Re: Let's see if this gets some discussion going - "party balance"

From: Jane Williams <janewilliams20_at_...>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 19:59:22 +0000 (GMT)


> This is "the party" ethic and it's not restricted to D&D. The healer
> is expected to heal members of the party so that the party
> succeeds.

It's that "success" thing again, isn't it? The meaning of the word has changed, and expectations change with it.

> I'd aim for at least one important decision
> for each player
> in each F2F session. More is probably better.

*Good* point. Decision points. Not necessarily plot related, character-development related are probably at least as important. And you don't need rule-based Power to make a decision.

> That's a difference between F2F and email games. A
> scene is a
> lot shorter than a normal F2F session

er..... several weeks?

> If
> someone has bothered to turn up and spends the whole 2-4
> hour
> session sitting on the sidelines the game balance is wrong.

I think that's more the point. 2-4 hours of expecting to devote your time to an activity is a LOT, so not being able to join in is bad.

> >> Also, combat in RPG's is like chase scenes in
> >> action movies. When the GM's imagination
> fails,
> >> combat becomes a good fall back option.
> >
> >(wince). I know as a plot device it worked for Raymond
> Chandler, but surely we can do better?
>
> Not if imaginations fail. I'd suggest if the GM is that
> out of
> ideas then they should have a break for a few months.

So would I, but it was being suggested as a natural thing to do. Maybe this is another difference between PBem and F2F - as a PBeM GM, I have far more time to think of responses.



Sent from Yahoo! Mail.
A Smarter Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

Powered by hypermail