Re: Re: Followers. What have you got?

From: Wulf Corbett <wulfc_at_...>
Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 02:42:14 +0000


On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:16:50 -0500, "Nasty Goblin" <goblinredux_at_...> wrote:

>> I also still tend to ask "Is there a chandelier, and can I reach it?"
>rather than just say "I swing from the chandelier".
>
>There is an important scale between detail & realism vs drama. Certainly
>Robin D Laws makes a valid point about game-maps in Feng Shui... ...they rob
>drama from the game. In high drama a player should be _able_ to say "I
>swing on the chandelier." As long as the improv fits the environment (and
>gets GM approval) it works.

But on the other hand, what a map, or at least a detailed description, does do, is tell you what the hell is there! Having just spent a weekend of very wonderful Live Roleplay, there are two great benefits obviously apparent*:

  1. No more 3rd-person description or "Oh, but I didn't say that out loud!". You get in there and act the part.
  2. No more "What table? You never mentioned a table!"

And point 2 is why I do NOT like what you describe as a 'dramatic' approach. If there's a table, or a chandelier, around, everyone should (or could) see and use it. Allowing one player to 'dream up' terrain isn't dramatic, it's just unrealistic when taken to extremes. I don't mind the "I'll hide behind the furniture" sort, it's the "I'll throw the pot of hot soup off the hearth at him" I don't like. If you think up hot soup, you find out if it exists first. If the referee agrees, THEN you can use it. Chandeliers are not miraculously conjured out of thin air for the use of one player only, unless you're an Illusionist, the character (and so the player) should not be allowed to dictate the terrain. That's the ref's job, it's part of the scenario, possibly the plot. That's not a restriction on the players' imagination, it's just common sense.

Wulf

Powered by hypermail