[dogs] The nature of Traits? (n00b GM flounders a bit)
Noclue:
Quote from: David Artman on January 24, 2008, 08:30:24 AM
Quote from: Noclue on January 24, 2008, 12:45:06 AM
This is me trying to imagine a conflict where Clint wouldn't be able to roll in his squinting d6.
The opposition is too far away to see the difference between "steely-eyed, intimidating squint" and "looking at me."
What's at stake is poorly served by intimidation tactics (ex: seduction or dealing with a superior or calming down someone who's terrified).
The opposition is emotionless or blind.
Took me a minute or two, but those are situations in which I'd call bullshit on invoking "Clint Squint: d6."
Well, sometimes clint just squints to bring out his inner Eastwood. Its not always about the effect on the other guy.
David Artman:
Quote from: Noclue on January 25, 2008, 07:45:12 PM
Well, sometimes clint just squints to bring out his inner Eastwood. Its not always about the effect on the other guy.
... *blink* ...
OK, that's ANOTHER example of when I'd call, "Bullshit!" "Inner Eastwood?" Clint would punch someone for saying something like that (well, Chuck Norris would).
;)
dindenver:
Hi!
I think the point your friend is missing is this:
The game is about what is on the character sheets. That is absolutely the point of a well-crafted game like this. When the game tells you, make up a trait, assign whatever value to it you think is appropriate and put it on your sheet. That means that the game is about everyone of those traits
For instance, the GM and the players will be extremely remiss not to include needlepoint in the description of at least one scene per town if one of the players puts needlepoint 2d8 on their character sheet.
Not only that, but its so easy for a Dog to say, "Well, even in needlepoint, sometimes you have to sever a tangled thread..." and pull out their gun. Or a "Stitch in time saves nine" as a way of convincing townspeople to take the more difficult path, etc...
But seriously, there is no wrong way to make a character. If he has fun "gaming" the system, let him. What can it hurt?
zornwil:
Quote from: David Artman on January 26, 2008, 07:33:08 AM
Quote from: Noclue on January 25, 2008, 07:45:12 PM
Well, sometimes clint just squints to bring out his inner Eastwood. Its not always about the effect on the other guy.
... *blink* ...
OK, that's ANOTHER example of when I'd call, "Bullshit!" "Inner Eastwood?" Clint would punch someone for saying something like that (well, Chuck Norris would).
;)
:D That's pretty funny.
I think without a decent Raise around the "inner Clint", our group might call BS on this, but I could also imagine decent Raises in which we'd be quite happy. Such as, Clint is in the desert, alone. The Stakes are "Does Clint succumb to the desert heat/conditions?" (yeah, tantamount to death, i.e., a medical follow-up no matter what if he fails the Stakes) Raise: "Clint stumbles forward, towards the mountains, where the promise of water and coolness lies. The sun beats down on him. He swears under his breath. He squints, focusing himself on those mountains ahead and nothing else. His mind locks onto the target, and he's unstoppable, getting closer, closer." (or less florid, "Clint squints to get focus his rage on getting to the mountains.")
Of course, it's fine your group would call BS to any/all of it. To me, a big strength of these sorts of interpretive narrative systems is the ability for them to mold around how a group thinks.
As to above, where someone mentioned generalized Traits that always get brought in a Conflict, wouldn't bother me, but I could also swing with a group that doesn't like that. I find in any serious Conflict, all the Traits get used; less serious ones, less so.
zornwil:
Quote from: Noclue on January 24, 2008, 12:45:06 AM
Quote from: daftnewt on January 22, 2008, 06:22:39 PM
but if i was building Clint would i write down "squints a lot, 1d6"? uh-uh -- waste of 'points', if you ask me. better to write down "jack of all trades, 1d6", since i can use that in anything.
This is me trying to imagine a conflict where Clint wouldn't be able to roll in his squinting d6.
Wait,I do have one I can think of. Clint is asleep and attacked. If a player in our group said on his See, "He whips around awake, squinting his eye at the fellow," we'd probably say that was too much of a See, that first he should wake up and roll over or something, but that even Clint isn't so cool as to just lay there and studiously (as he does) squint at the guy bearing down on hiim.
Of course, for some groups, it'd be just as fine to say "Three days later...." And we do some of that, but our group think is around honoring the spirit of where people are and then if we disrupt the scene we look for consent that it's not screwing up what people had really wanted to see - or at least that's where we're getting to, we've still been inconsistent/rocky on time jumps, more my fault probably as I'm more likely to push the envelope. I did that a while ago and realized only after the fact it left a player dissatisfied as he had really wanted to do some things that his PC should have had the chance to do, and backing up and going back forward would have been too convoluted, so in essence I accidentally deprotagonized his PC. Live and learn...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page