Board index » Across the Megaverse® » G.M.s Forum

 


Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.
Author Message
 Post subject:
Unread postPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:18 pm
  

Adventurer

Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:49 pm
Posts: 433
Noon wrote:
Shadowmagic wrote:
Sounds like a kind of hack and slash style but, hey, if that's what you like. Some people like story and character development and interaction, game mechanics are secondary in this style of play.

I wouldn't agree they are secondary in character examination. You can tell alot about a man from where he dies.

Quote:
If death is the end of the story, you must have quite a few dissapointed players in your group on many occasions.

I notice you don't mention the question being answered at all. Can you imagine a bunch of players coming to play to get an answer to a question, and getting that answer - and somehow being disspointed?

Quote:
Look at the chaos that abounds in any Palladium setting, if no-one ever died, that would take something away from the game as much as allowing people to die just on any off chance roll. Look for a middle ground and a way to keep the ball rolling.

If I keep the ball rolling forever, I'll be keeping myself waiting for an answer forever too.

Keeping the ball rolling is not the only point for playing.

Quote:
Maybe you're just bored with gaming(I haven't played with my group for about a year so, I'm not making a smart remark to you. We all still hang out and might start up again anyday.) and need a new hobby, GL.

It could be that your uncomfortable thinking of this in the same idea space as your own cherished history of roleplay. I'm not making a smart remark either. Perhaps your group will reform to play when they find a question they all want an answer to?


You seem to like putting a negative spin on everything that's been mentioned or suggested in this topic. This only leads me to believe that you, in particular, are not having a very good time. Too bad for you.

On topic, I feel most people would enjoy a gaming session that ends with the cheesy, predictable storybook ending instead of the "Your character is dead and there is no real reason why." ending you are supporting. Feel free to disagree, I'm sure you will.

Playing Devil's Advocate can be interesting at times but, it's become rather cliche.


          Top  
 
 Post subject:
Unread postPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:23 pm
  

Champion

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 1697
Location: Australia
Yourself and others have engaged me discussion about my idea, not the orginal posters idea. It wouldn't be a discussion if I immeditately favour your ideas over mine regardless of my goals, that's obvious.

For myself, I'd be very wary of pulling the 'sour grapes' card during discussion - it could all too easily protect my ideas from investigation and seemingly support them, when no support is warranted. But that's me, of course.

And in a similar vein, I don't see much beyond arguement for my idea (the challenge menu - that's what this discussion stems from, unless that's been forgotten). Nothing but negative spin perhaps?

Quote:
On topic, I feel most people would enjoy a gaming session that ends with the cheesy, predictable storybook ending instead of the "Your character is dead and there is no real reason why." ending you are supporting. Feel free to disagree, I'm sure you will.

I don't disagree because that isn't what I've suggested. Again your skipping the idea of having a question in mind first, then playing an RPG as one way of answering it (other ways are forming a commitee, researching it in books, asking around, etc). Your thinking of playing for the sake of playing - of course anything that stops play defeats the goal of the activity in that case. But if you have a different goal - of answering a question the group has, it doesn't defeat the goal, it forfils it. Really my suggestion is only for the latter*.

Basically if you have a question in mind and that's why you play, the death does have a real reason behind it.

And vise versa, if you have no question in mind when you come to play, death can not have a real reason behind it.

* I've probably assumed that the original posters and others are like myself when I started gaming - starting out with a question in mind, but not quite knowing it's there or what it was entirely. My suggestion helps jump start that question and really bring it to the fore. Of course, if it's not there to begin with, the suggestion's quite missplaced.


          Top  
 
 Post subject:
Unread postPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:37 am
  

User avatar
Dungeon Crawler

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 11:08 am
Posts: 367
Noon wrote:
Kesslan wrote:
It was all the result of some very bad calls on the part of certain PCs, and some equally bad luck with the dice. But no one complained about the outcome because thats just the sort of game SR is.

I don't see how scaling the encounter came into your example. The players accepted the challenge of taking it on - that's all that happened. The players could have equally accepted a non scaled encounter just as much.


The point was that it was a 'scaled down' game that went badly. It was the kinda 'milk run' job that -should- have been extremely easy. The point I was trying to make was that even an 'easy milk run' can actually turn into something that isnt without touching NPC stats at all.

Quote:
But I'm also not the type to kill a PC off just because I made a bad call on a given setup.

I've killed/maimed/injured PCs all on the same basic calls as ever before. If PCs see a threat and dive in uncaring of the danger I'm not about to start fudging things so that they are spared.

Bold mine.

And if you make a bad call on whether they were uncaring of the danger?

You don't kill on bad calls. But at the same time you make calls about whether they were uncaring of the danger. As soon as you make a call like this, the whole 'danger' of the situation is vulnerable to being fudged away, because you don't kill on bad calls.[/quote]

I think you got a touch confused by what I said here. If I make a bad call on setting up something the PCs cant handle, arnt ready for etc that's my bad as a GM. If say I throw up a splurgoth slaver at a level 1 party and they all want to jump at it dispite my warnings (subtle or otherwise) then well thats their choice and they'll likely drop like flies.

I dont generally kill on MY bad calls as a GM if I really overestimated the PC group. If some PC in the game makes a horrible call and gets himself killed that a completely different issue. I dont see how this makes it me not killing ever on 'bad calls' in general.

I also specifically said not kill.

Killing a character isnt the only sort of danger they can face. They can be maimed, they can be driven insane, depending on the setting there a whole lot of other 'bad things' that can happen to them. Death isnt the only danger in life.


          Top  
 
 
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group