Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by beingfrank, February 19, 2006, 03:10:03 AM
Quotegot all concerned with the idea that this meant that the game world was one that essentially punished PC cautiousness.
Quote from: beingfrank on February 20, 2006, 06:59:40 AMOh, another question, any advice on dealing with players who are uncomfortable with the idea that putting stuff on the table in the game means that it could go against the PC? It came up in regard to the example conflict about whether someone was watching the PC. The players are still in simulating task resolution mode, and got all concerned with the idea that this meant that the game world was one that essentially punished PC cautiousness. They seemed to feel that establishing that the PC kept an eye out for followers meant that the cautious people ended up being constantly stalked by foes, and the completely careless and oblivious person never runs into trouble. I've explained that it's not modelling the world, but the story, and that they should be putting things on the table about the characters because they want them to be points of drama rather than uncontentious. And I've got everyone's agreement to give it a go and see how it works in play. But are there better ways to dealing with this concern?
Quote from: Ron Edwards on February 27, 2006, 12:36:39 AMAlan's right about the wolf relationships. If you want twelve individual relationships, you'll have to build them individually through twelve conflicts, one wolf per conflict. And if you want a relationship with a group, then the game's Scale must have jumped to that level through actual play.