Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bill Zebub" data-source="post: 9131406" data-attributes="member: 7031982">I find the use of &quot;Narrative Game&quot; hard to parse because every RPG I've every played has been very narrative.&nbsp; And even if I understood the distinction being made, I think I would prefer a label that didn't suggest other games are &quot;non-narrative.&quot;&nbsp; (I find games where I have full control over what my character thinks and does to be fun.&nbsp; Should I call those games &quot;Fun RPGs&quot; and let those who disagree absorb the implication...?)And, as a couple posters above have said, I still don't see why Star Wars particularly needs, more than other genres/settings, to mechanically differentiate fights with emotional stakes.&nbsp; Sure, Luke has daddy issues, but that dynamic is a special case within that fiction.&nbsp; None of the other characters are paired similarly.On the other hand, maybe what is really desired is a mechanic that does get used, for all characters.&nbsp; That is, if you're playing a rogue-ish smuggler, or a neurotic droid, then you are supposed to choose a foil with whom you have a particularly strong emotional connection.&nbsp; One that you expect to face frequently enough that it's worth making the game more complex by having mechanics that apply in those situations.And that sounds to me not like a Star Wars-specific thing, but a general preference in RPGs.&nbsp; Which is valid...I'm not saying it's wrong, even if it's not my preference...it just doesn't strike me as more appropriate to Star Wars than any other genre/setting/fiction.EDIT:And, ultimately, letting Luke's player decide how to play their character differently when finally confronting Dark Vader is, to me, the core of what roleplaying is all about.&nbsp; I don't want mechanics forcing me, or even encouraging me, to do that.&nbsp; And if it's not my character, and Luke's player decides to just treat the fight as no different from fighting ice monsters or storm troopers, I'm ok with that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bill Zebub, post: 9131406, member: 7031982"] I find the use of "Narrative Game" hard to parse because every RPG I've every played has been very narrative. And even if I understood the distinction being made, I think I would prefer a label that didn't suggest other games are "non-narrative." (I find games where I have full control over what my character thinks and does to be fun. Should I call those games "Fun RPGs" and let those who disagree absorb the implication...?) And, as a couple posters above have said, I still don't see why Star Wars particularly [I]needs[/I], more than other genres/settings, to mechanically differentiate fights with emotional stakes. Sure, Luke has daddy issues, but that dynamic is a special case within that fiction. None of the other characters are paired similarly. On the other hand, maybe what is really desired is a mechanic that [I]does[/I] get used, for all characters. That is, if you're playing a rogue-ish smuggler, or a neurotic droid, then you are [I]supposed[/I] to choose a foil with whom you have a particularly strong emotional connection. One that you expect to face frequently enough that it's worth making the game more complex by having mechanics that apply in those situations. And that sounds to me not like a Star Wars-specific thing, but a general preference in RPGs. Which is valid...I'm not saying it's wrong, even if it's not my preference...it just doesn't strike me as more appropriate to Star Wars than any other genre/setting/fiction. EDIT: And, ultimately, letting Luke's player decide how to play their character differently when finally confronting Dark Vader is, to me, the core of what roleplaying is all about. I don't want mechanics forcing me, or even encouraging me, to do that. And if it's not my character, and Luke's player decides to just treat the fight as no different from fighting ice monsters or storm troopers, I'm ok with that. [/QUOTE]

Verification