On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 01:26:28PM -0700, Greg Vose said:
> You obviously missed the point, Wishkah.
Doesn't look like it, because what you write below reiterates what I'd taken
the original point to be. I'll try to clarify my case a little.
> The point is that the payoff of the story was saving the galaxy. The
> reality of what happened was that a dice mechanic killed the group before
> they even got there.
The galaxy's a dangerous place. If interstellar travel were a walk in the
park, if people didn't die doing it, the setting would be different.
Personally, I like the idea that a Cyberpunk character can be killed by a
mugger on the streets of Night City - pointless, meaningless deaths DO
happen, and it's this element of danger that makes the setting real and
provides atmosphere. How are you supposed to feel that you live in a
dangerous place if there's no actual danger to you?
Another point is the aforementioned Astrogation roll. If the game mechanic
for it isn't going to be used, then the player pretty much wasted his
character points taking the skill. He could have spent those points on a
combat-related skill, since it looks like that's the skills most likely to
actually require being used - after all, the GM isn't going to let the fact
that nobody can actually fly a ship get in the way of the story, he'll find
a way that things work out. If there's no chance of messing up Astrogation
being fatal, then it's not a very important skill, and personally I'd want
combat skills so I can be a hero, not the guy who sits in the background
because he doesn't have any useful skills.
> If I, as an SF&F author, wrote a novel where the payoff was that hero was
> going to save the galaxy (survive or not), killing off the hero in the
> sixth chapter while he was traveling to his destination because he flew
> into an asteroid would make my editor very unhappy and if it managed to get
> past my editor, my readers (who are smart people) would pick the book up
> and chuck it across the room.
Well, people do like formulaic stories, there's no surprise there.
> The exact same thing holds true here. The GM screwed up. It is all about
> suspense. It is all about the "good death." It is all about the story. It
> is not in the slightest bit about the die rolls.
Again, I disagree. When I play an RPG, I WANT the chance to mess up. I
expect my GM to be able to handle that and incorporate it. I do NOT want to
be railroaded through the GM's story. Unless it's been agreed beforehand
that that's what the game will involve.
At the moment I'm playing in a D&D game that has a great background and
setting, but our GM just won't kill anybody off. So although it's fun to
see what happens next and enjoy the story, there's no sense of challenge or
achievement when we succeed at something. Which means it's basically like
reading a particularly immersive book. Personally, I like something more
dynamic than that.
> It is the manner in which it happened and the slavish devotion to dice
> rolls expressed by what is a truly incompetent GM.
Like I said, each to his own, but I think it's a tad arrogant to write a GM
off as incompetent because his style doesn't appeal to you.
Wishkah
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
| This is pointless and will only promote in-jokes and cliquism.|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-