[TSoY] Elven Sacrifice Question, and Cross-Species Key (AP)

<< < (2/2)

Miedvied:
Quote from: Eero Tuovinen on May 17, 2008, 04:40:21 AM

A big part of this is how a given group interprets the significance of the ratkin litter-bond - the Key of the Litter is just an expression of this social structure and ratkin-specific social feeling. If the very inhumanity of an elf might allow or cause him to slip into a similar mindset, that's fine with me. I'm less hot about just using the litter key without thinking about what it means for a human or near-human to adopt such an alien mind-set, though; if the problem here is just that there is no ready-made Key for humans loving their friends, I recommend making one:

Key of Agape (group)
The character loves his friends, as only a human can. Define a group of people who are all friends with each other.
1xp: Express friendship and camaradie with the group of friends.
2xp: Support or get supported by a member of the group.
5xp: Change the composition of the friendship group.
Buyoff: Break off from the group.

My point being, you aren't limited to the Key of Love in expressing the in-setting idea that humans are loving beings.

I actually like that quite a bit, and I think that's what we'll go with. It certainly seems to fit everything, without stealing the oomph of the race distinctions in the game. Thanks.



Quote

As for player characters, in some cases it would be appropriate for the player to decide how much his character knows, but in many other cases I'd ask for the Ability check, as I described earlier. The player may still decide how much he wants to win the check in whether he spends Pools for it, but at least it's an oracular method for determining this stuff. No need for the player to decide whether his character's upbringing in the Green World prepared him for this stuff or not - just roll the dice and make the call.

Ah, you're absolutely right! You'd mentioned just having them roll earlier, but I sort of brushed it off mentally as being too randomized - it didn't click at the time that they could spend points to ensure the results come out however they feel strongly about, and I didn't want to leave things completely up to fortune. A brain fart on my part.

Quote

(Interestingly enough, if the PC elf is the only elf the NPCs have ever heard of, it would be reasonable to ask the elf's player: did he ever reveal the secrets of elven immortality to these NPCs?)

I hadn't given a lot of prior thought about the previous elven exposure the people had had, but at the moment I'm leaning towards "none" just so as to give this character's sacrifice maximum dramatic energy. I'll have to ask him whether he'd revealed it. I'm doubtful of it; his toon was a stand-offish prig (which was part of what made the sacrifice fun*).


*A tangible benefit from having lurked at the forge for a while: I know for a fact that if I'd been running this game five years ago, my reaction would have been something like, "no way. Your character can't do that. He's never picked up a sword before, and besides, that's /totally/ unlike him - he's a selfish prig." Quite possibly more important than anything else I've picked up from the forge, moreso than any Big Model, GNS, etc. stuff - Trust the players. Trust the players. Trust the players.

Abkajud:
Hi, Miedvied!

I thought the Actual Play description you posted was pretty powerful stuff. As such, I would also support your decision to have the rules give way to player empowerment and a really awesome moment in game play. That's the whole deal with a good narrative, right? "Don't let the ____ get in the way of a good story", said someone or another, and I think you definitely nailed it.

Regarding how you say you used to GM, well ... judgments about the character's sword-proficiency and selfish nature might be important for consistency, but they're secondary to facts about the nature of PCs in TSoY, not to mention this particular character's own past life as a warlord. I figure, if we can have past lives clearly established for a character, it's not all *that* unreasonable to say that such information can actually come into play. Otherwise, such stuff would remain Color only, and who wants that when it's such a cool opportunity?

It occurs to me that this is the kind of logic people use for D+D when the rules aren't quite giving them the game they want, but this isn't about Incoherence. It's more in line with the Golden Rule from White Wolf games, I think - just pushing a little further along than the rules are letting you, and acknowledging that you (the GM) are not abusing your authority or disempowering anybody.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page