| |
In lugnet.castle.org.cw, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.fun.gaming, Mike Rayhawk writes:
> > I like the idea as an experiment; I realize most CW folks probably prefer to
> > have total control of their stories and leave nothing to chance.
I think it was an interesting experiment...I have always enjoyed reading
Richard Parsons brikwars updates, as well as the various space and castle
NELUG brickwars descriptions. I like seeing the pics+models that result
from a colabrative/interactive event.
I am one of the control freaks = )
I have an evolving vision for my webpages and stories...a fairly well
defined plan of events that leaves little room for integration. Generally,
I am more interested in observing and less interested in participating in
the rpg phenomena.
However, I specifically created a couple characters that can "travel" to
other places. I imagine, I could also maintain a small expeditionary force
or garrison that could participate in one of these "experiments someday...lol
> > On the
> > other hand, I don't see how it's that far different in principle from
> > character-crossovers between CW realms: two people work together to develop
> > their story by alternate means, each giving up a certain amount of creative
> > control, ending up with a more dynamic element for their story.
I essentially agree with this view. However, I would like their to be a
distinction between Castleworld + "gaming". Many people aren't into the
whole D+D rpg game structure. I would hate to think that someone would
dismiss participation/sharing in Castleworld evolution because they didn't
want to "play the game" or because the misperceived CW as just another game.
> Actually, there was a lot of discussion about this when the idea of CW was
> still young... Several people WANTED to stage battles based on the number of
> troops they had, storm other people's castles and fortresses, etc. The idea
> is pretty much as you laid out-- heros wouldn't die unless their owners said
> so (otherwise they're knocked out or something), and people would only play
> if they WANTED to. I think that was the only reason discussion stopped on
> the matter, since some people thought they were going to be forced into a
> wargame that they didn't want to play, and preferred just to be showing off
> their world without outside interference. Anyway, I really like the idea :)
>
> DaveE
I prefer to focus my energies towards acquisition of needed elements and
building my "world". Perhaps when my project is farther along I would
participate in such a scenario. I enjoy application of strategy and logic
as much as anyone (believe it or not = )
Logistically, the brikwar idea is not very likely for me currently. I am
THE ONLY castle guy in my area and, according to the lugnet.local
groups...much of my state...lol
Besides, I would hate to see the conversion headaches that result from
matching 1000+ Samurai/Ninja/Ronin vs a more traditional European army, or a
host of dragon riding wizards or 2000+ wolfpack members tha somebody,
somewhere must be sitting on =8^o oh my!
John
(stil catching up on Lugnet posts I missed)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Improv-ed Medieval BrikWars
|
| (...) Actually, there was a lot of discussion about this when the idea of CW was still young... Several people WANTED to stage battles based on the number of troops they had, storm other people's castles and fortresses, etc. The idea is pretty much (...) (24 years ago, 26-Nov-00, to lugnet.gaming, lugnet.castle.org.cw)
|
13 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
