Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by TonyLB, June 13, 2005, 10:09:30 AM
Quote from: TonyLBSo I'm trying to write up some draft rules, and my mind keeps providing the same basic assumption: "If (and only if) the players are in conflict, you use dice."...But I am ludicrously blocked on what those things would be. Surely system can help people to choose between alternatives in the absence of conflict? But how and why?
Quote"If (and only if) the players are in conflict, you use dice"
Quote from: TonyLBJohn: So you would never use dice to determine whether a fighter hits an orc? I'm confused.
Quote from: TonyLBBut I am ludicrously blocked on what those things would be. Surely system can help people to choose between alternatives in the absence of conflict? But how and why?
Quote from: TonyLBAnother possible example: You're travelling through elvish woods. Every once in a while you make rolls on the "Creepy, evocative elvish stuff" rules. These are (hypothetically) more structured than "table of creepy stuff, selected randomly" in the same way that My Life with Master is more structured than "flip a coin, if it's heads you do something evil, if it's tails you do something good." As the balance of Elvish stuff shifts toward creepy, we see elves stepping willingly into their own graves, and their servants tossing dirt down on top of them. As it shifts more toward evocative, we see them planting flowers of immortality and regret, in bowers where the blooms intertwine in inimitable beauty. And so on and so forth. The dice (again, hypothetically) lead us to create all of these things in the same way that DitV dice lead us to create compelling, escalating conflicts.I don't see any reason to think that this sort of randomly-guided emerging structure shouldn't be as powerful in a non-conflict situation as it has proven to be in conflicts. Thoughts?