Subj : Re: New Game...? To : All From : yl112@cornell.edu Date : Sat Jul 08 2000 03:19 am From: yl112@cornell.edu Subject: Re: New Game...? On 8 Jul 2000, HAROLD GROOT wrote: Just my two cents: > You mentioned that the possessions taken from the characters would be > quickly found, right next door. I'm afraid that if anything this simply > compounds the distaste I have for such adventures. Ditto here. > The big problem I have is that it makes no sense. There are many > possible things that could and should be done with possessions. If it > is a society based on law they would possibly be locked up SECURELY > somewhere pending the outcome of a trial. If it is a society based on > force rather than law the people responsible for the jailings may have > helped themselves to the powerful items and spread the rest among the > guards. But it won't just be sitting there, ready to rearm any people > doing a prison break. People who run prisons deal with these problems > on a daily basis. Heck, the one fun thing I can think of to do with a "prison" scenario would be to run the characters through the legal trial--give them some allies, a sympathetic lawyer, and determined prosecutors on the other side. Set 'em up maybe so they've been framed for something and don't know what. Then the emphasis would be on the legal system--which need not be Roman/Justinian/Western-based--and politicking your way out to a second chance. I could have fun with something like that, playing a talkative-and-charismatic or taciturn-and-awkward character. The "jail" setup would just be for mood-setting. > There is another reason why I feel that your proposed "quick re-equip" > is bad. It trivializes what should be a dramatic, traumatic (and RARE!) > event. It is basically a violation of the integrity of the character > through DM violence. While I do not wish to be accused of trivializing > the word (and my apologies to anyone who feels I am doing this), > considering the nature of characters that are only figments of the > imagination this has many similarities to the act of rape. Since they > do not possess physical bodies, what gets attacked and violated is the > "what they are, what they can do". It gets done in the face of > overwhelming force (DM authority, pretty much the same as being at > gunpoint in the real world). There is no possible defense, no way for > the characters to protect themselves. Very traumatic. If the DM > response is simply to say "OK, after a few minutes they get their stuff > back and can go about their business" it trivializes things. It has > parallels to a real world rape victim being told "It's OK, after a few > minutes of rape we'll give you back your clothes and let you go on with > your life." Depends on the character and the player, I suppose, but I agree that a jailbreak ought to have some plot behind it. I ran a live scenario--a three-shot that never quite got finished, but that the players enjoyed (we had to adjourn for summer break)--in which the players woke up after having been waylaid. They were a prince and his entourage, returning to the capital after internal exile due to the death of the king. They had their possessions, but their memories were shaky. (This is based on Simon R. Green's _Blood and Honor_, for the curious.) While I would hesitate to run something like this as a campaign, as a short-shot scenario it made sense: the players picked a character, I gave them an idea of their roles and relationships, and fed them memories on which they were free to elaborate. When the players reached the capital, they discovered that the king's will (stating which of the three princes was the heir, presumably) had been stolen, and the king had died in mysterious circumstances suggesting murder. As time passed and the players set about re-establishing their contacts among the nobility, they discovered that their memories didn't match up with who they felt they were. This was *meant* to be slightly traumatizing: the prince discovered that he'd been known for some sadistic acts, the swordsman (and "drinking buddy") discovered he'd been a womanizer, etc. It was also crucial to the plot: the point was that they were innocent travellers who had been magically transformed and set up as dupes--basically decent people who had to confront their alter personae. In fact, along with the murder mystery (which didn't get resolved), this *was* the main conflict. I don't know whether you'd consider something like this much of an improvement, but it *was* fun. > If you're going to make it central to the plot, make it central. If > you're not going to make it central to the plot, don't do it at all. > Have it happen to some NPCs and let the characters find out about it, > maybe. This can give good-aligned PCs all the motivation they need > without violating their characters needlessly. But don't trivialize > it. Agreed. > In PBEM games there is another consideration - time. As has been > recently demonstrated here by several DMs, it's tough to keep a game > going for long periods of time. The "strip the players" beginning tends > to take longer to get going than many other kinds. BATH OF RETURN > serves as an example. It took months to just begin to get the players > oriented and equipped. These were months that were never used to solve > their problem - but at least in that story, the stripping of the > characters was indeed vital to the storyline. In yours it is not - or > you wouldn't make it so easy for them to get their stuff back. My mistake in the Black Wall was starting everyone off with "prologues" to acclimate them to the admittedly-nonstandard world. The sensible approach would've been to dump them in the situation and let them pick up world background as the action happened. 'Course, I haven't been gaming that long, so I'm still learning. :-) YHL -- |Fidonet: yl112@cornell.edu |Internet: scott@conchbbs.com | | Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own. --- # Origin: (1:106/357.99) * Origin: ConchGate (1:106/357.0) .