Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by iago, April 17, 2003, 08:55:31 PM
QuoteI thought things went rather well with the system considering this was its first run. A few things took a little getting used to, but that may be more due to my knocking the rust off the GM skills.For instance, I usually like to rely on a character's list of already stated skills for giving them information and the like. Now, this really wasn't a problem for the game in that I knew what general skills each character had, it was the fact that I normally have them roll some dice to see if they succeed in attaining said information. With PACE I had to adjust my style a bit. Since they have an automatic basic success, I had to ask (in the case of 'awareness') the player if they wanted to notice something. Then they had to pay if they wanted the information I had for them. Sometimes I would award them points if they chose not to succeed, but more often I wouldn't offer them anything. More playtesting is definitely needed, I think.Combat was also interesting. Everyone was mostly out of pips when the final fight came about (including me, the GM). The sequence using the pips almost felt like a close arm-wrestling match. A player would spend 2-3 pips and go into deficit to attack the bad guy. Those pips went into escrow until the conclusion of the sequence. The baddie (controlled by me) would spend his remaining pips, take a slight hit because he couldn't match the player, then collect the pips in escrow. Those pips would then be used to defend against the next player's attack. As the fight progressed, slowly but surely the bad guy was attaining more pips and would have turned the tide had there not been other circumstances in play. Again, more playtesting is needed. I would like to experiment with different ways of awarding pips and perhaps seeing how the escrow rule is played out if it were collected at the end of a full round of actions rather than per player action.All in all, the mechanics played out fast and furious and the action moved fluidly. As a GM I had no complaints about the ruleset and once I got used to things, it was easy to play. It was nice not to have to worry about a lot of bookkeeping, but that may just be me since that's my preference anyway. I definitely want to continue to playtest and push the system a bit further.
Quote from: Mike HolmesHmm. I just noticed a potential mechanical problem. Basically, there's a point at which a player might decide that he doesn't care how many pips the GM has. He can just borrow, and borrow, and borrow, always maxing out his scores. This gives the GM as many pips as he needs, so he, too, can always max out. Doesn't this mean that a player can throw the whole game into full Karma resolution if they so choose? I suggest some limitation on borrowing. Or is there one that I'm forgetting?
Quote from: iagoThus, the price of being that "super cool" character, is that you end up putting enough power in the GM's hands that your life ends up being more difficult.
Quote from: Mike HolmesQuote from: iagoThus, the price of being that "super cool" character, is that you end up putting enough power in the GM's hands that your life ends up being more difficult.But if it's all choice, anyhow, then why use a mechanic at all? What does the mechanic do for you? What's the downside to the GM throwing more and worse obstacles in your way if you can always just choose to win? At this point I'm not seeing the advantage over freeform.
QuoteIf this isn't clicking for you, though, I'm not sure I know how to "make" it click.
Quote from: clehrichQuoteIf this isn't clicking for you, though, I'm not sure I know how to "make" it click. Speaking of clicking, the PDF doesn't seem to want to come up for me. I've tried repeatedly, and get "cannot find server" from both the 24HourGames site and your .sig. Help?
Quote from: Mike HolmesIf the GM has no pips does that mean that he can't create controversy for the characters? Does the game grind to a halt because there's no conflict? It seems to me that the GM has the authority to do Fiats anyway. Giving him more opportunity is like saying to the banker, here's more money. Well, he already has all the money he needs.
Quote from: Mike HolmesAll I'm suggesting is some mechanical disincentive. Like interest payments or something. Because then the currency is kept in the metagame, and as such provides a real player disincentive. As opposed to placing a character in further conflict; which is something that players enjoy.
Quote from: Mike HolmesDoes this make the GM more "dangerous"? Not that I can see. The GM can already stat up the right NPC to kill off the whole party without needing Fiats, unless I missread something. He doesn't do so presumably because it would be uninteresting to do so. This isn't a competition between players and GMs (or is it, and I missed it?). To that extent, the GM becomes no more a danger by being empowered than he is elsewhere.