Change Bylaw 4 a ii : Elder Powers
Status message
Displaying output for plurality votingOpen Votes
Proposal Type: Bylaw Revision
Opened: 03-Feb-2006 1:00AM EST
Closing: 08-Feb-2006 1:00AM EST
I propose that Bylaw 4aii be removed and all issues conscerning Elder Powers be left to each individual Chronicle detailed in Bylaw 1ei under House Rules.
Additionally, Chronicles will have the right to disallow Elder Powers from visiting PCs under Bylaw 1di.
Mike Roberts
Sport mediaAir Jordan 1 Retro High OG "UNC Patent" Obsidian/Blue Chill-White For Sale
File / Document: No file attachments for this vote.
Ballot Options Against
For
Abstain
1 out of 155 eligible voters cast their ballot
Against
51% (38 votes)
For
35% (26 votes)
Abstain
14% (10 votes)
| Chronicle/Position | Voted for | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| St. Petersburg, FL - USA, Faces of Change | For | The bottom line about this proposal is ''Do the Chronicles have the right to decide what is allowed in their game?'' Even if you are against Elder Powers, voting For this prop gives you the right to decide for your game and allows others to decide for theirs. Which is a better scenario? A ST staff deciding that something will be allowed or disallowed in their game or a group of STs,that has never gone to that game,deciding that for them? |
| Los Angeles, CA - USA, La Sangre De Los Angeles | Against | |
| Saint Paul, MN - USA, Obsidian Towers | Against | |
| Iowa City, IA - USA, Fields of Rage | Against | As per the last time this came up. |
| Milwaukee, WI - USA, Nocturnal Rapture | Against | Can we please just stop already? |
| Tampa, FL - USA, Tampa Bay by Night | Abstain | Mike Roberts from FoC, though he is the most hated man in the org, has a point... this is not the Camarilla... and there are a good deal of individuals who seem to need to be told what to do. In OWbN, we have no MST telling us what we can and can not do. The local staffs must decide what is best for their individual game, then implement it. Please decide how much control you need, then stick with it. Tampa abstains because we would simply not allow elder powers in our game if passed... but we would like to be able to choose for ourselves. See OHG, Carpe Noctum, and SotP. |
| Cleveland, OH - USA, An Uncertain Destiny | Abstain | |
| Philadelphia, PA - USA, Nusquam | Against | L'Ange Noir said it best |
| Chicago, IL - USA, Dark Requiem | Against | Our game voted against this measure the last time it came up. |
| Fredericksburg, VA - USA, Caine's Chosen: Liberty in Death | For | |
| Indianapolis, IN - USA, Stars Never Rise | Against | Again, per our player base: Please tell Council to stop beating a dead horse into dust, especially when votes are coming BACK up two months after the last one. |
| Auburn, CA - USA, Lux Tenebras | For | It hurts me to vote this way because I dislike the changing things back and forth, but all of the players who put forth their input want us to vote yes. |
| Norwalk, CT - USA, Rails of Revolution | For | I believe this should be decided on a Chronicle level, especially since nobody seems to quite agree on it. |
| San Francisco, CA - USA, Always Comes Evening | Against | Not this again. |
| Providence, RI - USA, Hidden Flame | For | Not even a vampire game, but we agree with the principle of the thing. To those who are yelling about this coming up for a vote again - it took four tries to get it banned. Now all of a sudden, those that disagree with banning elder powers should just be quiet because they lost? If that was the case, the ban never would've passed in the first place, and we wouldn't be having this discussion. |
| Atlanta, GA - USA, Whispers of Atlanta | Against | Playerbase voted against this. As much as I hate the fact that my playerbase voted against this, Ill still abide by their wishes. For, I am one man, and they have big sticks. |
| Fargo, ND - USA, Within Shadow's Reach | Against | |
| Cleveland, OH - USA, Carpe Noctum | For | This should be left to each game not council. |
| Dayton, OH - USA, Dying Embers | For | Each games should have the authority to decide this issue for themselves. |
| Cincinnati, OH - USA, Shadows of Cincinnati | For | |
| Columbus, OH - USA, Columbus in Darkness | Against | |
| Springfield, IL - USA, Capitol City Cauldron | Against | |
| Washington, DC - USA, Shadows on the Mall | For | Per ST discussion. |
| Phoenix, AZ - USA, Secundus Surrectum | Against | As per ST Vote. Again. Seriously, can this be the last time? This has been voted down THREE TIMES. |
| Amador, CA - USA, River of Shadows | For | |
| Harrisonburg, VA: Death in the Valley | Abstain | As per our last vote. |
| Gimli, MB - Canada, Sang Nordique | Against | |
| Iowa City, IA - USA, L'Ange Noir | Against | Stinky cheese |
| St. Augustine, FL - USA, On Haunted Ground | Abstain | It took three? four? votes before the Org decided no on elder powers. That many votes of the org saying 'yes' to these rules. Now that they're out (thanks to ONE voting period), people are calling for 'no more votes' on elder powers. That's just being a sore winner people... However, while we support individual chronicle control over elder powers in our own games, an attempted compromise two months ago drove more support away than it brought in, as it added unnecessary 'org house rules' to the issue. We support the decision of chronicles to make their own decisions about this, and if you want them in your game, great. If not, then don't allow them--even to visiting players during their time there. Given that this proposal was put out when people are still obviously not ready to discuss it again, we will have to abstain for now. Our game is ready to have these powers. The org as a whole on the other hand, seems incapable of handling the responsibility. |
| Edwardsville, IL - USA, Caught in Eternal Twilight | For | This should be a house rule. They can be denied by any given game at their preference, and we are sure they will be. However, the games that want to use them still can. |
| Baltimore, MD - USA, Dark Harbor | For | |
| AHC 1 | Abstain | |
| AHC 2 | Against | There should be a bylaw written that stops the discussion of Elder powers being in the hands of 8th geners forever. |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Against | |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Against | |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Against | Do I really have to go over this one more time? Apparently so. 8th Generation Vampire characters should not have powers above level 5, or in MET terms, Advanced. This is the primary reason that OWBN decided, a long time ago now, to limit PCs to 8th Generation. At the time, 7th PCs with aboved Advanced powers, albeit homemade powers, and not the published ones, existed, and most people felt they were unbalancing. The published powers are, perhaps, not as broken as ''The Gun'' or other custom powers at the time, but they are still quite powerful. White Wolf made a mistake when they published Laws of Elysium with the chart allowing characters of worse than 7th Generation to have these powers. OWBN has corrected this mistake, on multiple occasions now, and it should stay corrected. Sadly, we have failed to close the NPC loophole for 8th Generation characters, but that is a separate issue. |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Against | Do I really have to go over this one more time? Apparently so. 8th Generation Vampire characters should not have powers above level 5, or in MET terms, Advanced. This is the primary reason that OWBN decided, a long time ago now, to limit PCs to 8th Generation. At the time, 7th PCs with aboved Advanced powers, albeit homemade powers, and not the published ones, existed, and most people felt they were unbalancing. The published powers are, perhaps, not as broken as ''The Gun'' or other custom powers at the time, but they are still quite powerful. White Wolf made a mistake when they published Laws of Elysium with the chart allowing characters of worse than 7th Generation to have these powers. OWBN has corrected this mistake, on multiple occasions now, and it should stay corrected. Sadly, we have failed to close the NPC loophole for 8th Generation characters, but that is a separate issue. |
| Reclamation | Against | I firmly believe that no PC should have any power at level 6. Moving past level 5 enters you into an entirely different arena in both mechanics and metaphysics. Why force a player to give up a character at 7th Gen, or at the rank of Legend? |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | For | I agree that this is something that should be left to the chronicle to decide. |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | For | I agree that this is something that should be left to the chronicle to decide. |