Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by JMendes, September 11, 2006, 06:02:38 PM
Quote from: MelinglorGoing back to your example, Joao, it seems like kind of dumb luck that you Transcended at a time when youcould wrap up your character's key issue, peace for his people. And you mentioned the other players weren't particularly into it.
Quote from: MelinglorIn fact, one other player had a character whose Key-based issues were tied directly into your PC (Unrequited Love), which can now never really be resolved.
Quote from: Melinglorpicturing players making bland, mechanical statements about character actions just for the XP, with no connection to the narrative, or to driving the story, or whatever
Quote from: Ralek on September 19, 2006, 02:13:58 AMYou never transcend unless you want to.
Quote from: Ralek on September 19, 2006, 02:13:58 AMKeys are not issues. Keys are stuff that the character (and presumably, although not always quite so, the player) care about.
Quote from: Ralek on September 19, 2006, 02:13:58 AMAbout the key thing... get over key guilt, just get over it. If you can't, then probably NAR play is not for you. This may sound harsh, but I've found this to be in true in all cases I've seen it happen. Playing too mechanically means nothing. Keys are a mechanic, so you have to play them mechanically.
Quote from: Melinglor on September 19, 2006, 03:59:31 AMAnyway, with that correction, let me go at it from a different angle: it still seems pretty arbitrary, even though not involuntary, to tie Transcendence to Grand Mastery. How is raising a particular skill to mega-high levels equivalent to wanting to end a character's story?
QuoteNow, see, I look at those two sentences, and they seem to saythe same thing to me. PTA Issues=what players want to address with their character=TSoY Keys. Sure, there's less emphasis on dysfunction than in PTA, but still. . .I have no idea how your correction invalidates anything I was saying on the subject.
QuoteBut I can also see the Keys being used by other players in a much more wooden and forced fashion. like, "OK, I jump in and help him, 'cause I've got the key of conscience, here's XP for me, OK I roll to attack, ho-hum. . ."
QuoteI like the idea of awarding XP for what you want for the character. I think the sticky wicket for me is in the specificity of the XP requirements for the keys. They read to me like so much bland, by-the-numbers character portrayal I've seen over the years, of the "of course I attack him, I'm chaotic evil!" variety.
QuoteI don't know. Maybe I'm over-thinking it. Maybe you can't idiot-proof (or unengaging plaer-proof, or jackass-proof) a system. Lord knows I don't have an alternative in mind. I thik I'll shut up now, since I don't want ot over-extend myself in the absence of play experience. Feel free to respond, though, and I'll be happy to continue the dialogue.
QuoteOne last thing, I am curious, as I asked before, was there anything specifically that happened at the table to prompt Isidro to criticize Keys? or was he just being a skeptical nitpicker like me?
Quote from: Ralek on September 19, 2006, 10:25:57 AMI don't know if you read the link to Joao's blog I linked up in the previous post where I address the issue more or less directly while talking about fruitful void. When you reach the stage in game where you can go Grand Master in a skill, XP doesn't t mean much to you anymore. That puts the whole system in check. If you don't care about xp you stop going after your keys, if you stop going after your keys, you stop making statements, your flagability seriously decreases - basically you are playing a whole different game. I don't know what is Clinton's view on the subject of transcendence being tied to grand master, but that's how I view it and have experienced it.
Quote from: Ralek on September 19, 2006, 10:25:57 AMThey are similar but not quite the same. Issues in PTA is something the character is struggling with and the whole system pushes for a resolution in their spotlight episode. You can make issues = keys if you bring all the characters key into it, not just one. Look at Joao's character... he had Key of the Mission (bring peace to the Khalean-Ammeni border), Key of Conscience (not kosher for an Ammeni belonging to a slave owning house) and Key of the House. That's his struggle - his house is very important to him, but on the other hand, his house is pushing to win the war and he wants peace. His transcendence deals with his "issue". He chose his desire for peace over his house. He made a definite statement there. He also chose to transcend in a scene where he could resolve his "issue".
Quote from: Ralek on September 19, 2006, 10:25:57 AMYou are also forgetting a very important part of the mechanic. Buyoff. You get a load of XP (10 more specifically) when you directly act against your key, but you lose the key. You are rewarded for making deep statements about your character, like the way Ana's character jumped into a combat situation even though she had key of the coward when she fell in love with the elf (Joao's character).
Quote from: Ralek on September 19, 2006, 10:25:57 AMI don't know if I follow you here... its up to the SG and the other players to challenge other character's beliefs by putting what they care about in check and having them make choices. If their beliefs are never put into question and all scenes are as straightforward as to allow a single key to be followed by everyone in the group, there's something seriously wrong with that TSoY game. Player's frame of mind is also important so that they can take care of challeging each other on their own, like how Isabel's character put herself in the middle of Isidro's pursue of his new found love.
Quote from: Ralek on September 19, 2006, 10:25:57 AMYes. There was an "incident" during play where Isabel's character interpreted what Isidro's character was doing as an attack on her lost tribe good name (she has key of the lost tribe). That wasn't Isidro's intention at the time, but nevertheless it prompted Isabel's action (in fact, she slugged him, advancing scrapping and buying key of the bloodlust in the meantime for a way cool scene). The disconnect between the rest of the group and Isidro was the fact that the group agreed that Isabel was defending her tribe's good name even though offending the name was not his intention so there was no "attack" so to speak. His question was "what stops her from keeping imagining insults to her tribe's name and keep hammering her key for XP". There's a really easy answer "Nothing". It will keep making interesting scenes and when the rest of the players (including the SG) pick up on the bloodlust to defend her tribe's good name it is ripe to be put into question. What will she do when her protege (she also has Key of the Guardian) is the one slugging out the insult?Quite honestly, I don't think Isidro has had enough coherent play with the rest of the group (he missed a lot of our sessions) to make a good judgement about the mechanic and he has a lot of traditional baggage our group has overcome and he hasn't yet, but he's definitely on the right track.
Quote from: Melinglor on September 19, 2006, 02:35:51 PMThe whole Transcendence/Grandmaster thing is becoming clearer to me. . .but now I find it's back to looking like it's not really voluntary. Oh sure, you don't HAVE to transcend until you want to, but as you say, once you get on the cusp of Grandmastery, the game system starts to wind down in terms of engaging your character, so it IS basically saying "transcend now."
Quote from: Melinglor on September 19, 2006, 02:35:51 PMI still, however, wonder why the endgame is tied to skill mastery rather than the actual thematic material.
Quote from: Melinglor on September 19, 2006, 02:35:51 PMI'm kind of parasitically drawing on your AP to help me understand where that fun exists in TSoY, 'cause from the text I just wasn't seeing it.
Quote from: JMendes on September 19, 2006, 06:01:30 PMStill, no matter how you slice and dice it, you are partially right in that the system converges, and so, sooner or later, this will happen to everyone. However, I just wanted to assure you that the exact timing and circumstances of the whole thing are a lot more under player control than it would seem at first reading of the rules.
Quote from: JMendes on September 19, 2006, 06:01:30 PMAs an additional data point, this can happen in just about any game system. I recall a Shadowrun session I was GMing where Rogerio (yes, same guy) had his character seriously considering going hand-to-hand one-on-one with a dragon! He gave it up when he came to the conclusion it would have been an endless stalemate, and right after that, simply retired the character. Also, theoretically, D&D is supposed to end after Level 20. Epic Level is kind of a tacked-on thing. :)
Quote from: Melinglor on September 19, 2006, 08:21:47 PMthe relevance of the example of my character-suiciding friend (to my mind at least) is that he was obviously looking for an endgame feature for whatever reasons, and not finding it in the rules, thus engineering his own situations.