Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5999167" data-attributes="member: 42582">As I understand it, Champions doesn't really do director stance, does it? Except via (say) Uncanny Luck abilities. So it might have a hard time with a power like Come and Get It, or (say) a class ability that 1x/session makes an NPC fall hopelessly in love with the character.I agree with you that the scenario you describe can't sensibly be done purely at the ingame level.That's why I think the application of the power has to be resolved at the metagame level, via player-to-player negotiation, if this sort of disagreement comes up.So in your rescue case, if the players have their conversation and agree that PC 1 will be moved by player 2's use of PC 2's power, the narration can be clear - maybe along the lines of "PC 2 calls out to PC 1, Wait - you can't help her until we stop BBEG - remember we have to work together as a team, and then we'll all make it out fine!"You may think that speaks in favour of your "threat to immersion" thesis, of course! Whereas for me, these parts of play - especially because, in practice, they tend to play out at the meta and ingame levels simultaneously - help reinfroce immersion in the fiction, a strong sense of the stakes, and the integration of the at-table mechanical experience with the in-head imagined fiction.As I've said, I don't really think of it as a rewrite. I think of it as making sense of a certain rules economy on the part of the designers.But what is more interesting is what your view is of the negotiation itself - I'm speculating that you would find it immersion-breaking, but maybe I'm wrong.That's what I was thinking in my posts. But maybe Nagol counts this as evidence in favour of it's disruption of his immersion.</blockquote>

Verification