<< >> 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!
[snip]
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. >>
Not necessarily; what you're describing is the "storyteller" style of play (from the same four point scheme as the wargamer mentioned recently). There are many people who do enjoy that style of gaming so saying its flat out wrong, or not common sense, isn't likely to be helpful (or welcome!) to those people who do so. Indeed, it looks clear to me that HW was written very much from that POV. Fortunately, this doesn't mean its the only way that the game can be played (and it certainly isn't the way I'd do it) and it can have great appeal to the "character actor" and "powergamer" types too, depending on the way the GM chooses to do things. It's a case of "know your players", really, which is good GM advice regardless of system...
Trotsky
Powered by hypermail