Started by mcv, February 12, 2009, 07:01:36 AM
Quote from: Christopher Kubasik on February 19, 2009, 07:32:51 PMAh, Martijn, you keep doing this thing, and the thing is this: Someone says, "Blah, blah, blah..." and you say, "That's all Story Now is?"
Quote- I'm not sure what you mean by campaign in terms of length, but I know that I and others have played games for months and months. I honestly don't see why it couldn't go longer.
Quote- There's no reason for characters not to be a cohesive unit. It's a choice on the part of the Players. But the choice has to be there. When you write, "The thing is, when you do that, the characters will soon each go their separate ways, and there won't be much game left. Either there needs to be a compelling reason for the characters to be together, or you need to game it so that they stay together even if the characters by their own free choice wouldn't have done so," I can safely reply: No, this isn't true. This is flat out wrong. I -- and many others -- have played many long terms sessions that worked very well this way. You may not have and you may not see how. But it can be done, with a great deal of fun and enthusiasm from everyone at the table.- The characters often split up, but I use lots of cross-cutting between scenes as a GM, shifting from one PC to the next. Because of the games I use and the techniques I use, everyone is engaged with what's going on, because what's happening to one player's PC is of interest to every other Player.
QuoteSorcerer also has a Humanity rating on a scale of 0 to 10. The rating itself does nothing to "control" or dictate behavior, but if a PC's Humanity reaches 0, the Player loses the PC (he is not longer human!) In each game of Sorcerer the group customizes the definition of Humanity. For our Traveller setting game, the definition is Friendship. So the choices, the big choices, orbit the choices of Friendship against Alienation. You make rolls when your PC commits acts that either support or deny friendship, and your Humanity might go up or down because of that.
QuoteNow, clearly, if a PC keeps acting against his friends it will drive his Humanity to 0 and he's out of the game! But it's important to realize that a Player can do exactly that. That's a choice for the Player alone. In my first game of Sorcerer I drove my PC's Humanity to 0 and it was a blast. He was a bitter, angry man driven by horrible passions and did the wrong thing time and again... and then (using rules from the game) we re-wrote him and I got him back as a PC and he travelled a path of redemption. It was awesome.
QuoteSo, there are imaginative "constraints" on the PCs (the fiction, the rules that tie to the fiction) but there are no expectations. At all.
QuoteAnd I need to repeat one final time: it works great. There's no anger at the table. Everyone has a great time. The sessions are compelling. The games don't dry up or blow up. Everyone can't wait to continue the stories to the next session.
Quote from: Christopher Kubasik on February 24, 2009, 10:27:53 AMYou wrote something that I think is very accurate: "I hope it's not too annoying when I do that, but from my perspective, what people call "Story Now" constantly seems to jump between two extremes, one where it's a completely new way of playing, and another where it's pretty close to what I've been doing (or been trying) for most of my life."Certainly that has been my experience with the tools and procedures I've been playing with the last several years. The key, for me, is that the play works now. I get what I wanted and it works.I got what I wanted, and I got play that works. I had to give up a lot of assumptions about what would work and what would not. But when I did, I got what I wanted.
QuoteDid you get a chance to look at the HeroQuest thread I linked to? I know it is long, but it is a clear example of these procedures. Although it was a one shot at a convention, for me it could easily have served as the first session in a long series of sessions. I do hope you get a chance to go through it. It would give us a framework for discussion from actual play -- which is where I am always most comfortable.
Quote2) You wrote: "I prefer a game and game world that makes sense...I care about the realism, about complex, plausible characters that work realistically as protagonist of a story in that word." Did you write this as a contrast to the sort of play I've been discussing?
Quote3) As for the concept of "solo games" or "solo campaigns" -- I'm fascinated by these terms. Now, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. What I've been writing about may not be your cup of tea, and that's fine. But I need you to understand that nothing I play like (in the HeroQuest game I linked to, in the Sorcerer games I've mentioned) feel "solo" at all. It's always a group of people gathered together. Doing something socially. Together. We're all interested in what the other people are doing with their characters. This, I'll be blunt, is just a major point of disconnect. That you're focusing so much on what interests the characters seems utterly alien to me since I've learned that what really matters at the game table is what interests the Players. There's just no getting around it.
QuoteIf the PCs work together as a group it's because the Players decide to do it.
QuoteNo amount of fiction constraints ("You're all a squad from the FBI") can force that to happen. In my experience it is fictional constraints like this that almost encourage Players to strike out on their own.
QuoteFor you, the notion that the PCs are not in the same scene is some sort of solo play.
QuoteI simply see nothing "solo" about the play at my table, and I know my Players would agree. But the games I play offer new ways of building cohesion among the social group at the table and wind everything up in ways that might not be part of how you're seeing play work.
QuoteA quick note about the Humanity rule from Sorcerer: To be very clear, the rules does not constrain the Player's choices.... it is that there are consequences for those choices. Essentially, when you do something "against" Humanity, you have a 50% chance of the PC's Humanity going down a point. When the PC does something in line with Humanity, there is about a 50% chance the Humanity will go up a point. So the Player can behave any way he wants... he can even dance on the edge of Humanity 0 for while with a Humanity of 1 and doing against-Humanity things as long as the dice favor him. But it is the Player's choice, every time. And if the Player really believes his character would act in a way that threatens his Humanity, he's allowed to drive it down toward 0. And then, if the player decides the risk is getting too great, he can pull back and start doing actions to lift his Humanity. But the point of the mechanic is that the Player chooses -- there is no forcing of behavior.