Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4040972" data-attributes="member: 4937">*pulls hair out*But that's exactly what the players of the aforementioned DM who had a problem communicating cold did!&nbsp; But of course, this is mere affectation.&nbsp; The player actually knows that his character isn't really cold.&nbsp; Nothing is at stake.&nbsp; The player that says, &quot;I bravely trundle on uneffected by the cold.&quot;, roleplaying just as well.&nbsp; The player that says, &quot;Ahh... whatever, I like marching in the rain.&nbsp; Keeps you stimulated.&quot;, is roleplaying just as well.&nbsp; You still haven't changed the fact that in making decisions, the character can ignore the cold and you are informing the player that in making decisions he can ingore the cold.*sigh* But can you at least credit that its existance is of a very different character than if it had a mechanical effect.&nbsp; That is to say, its still not a part of the physics of the game world?Just as an aside, that is one of the many reasons I don't play games like Dogs.&nbsp; I don't want a game that tells me what stories I'm supposed to tell.&nbsp; I want a game that gives me the mechanics to tell the stories I want to tell, no matter what conflicts those stories involve ('man vs. nature' is pretty classic and definately appropriate to the setting).&nbsp; (The DitV mechanics could be adapted to anything, but I have other problems with the game.)I suspect that you really can't imagine it.&nbsp; I think the longest we went without touching dice once was like 6 hours - a six hour political negotiation involving all the PC's and I think 12 NPC's.&nbsp; No dice.&nbsp; Just roleplaying.&nbsp; But, no 'physics' either.&nbsp; Don't tell the players this, but the reason for no dice throwing was that there was nothing actually being resolved.&nbsp; I actually had predecided the stances of all 11 NPCs based on who that NPC was supposed to be.&nbsp; (This was 1st edition, so no 'sense motive' checks.)&nbsp; The whole session was really about the PC's ability to figure out what those stances really were so that they could plan for them.&nbsp; Granted, some minor shifting of stances might have occured had the players really blown the RP, but they were masterful (just not masterful enough to convince people to do things not in thier own interests).&nbsp; But it was alot of fun nonetheless, and still remains one of the most memorable gaming sessions I've ever experienced, and gave the PC's plenty of surprises.&nbsp; And I got to play like 11 different roles and make each one have memorable traits and habits of speach (the 12th NPC was played by a co-DM), the players got to make stirring speaches.&nbsp; Awesome.Don't knock my style until you know what it is.Within the framework of the universe he has described so as to maintain consistancy and believability, yes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 4040972, member: 4937"] *pulls hair out* But that's exactly what the players of the aforementioned DM who had a problem communicating cold did! But of course, this is mere affectation. The player actually knows that his character isn't really cold. Nothing is at stake. The player that says, "I bravely trundle on uneffected by the cold.", roleplaying just as well. The player that says, "Ahh... whatever, I like marching in the rain. Keeps you stimulated.", is roleplaying just as well. You still haven't changed the fact that in making decisions, the character can ignore the cold and you are informing the player that in making decisions he can ingore the cold. *sigh* But can you at least credit that its existance is of a very different character than if it had a mechanical effect. That is to say, its still not a part of the physics of the game world? Just as an aside, that is one of the many reasons I don't play games like Dogs. I don't want a game that tells me what stories I'm supposed to tell. I want a game that gives me the mechanics to tell the stories I want to tell, no matter what conflicts those stories involve ('man vs. nature' is pretty classic and definately appropriate to the setting). (The DitV mechanics could be adapted to anything, but I have other problems with the game.) I suspect that you really can't imagine it. I think the longest we went without touching dice once was like 6 hours - a six hour political negotiation involving all the PC's and I think 12 NPC's. No dice. Just roleplaying. But, no 'physics' either. Don't tell the players this, but the reason for no dice throwing was that there was nothing actually being resolved. I actually had predecided the stances of all 11 NPCs based on who that NPC was supposed to be. (This was 1st edition, so no 'sense motive' checks.) The whole session was really about the PC's ability to figure out what those stances really were so that they could plan for them. Granted, some minor shifting of stances might have occured had the players really blown the RP, but they were masterful (just not masterful enough to convince people to do things not in thier own interests). But it was alot of fun nonetheless, and still remains one of the most memorable gaming sessions I've ever experienced, and gave the PC's plenty of surprises. And I got to play like 11 different roles and make each one have memorable traits and habits of speach (the 12th NPC was played by a co-DM), the players got to make stirring speaches. Awesome. Don't knock my style until you know what it is. Within the framework of the universe he has described so as to maintain consistancy and believability, yes. [/QUOTE]

Verification