Re: Making players afraid for their characters

From: Mandacaru <samclau_at_...>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:20:47 -0000


<janewilliams20_at_...> wrote:
> That does seem to be the inevitable conclusion.
> There's a distinction between doing things that the
> character will not enjoy, and doing things that the
> player will not enjoy. Since this is a game, and the
> idea is to have fun, I try to avoid the latter (which
> probably means large quantities of the former). But if
> the player knows that anything I do to their character
> is intended to be something that they as players will
> enjoy, why should they fear it? It hadn't occurred to
> me that this was meant to be one of my goals as a GM.

Well, that would be my model too. But, fear strictly interpreted may not encompass the whole experience and people can enjoy fear (i.e. fear is not the opposite of enjoyment). People watch horror movies, go on roller coasters and so on (not me, these things I find unpleasant) and get enjoyment from them. There is something visceral (Mike used the right word there) there which can heighten the experience. In a game like RQ, this can come from the real risk of losing your character (or a limb, etc). In HQ, I suspect you have to buy in to character failure as something a little bit scary. I donīt think the latter is intuitive or is directly supported by the rules.

A -50% penalty to relevant abilities, or even being temporarily "dying", puts no willies up me, personally. This is why I was looking for something a little more brutal than is in the rules (for frak's sake).

So, the whiteknuckle ride (if one wants it) depends on the narrator and players' craft - it isn't directly supported by the rules, I think. My interpretation of what others have written (here and on molad) is that what HQ could be lacking (for some) is the visceral aspect - RQ is very visceral, for example.

Sam.

p.s. Thanks for the lowdown on frak, Peter. What I remember of Battlestar Galactica is that I was anti-it. I think it ran at the same time (of my life) as Blakes Seven or somthing, and being prothat  I had (by my logic of the era and my friends') to be anti-BG. I remember when Avon visited my school (was he really called Avon) and the I think the hairy bloke's son even went to my school.

Powered by hypermail