> > > speculation, etc.
> >
> > So, basically the scholars will have experienced a
> > lot of bullshit
> > data in their researches, and take that into account
> > when formulating
> > advice. Whether the advisee will let that advice
> > take precedence over
> > well-settled misconceptions is another matter.
>
> Yes. this is something that is notably absent from
> most scenarios I've seen, and written for that
> matter--the prevalence of misinformation. but it makes
> for frustrating and dead end roleplaying, so the PCs
> seem to usually get amazingly relevant information.
> but then, this is a game, intended for fun, not
> frustration.
>
>
> It's something of a catch-22, though. Even if you do write it in a
> way that has misinformation, which could be done, you have the issue
> of determining that mechanically. In any game system, if you make it
> that somethings "work" and get a bonus, and somethings don't, then it
> becomes immediately obvious. So in terms of all the small little
> superstitions people use, it becomes very hard to represent that
> in-game. (Larger rituals working or failing is easier.) Personally,
> (I haven't had much chance to play recently, of course) I've let some
> such superstitions be clan-specific or otherwise narrowed. So this
> clan can rub berries on themselves and it works to keep darkness
> demons away, but while they think that's a characterstic of the
> berries or the demons, it is in fact due to their wyter and ancerstors
> and such. The result is there are lots of thngs that work for some
> people and not others and you aren't always sure what they are.
LC
Powered by hypermail