Re: The Glorantha Digest V6 #113

From: Joerg Baumgartner <joe_at_toppoint.de>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 98 23:29 MET DST


I'll retravt my comments on the nature of plot point gains since I've been assured the nightmare's gone...

Still, I sorta feel with Alex:

>Well, that was all a touch overwrought, I suspect; ended up as a more
>of a portmanteau grouse than sticking to Eric's point, please bear
>with me.

I don't think so, Alex. Given the information we got at Convulsion, it seemed a reasonable way of discussion. The info about the more current state of the project would have been more useful, I suppose, but the playtest seems to be intended to produce a feel for the "paradigm shift" (gruesome term, really).

I suppose the system won't get too much into the way of roleplaying if used cautiously, so I'll give it a try (and a buy anyway).

Bruce Mason

>The minimax approach seemed to be to pick on someone weaker than you
>and drag out the contest to make as many rolls as possible. <snip>
>Question is, if someone is prepared to do this does this
>say "dodgy system" or "dodgy roleplayer"?

Both. But then I don't choose the people I play with just for their roleplaying abilities.

>but the answer to that would seem to be not to play with obsessive
>minimaxers.

That's exactly the "Don't play with old buddies" advice I predicted :-(

>I would rather see HW designed to be compatible with good roleplaying
>rather than defensively designed against munchkins and rules lawyers.

I would rather prefer a system rewarding good in-role playing than good in-story playing (yes, they are _Different_). I am convinced that I will be able to present my NPCs the way I want no matter the system, but as Alex rightly pointed out, fudging should be the referee's decision, not the game system's.


Powered by hypermail