[Diary of a Skull Soldier] Ronnies feedback
Ron Edwards:
Let's talk about the Marks.
"They're there to make you wonder why they are there." Yeah, I get it, blah blah. But the fact is that this is a game design, and I consider it to be a good game design regardless of any claimed intentions by its author. And I don't mind that assessment being tagged as projection on my part, as long as it's projecting onto genuine text which is freaking present and can't be handwaved away.
Wondering why something is there, doing play, is not necessarily an inconsequential act which can only end in, "Look, I construct meaning out of things." (Duh. People get PhDs for talking about this?)
All right, so we're role-playing, and I'm playing my soldier guy in his skeletal-themed armor. I go ahead and narrate him doing something, and as per the rules, there is no dilly-dallying about whether he can, we just go with it. Note though, that Marks only apply when I have him do something about the world of the skull soldier, meaning what we know from the diary. That's text, also called rules, also called what I'm talking about here. Not some fucking made-up thing I invented to pretend it's there.
Let's say I have him do exactly something which qualifies.
I'll summarize the percentile rolls a little more carefully.
1. 1-70 fails. Within that, 61-70, nothing else. But if it's 1-60 then I get a 7/10 mark
71-100 succeeds. 91-100, nothing else. But 71-90 = 3/10 mark
What are Marks? What is that you are supposed to wonder about? It's not a blank slate. There are a hell of a lot of things specified about what they are to work with!
1. Your character has taken them on.
2. You name them.
Note that they are by definition worries, concerns, and perspectives of the diary-writing skull soldier, related to the area and what you're doing.
3. Cultural construction thinking can suck my big one. 1 over 1 equals 1, and "1" has a unique relationship to reality found in no other mathematical designator. Fractions of 7 over 10 and 3 over 10 are, relative to one another, relevant to that unique thing. If one gets three 3/10's, that's different from getting a 3/10 and a 7/10, and further, both of those are different from getting three 7/10's. What to do with it from there? By the rules, nothing. That's OK. What we have is enough.
And again, let's say that play is quiet for a minute or two, then OK, we move on to the next diary entry or close out play, whichever applies, and my character has taken on whatever Marks he got. Fine. But let's look at the other option, if it doesn't quiet down. In that case, we close out as naturally as possible after ten rolls or so.
Ten rolls! Each one with a 90% chance of gaining a Mark! Even if it's spread across several players with characters, that's a hell of a lot of Marking. A hell of a lot of worries. A hell of a lot of evocative naming. A serious amount of recorded information which by the rules, my character has taken on.
This makes me excited to play the second scene now. That is a reward mechanic in action. There is no "wondering" about that.
Best, Ron
Callan S.:
I had my woman come and look at this thread before these the last three posts above, asking her opinion on the whole parody thing. She recoiled like I'd shown her a snake and bolted to the door "Some people just wont' understand" she said, hovering at the exit. I paused, internalised it a bit, and said "Well, they might...but yeah, your right, they might not in the end. And that'd be it"
I'll skip the profoundly obscure assertions, as it's slipped into a social level of speaker and listener (only).
Quote
I disagree with you and think that nearly that entire line of discourse is trash.
Okay, now I'm getting you.
Quote
A hell of a lot of worries. A hell of a lot of evocative naming. A serious amount of recorded information which by the rules, my character has taken on.
This makes me excited to play the second scene now. That is a reward mechanic in action. There is no "wondering" about that.
So what are you saying - that your interested in seeing how your marks perhaps affect your characters choices/actions in the next scene? As opposed to just wondering about them after the game?
I don't know. I think there have been books and movies which made me wonder about parts of them latter on. Years on, sometimes. And others which were popcorn and forgotten almost instantly on leaving. Wondering afterward, outside the activity, seems important over centuries of story media and useful in a practical sense. I can now see some potential reward mechanic going on, but I can't see how it's massively important relative to that wondering? If someone wondered about some mark in their game session with Diary years on, that seems to be both important and exactly what I wrote in the text? They wondered.
Indeed, if you can see it, couldn't some other guy see it as well? That's the idea of telling you to wonder - and you did. And you got where you got, which got to an area roughly where I intended, with some concern or emotional reflection on the marks (I'm not sure how to describe it). What, does it sound like being abandoned by the author and left to wander alone on the matter? I could pay that as a valid issue.
Or are we stuck in a 'I'm not talking to you' thing and that was all pointless to write out?
For anyone else reading, the whole 'Marks are there to wonder about' part might work just fine - it might not appear to work for drawing all attention to wondering about them and no attention on the fact that you are wondering about them. Though you see it in retrospect, of course.
Ron Edwards:
Well phooey, I'm talking to you after all, I guess. Can't stay away.
Here are some points from earlier and just now that I think are cool.
1. Your comment about "writing from attitude." Fantastic. I've always liked that about independent games, and about the Ronnies in particular.
2. About the Marks, here's my take:
Quote
That's the idea of telling you to wonder - and you did. And you got where you got, which got to an area roughly where I intended, with some concern or emotional reflection on the marks (I'm not sure how to describe it).
As far as I can tell, I call that good game design. No, it's not being abandoned, it's being set on the right track. I think that I'm happy to rescind all comments about that part being unfinished. After going through it again like that - and even then, it was merely rehearsal, not real play - I see the payoff just as you describe it.
As for whether any local application of those numbers is more or less important than the wondering, I think the wondering is more important. Which I think means we agree.
Best, Ron
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page