[Sorcerer] First annotations available
Ron Edwards:
Hey everyone,
I thought you might like a sneak peek of the annotations I'll be publishing with the new print version of Sorcerer. It turns out I didn't make it for 2011, but I don't mind. It is indeed my big publication for next year.
If you didn't know about it, see Hard core Sorcerer talk and Adept Press thoughts and projects for Sorcerer.
Currently, chapters 1 and 2 are available at the Learn about Sorcerer page, with 3 and 7 coming tomorrow. I'll tart up the page over the next few days. I recommend that you read them in order, because the first one explains the system of diagrams which links the book together. They're all still drafts, so questions and comments are greatly appreciated.
Best, Ron
Moreno R.:
Finally! Christmas is early this year!
First question: the feedback: by e-mal or in this thread? Or in another thread?
For example, I don't think that the problem of the Bonus Dice on page 19 is satisfying resolved (the annotations maybe make it even more problematic). I mean that, of these three things...:
1) Be the supreme judge of "good quality role-playing" at the table
2) be the supreme judge of how much the other players are enjoying any single action
3) Be the supreme judge of what I (myself) like.
...The second one is even more problematic than the first, because it turns an aesthetic judgment into a social (but hidden) one: You don't judge what is explicitly said at the table, but the facial and verbal reactions of your friends, to the point of trying to understand if someone liked something that maybe you did not like. And decide if that enjoyment is enough. (it depends probably on the loudness of the friend, the quiet, calm one will cause a lot less bonus dice than the one who laugh loudly...)
The first statement is instead the same of the third, but with a lot of Hubris added. But these two statements should give the exact same dice during the game. Both are about something you feel yourself, something you know, not something you have to notice in other. You don't have to solve the puzzle of people's behavior.
What i the right place to discuss this? This thread o another one? And what about typos?
Ron Edwards:
Hi,
All comments and questions should be in this thread so I don't have to hunt for them later.
Don't report typos. The whole thing will be subject to copy-editing later, and there's no point to doing that until the substantive text is finalized.
I don't see the problem with the bonus dice. This is a task the GM simply takes into his or her hands, that's all. It's quite easy, and I don't see any hubris in acknowledging that I like something at the table, or see others liking it. Doing it right merely means staying honest about it, which actually makes the whole thing far simpler.
Based on this and previous comments, I do need to re-write it. But the problem seems to be something like this, in layers:
i) Enjoying stuff at the table.
ii) Ignoring, withdrawing, isolating oneself from that stuff.
iii) Then trying to perceive and communicate about that stuff on top of that isolation.
If I'm at (i) and only (i), then what you're saying makes no sense to me. I have to find a way to write it so that only (i) is communicated.
Best, Ron
Ron Edwards:
Chapters 3 and 7 are now available.
Best, Ron
Roger:
I've got more to say overall, but I wanted to get this out here sooner rather than later.
I put together some diagrams which, I think, show how the dice mechanic works. They're illustrations of the examples given in the Chapter 1 annotations.
The diagrams are currently at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/33232616@N07/sets/72157628324541863/
Would these be useful in the rulebook? Would diagram_0 be a useful play aid around the table? Maybe, if people are running into problems with this sort of thing.
This sort of thing might also be useful in wild threeway (or more) action, although I haven't tried throwing together one of those yet.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page