>From: "L.Castellucci" <lightcastle_at_...>
>
> >If, on the other hand, we know
> > that the character had to suffer some arduous trial in order to get the
> > armor, then it's inclusion is, for me, dramatic.
>
>I'd include other reasons. The armor of a Sheshengi knight is dramatic for
>cultures without massive Iron armor because it is CRAZY scary. How can we
>stop this juggernaut?!
Yep, good example. My example wasn't meant to be exclusionary - that's not the only reason I'd put an effect for armor into play. Heck, I do it just for kicks in many cases (remember I'm the guy who actually likes to find every last modifier that's interesting).
But, to give an even better example, I've had combats happen where the abilites used on each side were they're relationships with other individuals or personality traits as the primary abilities. Because we wanted to see, for the contest, whether Character X's love won out over Character Y's spite or something. Not common, but it happens. Not based on in-game logic at all. Just based on each players' emotional engagement with the conflict in question.
To be even more specific, armor will often happen like this:
Mike: Are those all the ablities and augments and penalties and modifiers?
Player: Uh, you know, my character is better armored and equipped than his
opponent. Can I get a bonus for that?
Mike: Sure, plus ten sound right?
Player: Great!
In another context with the Seshnegi Knights attacking the barenaked Heortlings, do I assess some bonus or penalty? Maybe, maybe not. If I miss doing it... well then obviously it wasn't interesting enough for me to put it in. That's dramatic reasoning. Do I feel like putting in that modifier in this contest? Do I, the player or narrator, want this to be in the contest? Not "should it be in the contest" based on some in-game logic, or some rule that specifies it's use.
Any clearer?
Yeah, somebody out there is thinking of writing, "But I'd hate to play that way." First, I think that would be a response to a seeming dichotomy that I don't think really exists. Second, in practice nobody ever complains about this methodology when I use it - it's more subtle than it seems. Third, if you really don't like this way to play... well, again, different strokes for different folks.
I'm not saying my way is better, it's just what I like. And if Robin's rules support that as a default (optional rules aside), you'll have to forgive me if I'm happy about that. At the very least we can all understand what the goal of this sort of rule is. Even if you don't understand why it's fun.
Mike
Powered by hypermail