S&S One sheet
Vortigern:
I suppose I was really trying to refine my own understanding/conception of what Vitality as a Humanity definition means to me by exploring the Gain/Loss circumstance list. And to gauge my players in their reaction and understanding of the idea in their responses and additions to the list. Since it is a pbp I was using that to try and gauge their 'buy in' if you will into this thematic part of the game.
I also usually tend to be someone who favors specific definitions that are written down, as a general habit, in my gaming... though that could easily be argued to be a holdover from previous systems/experiences, and more specifically negative experiences with free-form 'I said so.' GMs in hard/crunchy systems. ;P
The, relative, simplicity of the system is actually one the things that has attracted me to Sorcerer, however I may have some lingering habits I need to address as I progress with trying to run the game.
Ron Edwards:
Hey,
I really don't want to stall you out. What I'm saying is that you already have it, perfectly, smack, done. You wrote it yourself.
Quote
More just something along the lines of a generally 'positive' force in the game-world, against the darkness/decadence/treachery&backstabbery of the older/corrupter civilizations. Or even just revitalizing one of them for example.
Your post then dilutes it by bringing up this red herring of "good two-shoes," and I'm saying, never mind that. I suspect that's your baggage, being expected to play some kind of bland-ass paladin who goes wherever the GM points because he's a "hero." If so, then jettison that baggage, and stick with what you wrote as I quoted it. It's great. I'd play that in a second.
From there, I think one simple example of loss and one of gain is all that's needed. Again: the issue is not reaching to fill in all the corners, but rather realizing that you've already done the job. Your responsibility as GM during play is not to bait-and-switch, i.e., not to do otherwise than what you've written. And to trust yourself that you can handle applying what you've written to specific instances, whatever they may be.
Best, Ron
Vortigern:
Hmm. Alright.
That makes sense even if conflicting slightly with my more analytical side that wants to have all the answers to rulesish stuff planned/plotted out 'now' rather than do it as it comes up 'later'.
Yet, essentially, Humanity is always going to be a judgement call on the situation, and writing out lists of actions ( while for me it helped to formulate my still growing idea of what I really meant by it to begin with. ) constrains or influences some of that judgement later in ways perhaps not appropriatte to the situation, and that this is a bad thing?
Ron Edwards:
Listing out possibilities is a good exercise ... within limits. I can only respond to what I'm reading here, and speaking strictly about your first two posts, it looks to me as if you'd exceeded the functional limits by a fair amount. I am also talking about what you intend to say to your fellow players, and my advice about that is to stay with the sentences I quoted. As long as you say, "Although this might get refined a bit during play, I'm committed to it and won't spring something else on you," then it'll work fine.
Best, Ron
Paiku:
Hey Vortigern, how does PBP work? Does the GM do all the rolling and inform the players of the results? I'm just trying to imagine how this will work with Sorcerer - but I'm not even sure how it's done "normally." I checked out your link to online-roleplaying.com, but of course everyone there knows what they're doing so I can't find "PBP-101" spelled out anywhere.
I don't want to sideline the present very interesting conversation (which I have been following with interest)... just curious.
Thanks,
-John
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page