I'm interested in the intimation - on another thread -
that 'split-party syndrome' is bad. No quotes because
the autheor did not specifically say that, but this is
something of 'truth, generally accepted' by GMs.
However in Red Cow we regularly play with a completely
split part and cut between people. I find there are
some real advantages:
- Individuals get to pursue their own goals.
Especially in a community based game your relationship
with x may be important and you may want to play out
some important change. In a 'party' game everyone has
to tag along for the ride. In a split game they don't.
Similarly it means that characters do not have to be
generalists. You don't have to add a spear and shield
skill to your Orane steadwife on the raid, or come up
with justifications for her involvement.
- Breathing time. The breaks in an indvidual story
actually help both me as the narrator - I can take
time to let the last set events gestate before
responding and the player - they can think about their
next choice, figure out their TN after all their
augments are reacked up etc.
- Interest. Perversely people seem to be more
interested in other players stories than they were in
other players actions when they were all part of the
group. I guess they are not competing for the
limelightn within that thread.
I'm not looking for any answers on how to run party
play and keep these benefits btw. I'm just saying that
non-party play seems to work well for us, so I would
not always assume that it is 'bad'. In HQ for a
community based game I would conversly say that it can
be good.
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos
http://uk.photos.yahoo.com