careful what we let our players get
>--}away with.
>--}
>--}
Well yeah, a Marshal does have to be careful in
general.  But that
does not mean that certain people cannot have certain
hindrances.  I have no
problem with a Templar with bloodthirsty, or a Law Dog with
bloodthirsty or
whatever.  It is not the edges or hinderances that make the
character, but
rather how the player role-players that character with those quirks.


Meph
>--}
>