On 2006-01-31, ffilz wrote:
|
I'm a strongly visual person, so I can envision getting into these sorts of issues with more shared responsibility. I think it's important that visual cues support the rest of the system. They're great with a detailed combat system. But a detailed map may fall flat if exact positioning and distances are not important (or even counter productive). And as long as the exact positioning is not important, my comfort level shouldn't be compromised. Am I understanding this situation right though that Emily was giving a purely verbal description (from some imagined vision) and Meguey was trying to convert that verbal description to a visual map? I can see how that in general could lead to some pretty nasty collisions. I guess another issue is how to negotiate when expectations of the SIS are not in conjunction. If one player is holding dear to one vision based on their external knowledge, and another player is holding dear to a different vision because of cool factor or something, how do you resolve it? How can system better help resolve such situations? Obviously one possibility is that the players agree that historical accuracy is important, and defer to the knowledgeable player when a dispute arises. Another possibility is that the scene owner's vision is most important, and the knowledgeable player can raise an objection, but should back down if the scene owner insists on their vision. Of course in a game like Universalis, there is explicit mechanics to help this situation. Frank |
Some maybe useful links: Complete Index of Entries Search for a Post or Comment Search the Forge Forums |