There's that. But.
> Thus, I suspect
> if we haven't been told it, part of the (dare I say
> real) reason we don't have all the details is that
> it is still a work in progress.
In some cases I know you're right. In others - well, Danar didn't have a name when I first met him, but Kallyr's son, and his death at about that point, and the effects on her, is something I've known about for years. That's fixed. That's part of Greg's master plan, and has been for a very long time. We creative types (thank you!) put flesh on the skeleton, true, but the skeleton is there, more or less complete, and all Greg's. (And no, I don't feel stifled by that at all, myself. It's a good skeleton.)
> Also, the whole Danar thing; I'd love it if my
> players think they are lovers. Think how great it
> is when they find out the difference.
Oh, yes!
> The only
> problem being if the GM had Kallyr tell the players
> he was her lover. But if so, change it! YGWV is
> liberating, use it.
I would recommend against that in this case.
No, hang on, let me read what you actually wrote - OK, so what you have to justify later is why she was lying, and who she was trying to mislead about what this time.
But I'd recommend against introducing any actual evidence of any alternative relationship.
> I know its frustrating for you
> writers, but I contend not so acute for us GM's and
> players. I stand to be corrected of course.
I have all three hats - and I find this particularly frustrating as a GM.
> And Jane, as for asking about using the Sartar
> Rising books to generate a Lunar Game, well, I think
> you must be spending too much time with Nick
> Brooke!!!
That wasn't me! Blame Donald this time.
Jane Williams
Powered by hypermail