Author: Chad Underkoffler (---.comcast.net)
Date: 04-22-2004 13:59
QUOTE:
--------
The player says, "I want to climb the tree." The GM says, "Okay, that's Difficulty 6. Roll a ten-sided die. If you get a 6 or above, you successfully climb it. If not, it's too difficult and you keep sliding down, no matter how hard you try." So we can compare this to Nobilis, where the GM, following set guidelines, determines a difficulty, saying that a specific task needs Aspect 2 or Aspect 7 or whatever. Then, instead of rolling dice to attempt it, the player simply decides if it's worth the cost in Miracle Points. Is more effectiveness now worth less potential effectiveness later?
[snip]
[Borgstrom's] emphasis on player choice and balancing resources is the more unusual cattle prod. We've heard of such things, but aren't as familiar with them. Basically, my whole point here is that products of bricolage (such as rituals and roleplaying) may not be immediately understandable to those unfamiliar with certain components or combinations, and require analysis on an individual level before they can be fully digested and utilized.
--------
Bravo, and thank you.
You see, I've been having issues understanding why other folks aren't getting or enjoying the conflict resolution system I created for DEAD INSIDE.
Basically, there's no separate SAN/HP/Wound Track in DI. Instead, all a character's Qualities serve as their "hit points." When a character takes Damage or Failure Ranks in a conflict -- be it physical combat or mental challenges or social skullduggery or business wheeling 'n dealing -- they select where to apply the lost Ranks across all of their Qualities. This allows them to play out a conflict with strategy ("will my Athletics come in handy later in this fight, or should I decrease it now?" or "I don't want to lower Karate, I'll lower Accounting instead"), by providing them the choice of how they are damaged, rather than it simply being dealt to them.
"Is it worth the cost?" is a prime consideration in using that system. It also allows the player to determine -- to an extent -- how they are injured. It's more like cowboy's & indians -- if someone says "you're shot!" (and you accept that yes, you were shot, of course), you get to play out how the shot affected you, ranging from "just winged me!" to "Tarnation! You broke mah hand!" to any number of colorful and noisy death scenes.
This is, as everyone but me would probably expect, a bit different from the usual RPG mechanic, and therefore many people haven't really taken to it. Your article today helped me come up with the descriptive text above, which may go farther in explaining the system than the current text. (What does everyone think?)
In any case, thanks! This was quite thought-provoking!
|
|
