Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by Judd, December 06, 2005, 01:13:37 AM
Quote from: Paka on December 19, 2005, 03:41:34 AMI disagree with this entirely.The loss can hurt to the character but the player can think its freaking cool for the PC to be captured so the other plays have to get them free from evil's clutches or they lose a hand or whatever the loss of stakes is.Stakes can be hot and fun. Loss can be fun. Losing can be fun.Driving your character towards self-destruction and ruin can be fun. If it is not so for you, could you please post an Actual Play example when it wasn't for you?
Quote from: Vaxalon on December 19, 2005, 09:28:03 AMCPXB finds . . . .
QuoteWhat's interesting, however, is that in the case in question, I wasn't even suggesting that Fred have the character take the stakes in question. I was using his character to give an example of how the mechanics worked. And Fred had an instant reaction of "well there's no way I'd risk Okhfel's strength." I mean that's how strong this mechanic is in terms of making things have value as stakes that even on a miscommunication between Fred and I (that is, him taking my example as something he might actually want to do), that he instantly made a strong player statement about what sort of stakes he'd accept for such a situation.
Quote from: CPXB on December 19, 2005, 09:38:24 AMI actually *agree* that driving your character towards self-ruin can be fun. But it isn't *gambling* because the player -- the person that counts -- isn't risking the loss of anything. That the *character* loses something that means something to the *character* isn't a real risk for the *player*, who is the one making the decisions and doing the rolls. For the player, it's a win-win situation.I was never attempting to critique the concept that what y'all are doing isn't fun, or that I wouldn't do it myself (I do). I was just thinking, "Huh, this isn't a gamble."