[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]
Re: MR: Disc: Pay-to-Fight
Poster: "Greg Lindahl" <email@example.com>
> If the newbie / OP dosen't have $20.00 to pay for a membership in order
> to be able to fight, they surely aren't going to have enough money to
> put together their own kit, even building most of it themselves.
My kit for rapier fencing cost me $40. My kit for archery cost me
$0. But I don't think that this discussion really addresses the point:
Just because a requirement might be thought to be inexpensive by some,
what point does it serve? Does pay-to-fight make the game more fun?
Does it make the game more authentic? Does it make the game safer? I
don't think so.
> So, let's say that they don't have the money for a
> fighter's/archer's/fencer's equipment or the $20.00 for an associate
> membership. Where does this leave them? Only with about a million
> other things that they can do in the Arts and Sciences within our
The instruments that I've played for A&S over the years cost around
$15,000 (fortunately mostly borrowed.) If you'd like to continue with
the "membeship doesn't matter because you spend so much more on kit"
argument, then perhaps we can require membership for all musicians? :-)
It would give "pay-to-play" a whole new meaning...
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
Admin. requests: firstname.lastname@example.org