Re: Theory on the Puzzle Canal

From: ttrotsky2 <TTrotsky_at_n5OREbMXOwMEhZM1_bneezSzA8hjW3Fr7QrrSy9qajHtjUXQgRPLdl_618TU2YDu3k_>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 07:21:17 -0000

Keith Nellist:

> > > I don't think it's really helpful or productive to hint at
> official
> > > super secrets
> > > that obliviate everything that has gone before and refuse to
> > discuss it
> > > telling people instead to wait for some book that may never come
> > out.
> >
> Simon: I agree completely.
> >
> I'm not upset by it. I'd rather get a "your theory is wrong but I
> cannot tell you why" response than no response at all.
> The reasons for not being able to tell me might, or might not, be
> questionable but I can see that there can be good reasons.

If I understand it, it's because the plot of something in some way relies on the answer. Given that players read the group, it seems fair not to reveal it here. Now, if the book didn't mention it either, leaving the GM in the dark because "we'll reveal it later" that would be, in my view, a mistake. But I see nothing wrong with avoiding plot details of upcoming material on this list. Similarly, if explaining an answer to something in detail would obviate the need to buy the book at all (probably not the case here, though).

On the other hand, if its just being kept secret for the sake of it, then you'd have a point.

Gamer and Skeptic

Trotsky's RPG website:
Not a Dead Communist:


Powered by hypermail