At one point during a recent session of Champions, one of the players who entered the campaign in its 'second season', found out about an enemy organization which was already known to the first season Players and their PCs.
He remarked that the Players could use a list of the major players and organizations in the setting. I actually have such a list of major superheroes and villains known to the public, which I made available for everyone to read, and the PCs are members of a team of superheroes tied to the UN and have access to the team's international database.
My thinking is, if a group is not well known to the public, you only recently joined the superteam and you haven't taken the time to look stuff up in the computer system, why should I freely give out info on the organization in question? How is that fair to one of the other players in the group who specifically bought the Knowledge Skills 'Criminology' and 'Superhuman Community' and the ability to sleep less than normal to reflect the fact that he stays up all hours of the night studying up on opponents and allies alike?
Well, the first player feels that with all the details in this setting, I should do a wiki type page giving everyone an equal footing run down. Not on secret GM stuff of course but stuff that the PCs, as members of the UN superteam for anywhere from 1-to-4 months now (in-game time) would be expected to know or would be informed of.
That is just not my way of doing things. I don't like doing that. Why? Well, I don't really want to game outside of the game. That is, if you want info that is already readily available to your PC, have said PC access that info or talk to an NPC in-game. Seriously, I am already doing tons of work for this campaign including designing and updating villains, making illustrations of every major character we meet, working on scenarios based off what the PCs did last adventure...now I should make a wiki page too? Spoiled much?
This same player also wanted to participate in a gaming phenomenon I've encountered only one or two times before and which, while probably as old as gaming and the telephone, is made easier by way of the internet. He wanted to play out a meeting with an important NPC over IM or through email. He said it was, "So it wouldn't take up game time".
This concept makes little sense to me. What is game time for then? Isn't it the time when we interact with NPCs, further PC and NPC goals and move the plot along? Also, the idea once again seems unfair to me. We, the group and I, get together once a week for what is usually an 8-10 hour session. Each player and PC gets a part of that time dedicated to what they're doing in the adventure. Why should any one player get more time than the others. If I did it for everyone when would I eat, sleep, write this blog, walk my dog or, you know, live.
Though perhaps I am wrong in my attitude toward this approach. Am I too old school in my wanting to game at the table with the group and not in pieces away from it?
Opinions please. Anyone else experience this positively or negatively?