[3:16] These players are crazy
Callan S.:
Whoa, Jaakko, a 'should' slipped in from somewhere and I think Marshall took it up too. I've described that I think imagination in a group becomes harmoginised and stagnant and for myself, I look for rules that fuck up that harmoginisation, for the new ways we go when were can't do the very first thing that comes to our imagination. It's not a matter of should, it's a matter that when imagination is in charge of whether rules are followed, that harmoginisation pretty much remains perfectly intact. Perhaps I'm wrong about the whole harmoginisation thing, but I take it to be true and I'm pretty much over games where imagination comes first and foremost/imagination controls whether rules are followed. That's me. Now I'm assuming something about 3:16 prompted or encouraged Marshall to simply do as imagination dictated (he does mention above that 'the rules say to award Effectiveness'). If not and he did it off his own bat, well I'll still go with my first comment - if the nuke thing had been within the rule structure, I admire the art made and skill it took to make it/to fit imagination within a rules construct. But just ignoring rules makes me go 'Uegh', mostly out of anticipating something else and not getting it at all. Not that that matters a great deal, I was just expressing my hope (that's why my posts were small, as it's not a terribly important subject)
Marshall, the above might explain me better, because force shmorce, my positions not about force. But taking your high ground example...what I'd like to see is when everyone including the GM think he's on higher ground and want to give the bonus, but can't as the rules stop them from doing so! How does their imagination get around that, aye? There's a bit of an imagination workout, stretching the imagination from the usual harmoginsed group way of thinking into a direction they, without the game, would not have gone. But then uegh...ignore the rule because clearly blah blah subtext imagination first blah blah. Ie, No work out (ugh...okay, to dilute my point but be pedantically accurate - in this particular instance (perhaps not in the rest of play), no work out).
Quote
But, really, fucking with the kill economy doesn?t hurt anything. It doesn?t matter when people level up, get promoted, get demoted, only that it happens. The when and why become fodder for the playgroup, as they turn it into bonafide elements of Situation (and especially Conflict), which they can and will do, all by themselves.
Well, as I've basically said above, I'd like to see the kill economy fucking with your imaginations, rather than the other way around. Okay, you've worked this nuke into the fiction and it's gone off, with the apparent idea of massive devistation. But hey, let's say the kill economy fucks with your imagination instead - how do you fit your imagination into the kill economy? How can you fit this nuke explosion in somehow WITHOUT breaking the rules structure? That's the imaginative hurdle/hundred kilogram imaginative weights to work out with.
But hey, if the author wrote it with the vibe (or however you might put it) that you ignore the rules at that point, hey, your playing right. I just already own games like that. For myself it's not enough anymore. I'm basically just expressing my hope for what products are available, when I've responded in this thread.
And wow, I can preview without the forge stalling the first few times!
Gregor Hutton:
I'm finding the thread a bit hard to follow because some of the posters have the book and Callan doesn't, so Callan I've PMed you. Hit me up with your e-mail address and I'll send you the PDF.
Callan S.:
I've recieved the PDF Gregor was kind enough to supply me. However, in a technical sense I don't have a copy. By that I mean in casually trying to comprehend the ruleset, eventually the number of ever increasing options was greater than my mental capacity to hold and comprehend at a casual basis. More specifically ever increasing options which didn't appear to tie to any game end. Just more and more options towards no fixed point. Without that fixed point my comprehension falters after reading a certain amount of structure. I will say for me, escape from tentacle city boardered on this as well, at a mere 16 (IIRC) pages, with options that seemed to just exist for their own sake. However, it did have a game end point and I'm not sure, even after a quick flipping through looking for one, that 3:16 does.
I'm saying this because to do otherwise, it seems to me, would be to give the impression (and inductively, pretending to myself) that in owning a copy, I know what it's all about now. By and large I don't know much more than before I was able to read a copy.
Probably alot of people wouldn't say that because they'd fear looking too stupid to understand it, or lazy. I'll face looking stupid and just note this here, regardless. You've given me a copy and I'm still not much more up to speed than before.
So, now that notes out of the way, any page references in regards to the nuke stuff?
Gregor Hutton:
The book is ordered in when you will meet stuff in play, with reference material and index at the back. Without reference to play then it's maybe tough to figure out. To summarize how the game is played you just need to read pages 64 to 76, which show examples of creating a planet and then a mission on it.
But, for the "Bigger Picture" stuff in 3:16 you want the following things:
Ranks Pages 38 to 41 are the Higher Ranks of the military. They get more orders and weapons than the grunts (on pages 12 and 13).
Weapons and Gear Pages 79 to 89 show the weapons for the game. The nukes are on 85 next to the giant mushroom cloud, with the Device and Starkiller missile on page 84. The Orbital Bombardment is on p. 88. (The "ordinary" weapons that grunts can get are on pages 79 to 81 for comparison.)
Hatred for Home The final Weakness that can be made available in game is mandated to be "Hatred for Home", you can read about it on p. 33. Weaknesses live on page 24 to 27.
GM stuff Page 48 gives an overview of how the GM's role changes over the campaign.
Callan S.:
I think the presence/absence of a game end condition is important to pin down here, as in if someone is thinking there is a game end and all their discussion revolves around that, when they are actually wrong and there is no game end, it clearly borks discussion. Both Universalis and Capes, as I understand them, have no game end condition, so it's not a biggie to not have one. But if we talk and talk as if there is a game end condition when there isn't, that's when it becomes a biggie.
If that can be pinned down, I'd then be trying to construct some sort of mental flow chart towards the whole nuke thing, looking for traditional bleed points along the way (some people might call it 'murk'). Bleed points being stuff like 'Do what makes sense' (a traditional RPG crutch), which doesn't indicate who in particular does that, and whether it's their own idea of sense (which may not match others) or some sort of galactic standard of 'sense'. Before my comprehension of all the options ran out, 3:16 had shown no bleed points as yet.
But that's me. Gregor, you said you were having trouble following the thread. I can't assume that means your interested in the flow chart layout or even the pinning down like I am?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page