The Forge Reference Project

 

Topic: Non-linear Sorcerer (split)
Started by: Tim Alexander
Started on: 8/6/2003
Board: Actual Play


On 8/6/2003 at 2:31pm, Tim Alexander wrote:
Non-linear Sorcerer (split)

So Dav,

I sort of missed the first go 'round with this thread, but I have to say I'm fascinated. I want to see if I've got you right, when the players want to use some karma (goodguy points?), they flash forward/back and you just frame sort of a scene at random? Are they providing input to the initial framing, or are you sort of dumping them into context and then letting them run with it? Is it actually played, or just left as a flash before getting back to the original scene at hand?

As a stylistic choice, I really love the 'start with the end' sort of play. I get a lot of my basic plot stuff from a scene kernel. What I mean to say is generally there is something that pops for me, a fully cinematic scene, that then makes me go "That's cool, what might be going on around that?" The 'start with the end', or more broadly a non-linear approach, would let me take that kernel and instead of developing it offscreen, which I'm trying to get away from, and instead hand it to the players and let them develop it back and forth with me.

Have you run into any big snafu's? Sticking points? Did the players still define kickers, and how are they, or aren't they coming into play?

-Tim

Message 7460#78270

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Tim Alexander
...in which Tim Alexander participated
...in Actual Play
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 8/6/2003




On 8/6/2003 at 2:52pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Non-linear Sorcerer (split)

Hello,

With great reluctance, I split Tim's post from the end of Non-linear Sorcerer, Part 2 as that thread was back in May.

But let the discussion continue! Dav, whaddaya say?

Best,
Ron

Forge Reference Links:
Topic 6412

Message 7460#78278

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Ron Edwards
...in which Ron Edwards participated
...in Actual Play
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 8/6/2003




On 8/6/2003 at 2:56pm, Tim Alexander wrote:
RE: Non-linear Sorcerer (split)

Thanks Ron,

So is that an etiquette point then? If you've happened upon an old thread that you have new content for, are you best off to quote and split?

-Tim

Message 7460#78280

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Tim Alexander
...in which Tim Alexander participated
...in Actual Play
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 8/6/2003




On 8/6/2003 at 2:59pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Non-linear Sorcerer (split)

Hi Tim,

In a word, Yes. That's the way to do it. No harm done here, though; we're used to people learning the ropes during their first few times posting.

Best,
Ron

Message 7460#78284

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Ron Edwards
...in which Ron Edwards participated
...in Actual Play
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 8/6/2003




On 8/6/2003 at 3:02pm, Tim Alexander wrote:
RE: Non-linear Sorcerer (split)

I appreciate folks being understanding, thanks for the info.

-Tim

Message 7460#78285

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Tim Alexander
...in which Tim Alexander participated
...in Actual Play
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 8/6/2003