[ASH: A Saviour’s Heart] Full Game and System-Specific Questions
stefoid:
Nitpicking while reading, but why use terms 'sessioneer' and 'fellowship'?
Rubbermancer:
Well, presumably the character will have in-game motivations that are very real and immediate when they don't react on them, ie: avoiding death, nabbing a cool artifact, etc. I think that might be something that will solve itself, if the GM takes care to tempt them with the right "evil carrots".
Thriff:
Stefoid,
I don't think you're nitpicking at all! Your question is actually very important, because, fundamentally, your question is about words. And words are very important.
I use the term Fellowship because I needed a term that referred to every person at the table, regardless of their position as player or Sessioneer. I chose the word "Fellowship" as opposed to group, party, or adventurers because it better aligns with the purpose of ASH.
Everyone who meets to play ASH must share compatible Agendas; they will have gathered as a community seeking to fulfill a mutual goal and even though that goal will vary depending on group, everyone playing must be committed to the similar goal (think GNS, technology, tone, setting, number of sessions, duration of sessions...). The characters being role-played may be sworn enemies of one another, but that doesn't de-value the importance of the players uniting as fellows bound in Fellowship.
Sessioneer is a port-manteau of Session and Engineer; this is because the Sessioneer is the engineer of the session. They craft the setting that all of the players will be role-playing in and then faithfully represent that setting as the fiction develops due to the PCs' interaction with the setting.
They are not a Storyteller--everyone playing the game is responsible for encouraging a story. They are not a Game Master, no single person holds that much authority in ASH. And they certainly aren't a Dungeon Master, what with the lack of dungeons and all...
The Sessioneer serves the Fellowship by creating an initial setting and representing that setting as the players go around exploring, provoking, and ultimately "mucking" it up one way or another.
I hope this answers your question. Let me know if any others come to mind.
T
stefoid:
Quote from: Rubbermancer on September 22, 2011, 08:31:44 PM
Well, presumably the character will have in-game motivations that are very real and immediate when they don't react on them, ie: avoiding death, nabbing a cool artifact, etc. I think that might be something that will solve itself, if the GM takes care to tempt them with the right "evil carrots".
So in-game circumstance is up against meta-game carrot and/or stick? I can see how that could generate some tension some of the time, but my own preference is for the competing factors to be all in-game.
stefoid:
Quote from: Thriff on September 22, 2011, 10:18:14 PM
Stefoid,
I don't think you're nitpicking at all! Your question is actually very important, because, fundamentally, your question is about words. And words are very important.
I use the term Fellowship because I needed a term that referred to every person at the table, regardless of their position as player or Sessioneer. I chose the word "Fellowship" as opposed to group, party, or adventurers because it better aligns with the purpose of ASH.
Everyone who meets to play ASH must share compatible Agendas; they will have gathered as a community seeking to fulfill a mutual goal and even though that goal will vary depending on group, everyone playing must be committed to the similar goal (think GNS, technology, tone, setting, number of sessions, duration of sessions...). The characters being role-played may be sworn enemies of one another, but that doesn't de-value the importance of the players uniting as fellows bound in Fellowship.
Sessioneer is a port-manteau of Session and Engineer; this is because the Sessioneer is the engineer of the session. They craft the setting that all of the players will be role-playing in and then faithfully represent that setting as the fiction develops due to the PCs' interaction with the setting.
They are not a Storyteller--everyone playing the game is responsible for encouraging a story. They are not a Game Master, no single person holds that much authority in ASH. And they certainly aren't a Dungeon Master, what with the lack of dungeons and all...
The Sessioneer serves the Fellowship by creating an initial setting and representing that setting as the players go around exploring, provoking, and ultimately "mucking" it up one way or another.
I hope this answers your question. Let me know if any others come to mind.
T
If you think its important enough to warrant inventing a word or using a word in an unfamiliar way, to underline a point, then go for it. But Id suggest that if the meaning is close enough where a familiar word in a familiar context will serve, that makes it easier for readers to take in.
For instance your game also uses the terms seek and vow, which it goes on to describe as a characters goals and code. Why not just use the term 'goal' and 'code'?
Another instance: a trait is a fairly common concept in an rpg and 'identities' seem to be extremely traitish to me. Why not just call them traits?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page