Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by C. Edwards, June 05, 2003, 01:05:10 AM
Quote from: Mike HolmesIf that's correct, then Fidelity must assume lots of Points of Contact. That is, the usual method of producing Fidelity is by making decisions in the context of many points of contact. That said, POC are not Fidelity. POC can exist, for example, to produce Theme. For example, Universalis has no Fidelity support at all, but loads of POC that are all designed to allow for cooperative storytelling.
Quote from: Ron EdwardsThe last time I played GURPS, the setting was Cynosure and I was playing an undead necromancer woman. We'd found ourselves in a wild-west dimension, and we'd been transmogrified to be consistent with it, so I found myself playing a witchy squaw armed with a few sticks of dynamite (the nearest equivalents to my character's blast'em fire-spell). Anyway, all this is just to say that I pulled a classic 3d6 whiff, and blew the crap out of my character when she badly failed a "toss a stick of dynamite" roll. Note that she was using a Throw default, not her Spell skill (which was mighty high), because according to this system, if the character is throwing something, you use the Throw skill, case closed. Here was my thinking about it at the time. It seemed to me that, given Cynosure as a setting, the characters are "equivalents" in different dimensions, such that the squaw's competence with throwing her dynamite should be the same as the necromancer's competence with hurling her fire-spell back home in Cynosure's magic areas. But it seemed to the GM that GURPS' resolution system was "the bedrock" of play, and that using Champions-style Special Effects logic was very wrong in this new game. A Throw is a Throw, with the numbers for throwing right there in the book, and Magic was over here in this other part of the book, and that's that. See how System overrode Setting?
Quote from: C. EdwardsI think perhaps the conceptual difficulty I'm having is that System seems to be most often dialed or preset before play where the other 4 elements tend to fluctuate frequently, generally bowing to System when any disparities occur.
QuoteThe 5 elements as mixing board, hmmm.
QuoteI think perhaps the conceptual difficulty I'm having is that System seems to be most often dialed or preset before play where the other 4 elements tend to fluctuate frequently, generally bowing to System when any disparities occur.
QuoteChris, pre-existing setting, even metaplot, can be examples of POC that might satisfy a player's sim proclivities. Any element, as long as it's created with Sim in mind, has this effect (color is particularly important). Think of it like this. When playing a first person shooter, it's the "presence" of the walls as something hard and unalterable, and all the elements that give it that Sim feeling. If there were some GM somewhere, putting up walls as they became neccessary in his opinion, it would lose a lot of its particular and particularly Immersive quality. So it's that "hardness" of the element that makes it a Point of Contact that supports Fidelity.
Quote from: Mikes HolmesChris, how is any of that any different from what I've said? The only difference that I can see is that I've said, that some POC aren't sim ones. But yes, Sim is caused by POCs that are sim. Which part is the controversial part?
Quote from: Ron EdwardsInSpectres is bluntly and thoroughly about whether you permit your own stress (a) to fuck up the company's functioning because you can't do your job, or (b) to suck up the company's resources while you recover. It's all tied up with the idea of a "startup," which has at its root the assumption that everyone involved will be 110% all the time, and also that no matter what, they'll always be on one another's side.