[Wings of Blood] Ronnies feedback
Paolo D.:
Ok thanks :-)
Yes, I'm totally coming to InterNosCon (maybe with a disturbing costume to :-D )
stefoid:
Now we understand the need for loincloths
Ron Edwards:
Hi Paolo,
I finally found the time to read the document. I am intrigued by the rules tying the oath to re-rolls, and I think that will be fun to playtest.
My biggest concern is with the scenario preparation steps, in that there is a lot of guessing going on. The GM is trying to attract or please or engage the players in a completely transitive way. It's almost like he's begging for them to "like" the material but has to guess what they'll like, with the implication that there exists some danger that they won't involve themselves.
Contrast this with the rules of Trollbabe, in which the blunt fact is that she is involved as far as the locals are concerned, and part of being a player in Trollbabe is to accept that without any ambiguity regardless of how you want to play your character's attitude. Furthermore, the Trollbabe GM is not trying to please or hook the players; instead, he makes a situation which obeys the criteria in the rules, and creates the details in a way which he likes.
Dogs in the Vineyard is identical to Trollbabe in this regard - notice, for example, that nothing in the rules suggests trying to please or specifically attract the players when building a town. Just build the town according to the rules, and make sure the crime pushes your own buttons, and that will work fine.
Or contrast it with the rules in Sorcerer & Sword (sadly not available in Italian), in which the GM identifies a location and some basic aspects of the situation and a couple of important people there, and then the players can situate their characters in that location however they want, up to and including having been in that location and having become an important personage there already. In other words, the characters don't merely "arrive."
Either of those works quite well and avoids the issue of the GM being in the position of supplicating the players to be interested.
I'm also a little bit confused in that I can't tell what's supposed to be better for my character: making the locals suffer in some way that advantages me, or helping them. Are both supposed to be advantageous, but in different ways? Maybe the only problem is that I need to read it again, but at the moment, this seems to be both interesting and confusing.
Best, Ron
Paolo D.:
Quote
I'm also a little bit confused in that I can't tell what's supposed to be better for my character: making the locals suffer in some way that advantages me, or helping them. Are both supposed to be advantageous, but in different ways? Maybe the only problem is that I need to read it again, but at the moment, this seems to be both interesting and confusing.
Actually, this is one of "the points" of playing. ;-)
Technically, you might want to try to help the locals AND to fullfill your step. This would give you +1 to both Rage and Heart at the end of the chapter, and should definitely be the most advantageous.
BUT, there are two things in the middle:
1) Will you really feel to help these locals? Ok, they are suffering like you, but they could be mean, and/or they could be helping the main antagonist.
2) Will you really be able to help the locals? Going into struggles could be very resource-draining, and making them suffer (or stealing some items) is a good way to gain new resources - after some struggles, you should need them to struggle for your chosen step and/or to take a stance against the main antagonist.
Ultimately, you could have to choose between flying away without fulfilling your chosen step (after gaining a lot of wounds and draining your death oath/equipment bonuses), or make the locals suffer (to gain new bonuses).
You could even start directly in making the locals suffer. But there are other playing characters with you, and they could not be ok with that.
...however, at this point, I don't know if I still need the +1/-1 to the Motivations at the end of the chapters, now that I have the new phrases in the death oath... I'll think about it after trying it in the playtest.
About GM prep:
after playing some bang-based games like PTA, SS, TQB/The Pool and stuff, I noticed that sometimes the players can "put a flag without any flag at all". Sometimes they would like to see in play something, or they are excited about something, but without having any written flag about it on their character sheet.
So, I wanted to write prep rules that should work on their own (like the guidelines for the towns in DitV), but also to tell the GM "Hey, if the players are engaged in something but they don't have a feature on their sheet about it (a flag), keep that in mind too when you prep an island".
Paolo D.:
...however, I realize now that maybe you was talking of the questions about GM prep (I wrote the last sentence of my last post talking about the "Pull the right strings" part, not the "GM prep questions" part).
At this regard, I think you could be right. My intention when I wrote the prep questions was definitely to do something like that:
Quote from: Ron Edwards on February 17, 2011, 02:29:16 AM
Furthermore, the Trollbabe GM is not trying to please or hook the players; instead, he makes a situation which obeys the criteria in the rules, and creates the details in a way which he likes.
And you are right, the GM shouldn't guess how to make an interesting island - the questions should be here to do this without any guessing. I think I know how to fix it, I'll come back when I have a new pdf.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page