Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by Andrew Norris, March 14, 2005, 02:28:00 AM
QuoteI recognize that the way the male players are interacting with me as GM is the way Sorcerer is written, don't get me wrong.
Quote from: Ron EdwardsYou wrote,QuoteI recognize that the way the male players are interacting with me as GM is the way Sorcerer is written, don't get me wrong. Please clarify that a bit. I'm not sure what you mean, or whether there's a typo in there, or what.
Quote from: Ron EdwardsI hope you can look over my Bangs comments to him in that thread and apply them to your Bangs, which in my view are also a bit lightweight or vague, but perhaps that's just a matter of what you presented rather than the Bangs themselves. They seem to have worked all right in play, but I'm not yet getting the sense, from your post, that the GM/player/Bang dynamic is producing that characteristic Sorcerer Story-Now-Motherfucker runaway horses feel.
Quote from: Ron EdwardsWhat I'd really like to know, now, is what your new reactions will be upon re-reading the supplements. A lot of people find them a little baffling, except for the genre stuff in Sorcerer & Sword, because they have not yet played Sorcerer and don't yet understand the author/social issues that the game is founded on.
Quote from: Ron EdwardsMy question to you is whether the Premise as I stated it above seems to have become a driving issue for them, judging by player comments and body language as well as by their directions and dialogue for the characters.