Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8658748" data-attributes="member: 42582">This claim appears contradictory: clearly if the game relies upon having prior knowledge of how to use it, it does need something that isn't in the book.Here are the passages where the author recognises that the book is incomplete (from p 4):Unanswered Questions Who decides when to roll Insanity? Who decides when it’s interesting to know how well you do something? Who decides when something disturbs your PC? Who decides whether you might fail? Decide the answers with your group. Make reasonable assumptions. For example, some groups will let the Keeper decide everything. Others will share the decisions. These rules are designed to play prewritten scenarios, run by a Keeper. If you try improvising scenarios or playing without a Keeper, let me know.Additional elements of incompleteness which are not called out, but are fairly clear, follow from p 2:To know how well you do at something, roll: . . . For example: you’re escaping from the window of an Innsmouth hotel. On a 1, you crash on an adjoining roof, attracting the attention of everyone around. On a 4, you land quietly on the roof, but leave traces for pursuers to follow. On a 6, you escape quietly, while your pursers continue searching the hotel.There's no explanation of how to work out what the consequences are of doing something poorly (the example helps a bit, but leaves many questions unanswered, starting with "who decides who is around, and how they respond to having their attention attracted?"). It's a little bit clearer on dong something well, but not complete: what happens, for instance, if you leave traces?Additional principles have to be brought in to answer those questions.</blockquote>

Verification