RE: Sp's

From: Loren Miller <loren_at_wharton.upenn.edu>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 14:10:00 -0400


"Nikk Effingham" <eng7nje_at_arts-01.novell.leeds.ac.uk> writes:
> But there are two flaws, one is how long you can keep this up. I, for
> one, would find myself slipping quite easily into exchanging simple
> bettings of numbers for most resolutions, especially as I doubt many
> of my players could be bothered to come up with equally evocative
> descriptions.

Tell me, have you ever noticed this in a RQ game?

Tom:   "New round... Strike Rank 1...   2..."
Renee: "Ooh ooh my babeester gor attacks the 2nd morokanth!"
       "I roll 23, a hit, to the 4, for 11 no 12 no 14 points! what'd I do?"
Tom:   "He dodges with a 61, guess he doesn't dodge, you hit, 3 points of
       armor there, 11 gets thru, disabling that location. It's out of the
       fight."
Harry: "Is it dead? I hit it for 8 in the 7 earlier. is that enough to kill
       it?"

Tom: {thinks... why don't they care about the morokanth's feelings or doing

       any ROLEPLAYING?}

My opinion on the whole thing is this. No matter how much help the system gives playing groups, the GM & players will decide for themselves whether they enjoy, at that moment, doing the active work of visualization required to make the scene live. If they don't, then it's a lotsa-dice rolling contest in RQ, and a single-dice-rolling and betting contest in HW. Personally, I think the fewer dice rolled the better, and if you can add in some bluffing and other stuff that happens with bets, then it's even better. If they do the work required to make the scene live, then it's a wash.

Powered by hypermail