*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 12, 2022, 03:25:52 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
275647 Posts in 27717 Topics by 4285 Members Latest Member: - Jason DAngelo Most online today: 76 - most online ever: 565 (October 17, 2020, 02:08:06 PM)
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: First impresions.  (Read 2630 times)
Jack Spencer Jr
Guest
« on: August 22, 2001, 09:46:00 PM »

Got the game the other day, and I'm impressed.  3e PHB has a few hundred pages on it and is slightly larger but I think the money was better spent on Sorcerer.  If nothing else it's good to actually see some of the theories Ron keeps talking about in action.  (Yeah he didn't finalize many of these theories until after Sorcerer, but some of them are in there)

I do like that there is no set die for the game.  But, from the comment in the book about how different dice produce different results leads me to think that this could be another layer to put on the rules.  e.g. some situations require d4's and other situations use d20's and every other die in between or outside this range.

But this may overcomplicate the rules a bit not to mention require players to have a sizable dice collection.  However, I already have one of those.

Logged
Uncle Dark
Member

Posts: 215


WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2001, 09:56:00 PM »

Quote

On 2001-08-23 01:46, pblock wrote:

I do like that there is no set die for the game.  But, from the comment in the book about how different dice produce different results leads me to think that this could be another layer to put on the rules.  e.g. some situations require d4's and other situations use d20's and every other die in between or outside this range.




We had this discussion over on GO once.  I'm not about to go try and dig it all out, but IIRC some people liked it -- if they were the kind of gamers that liked drawing things out mechanically a a means of increasing tension -- and Ron didn't like it because it disturbed consistency of feel to the game.  But don't quote me on that (Ron?).

Lon
Logged

Reality is what you can get away with.
Ron Edwards
Global Moderator
Member
*
Posts: 16490


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 23, 2001, 08:45:00 AM »

Hey,

My objection to the idea does not rely on some ideal of "purity." It's a matter of toggles in game design.

A toggle refers to what is held constant as opposed to what is allowed to vary (a "dial"). In Sorcerer, the number of dice is a dial, and the type of die is a toggle. The pips on a die (the numeral "4," e.g.) are considered only in comparative terms, and thus are a toggle rather than a dial.

It is very clear to me that most game design suffers badly from too many dials. The proposed rule adds a dial that is not necessary, as its function is already covered by the dial of the varying number of dice.

One of the most valued fetishes of gamers, unfortunately, is the fun of considering two dials at once. It's a handy thing when properly applied - it allows strategizing, for instance, which appeals to Gamist behavior. But the desire for these multiple dials, without GNS focus or consideration of all elements of the game design, needs to be watched carefully. I think that one of the most important aspects of designing an RPG is to permit multiple dials only in very important, focused portions of the game.

In Sorcerer, the dial of Humanity conflicts with the dial of the combined Power/abilities of one's demons, as well as with the dial of those demons' obedience (modeled in part by the Binding strengths, Needs, and role-playing). All of these, as a unit, are affected by the dial of role-playing bonuses.

In my opinion, letting ANOTHER dial into the mix is pretty crazy.

Best,
Ron
Logged
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!