Re: Problems with a player's 100 words

From: L.Castellucci <lightcastle_at_...>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 16:19:22 -0500


On December 16, 2006 11:59 am, Jane Williams wrote:

> The player is a power-gamer at heart. He plays
> role-playing games to "win". He always wants to be
> more powerful than the other PCs, and to dominate
> other PCs and other players - the latter can be a
> problem.

Can be? He'd never play in a game of mine. I don't mind dominating the other PCs when it works to give good stories for everyone. The moment you start pushing other players around, you're asking to be politely shown the door.

> He did arrange for the retirement/assassination of his
> previous PC on the grounds that it was impossible to
> GM, after all.

I did that once. Although it wasn't impossible to GM, it just was fundamentally opposed to the rest of the party in tone, and so became more trouble than he was worth.

(He showed up about a year later as an NPC working at cross-purposes to the PCs, which was a lovely touch by the GM.)

> I've done things that headed that way in a slightly
> more subtle manner, too. Squeezing as much as possible
> out of 100 words is an art-form :)

True. I think it is the lack of subtlety that is so irritating about this. :)

> Personally if I start with a list, then convert to
> narrative, I can get more out of the narrative.

It's how I have found it works for me, too.

> Yes! We're trying to convince him that HQ is *not*
> limiting. He doesn't like the fact that in RQ you
> could just "do" all the relationships and so on, but
> here you can only have them by spending points.

So he chose to write a narrative where he has no relationships?

> He isn't a munchkin in the normal sense. In PBeM, you
> dominate a game by writing, and writing well: quality,
> imagination, quantity. This is a game with me and Mike
> as players, to give you some idea of the "competition"
> (not that either of us see it that way of course).
> This player dominates, by producing more *good*
> writing than either of us. This is something to be
> channeled, not squashed, IMO. Only the more I look at
> that 100 words, the less able I feel to explain what
> the 100-word narrative is actually for.

This 100-word narrative? Or 100-word narratives in general?

LC

Powered by hypermail