Creating the Scenario with the Character Sheets in Front of Me

<< < (5/10) > >>

johnmarron:
Quote from: Paka on December 20, 2005, 09:15:31 AM


But why not just have it tied to the system?

I say the following with a smile on my face and I'm not meaning any condescension: John, man, I don't getcha, really I don't.


Judd,
   No offense taken.  I understand that my preference for minimal mechanics is a bit unusual around here, and I don't set out to baffle you intentionally (honestly).

I think Emily was dead on about my reservations concerning mechanically incorporating flags when she talked about the presence of even more numbers and stats on the character sheet putting me off.  I appreciate the value of making Flags central to the game, having them right there on the sheet in front of god and everyone, and rewarding play that focuses on them, but I'm such a number-phobe that I shy away from expressing this in a non-narrative way.  That said, Emily's question: "The thing about having the markers not be anywhere on the char/resource sheet is that then, what goes there?", definitely struck a chord with me. 

A while back I read through the Decipher Lord of the Rings RPG.  I read over the sample characters they provided, and my eyes glazed over at the reams of numerically represented stats.  At the bottom of each character sheet was a paragraph of narrative description, and I thought to myself, "this is all I really need to protray or GM for this character".  For me, if I can get the players to put honest, thought-out Flags into that paragraph, I think I'll feel comfortable using that info to provide bangs.  Obviously, techniques to achieve this are part of the "system", I just don't want them to necessarily require bookkeeping or randomizing.

I'll give some thought to how to achieve narratively-expressed flags, and see if I can implement it in a game.  In the kind of system I'm envisioning, character "advancement" (really change) could take the form of adding and/or re-writing sentences of your character description.

John

Judd:
John,

I feel like we are in danger of disagreeing just becaus we are on the internet here.

The following statement in particular I agree with:

Quote from: johnmarron on December 21, 2005, 06:06:21 AM

A while back I read through the Decipher Lord of the Rings RPG.  I read over the sample characters they provided, and my eyes glazed over at the reams of numerically represented stats.  At the bottom of each character sheet was a paragraph of narrative description, and I thought to myself, "this is all I really need to protray or GM for this character".  For me, if I can get the players to put honest, thought-out Flags into that paragraph, I think I'll feel comfortable using that info to provide bangs.  Obviously, techniques to achieve this are part of the "system", I just don't want them to necessarily require bookkeeping or randomizing.

I'll give some thought to how to achieve narratively-expressed flags, and see if I can implement it in a game.  In the kind of system I'm envisioning, character "advancement" (really change) could take the form of adding and/or re-writing sentences of your character description.

John


What you just described isn't system-lite or rules that get out of your way.  What you just described is a solid idea for an RPG that you should get-a-crackin' on.

Kinda sounds like Heroquest, no?

But back to the topic at hand, I think having the player write a paragraph that isn't linked to the  game's mechanics is folly.  I'd imagine that you would get lots and lots of character history crap that had no bearing on where they wanted the game to go or what the player wanted to do with the character or see in the game.

But link it to the game so that when the paragraph changes, the character changes, that's a whole different ball-o-wax.

Emily Care:
Quote

The problem is, the GM is then faced with a group of identically-formatted laundry list of potential Markers.  But then you have to play mind-reading games to figure out which of these Markers is live and wired in to the player's interests, and which is just sitting there, spun out by the player out of Simmish interest or, worse, dredged up in order to have a filled-out character sheet. 

In Adam Dray's Verge, you actually pick several traits and circle them in a given session to tell the GM what you want to deal with right now.  Such a simple fix.

Though if the player doesn't know either, then you're still in a pickle.  Seems like the system has to help you create or choose aspects & issues that will spark. That are dynamic.  People can also be interested in aspects of a character that keep them in stasis too.

best,
Em



Michael S. Miller:
Hi, John. This bit stood out to me:

Quote from: johnmarron on December 21, 2005, 06:06:21 AM

I appreciate the value of making Flags central to the game, having them right there on the sheet in front of god and everyone, and rewarding play that focuses on them, but I'm such a number-phobe that I shy away from expressing this in a non-narrative way.

How would you characterize a Kicker is Sorcerer? It's on the character sheet. It's got no numerical rating. It doesn't modify any dice rolls (and only triggers advancement rolls when it's "resolved"--an undefined term). It's generally written in a couple of sentences. Does this give you what you want?

I'm trying to figure out whether you're objecting to Flags tied to the dice system, or objecting to Flags tied to the capital-"S" System.

RDU Neil:
Haven't posted here in years, but somebody directed me to this thread which is quite interesting.  I have a qusetion for you all...

While we don't use your terminology (Flags, Bangs, etc.) the concepts have filtered into our game play over the years.  The idea of "playing off the players" and taking what they give you in terms of positive reactions... tells... and GMing from that position... that is strong in our group... BUT... and here is the issue... I've seen what I would call a "lack of follow through" on the part of players that is quite disruptive to the group.  Basically, the player is "into" something for a session or so... which is currently driving the story arc... other players are into it as well, supporting and enjoying things in an audience kind of way... and then suddenly the next episode the player is "meh, whatever..." and lost all interest in the current story... leaving the game sputtering and the GM and players rather put off. 

So many posts on here seem to talk about GM responsibility to working to the player Flags... but what about player responsibility to see the story through... to be responsible for the enjoyment of others at the table, not just their own... to be willing to handle some player disappointment in things that don't play out EXACTLY as they want... essentially taking the bad with the good which is just a fact of life... gaming or real.

Maybe I'm missing it, but where does the player responsibility come in this?  The players need to commit to stepping up and soldiering on through the "meh" moments to find the true bangs later.  This doesn't mean every sessions/episode should be a slog (That is a clear sign of dysfunction in the game.) but a single episode could be in the context of a larger, long term arc that really explores what they enjoy. 

I guess the question is, don't you feel that individual players have responsibility to the positive experience of the group as a whole, and not just to their own short terms whims?  (Again, I could be misreading, but I just haven't seen anything about player responsibility... just GM responsibility.)

Example: 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page