Subject:
|
Re: .castle's problem
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.gaming.starship
|
Date:
|
Sun, 7 Sep 2003 02:17:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2736 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.gaming.starship, Andrew Engstrom wrote:
> .castle has a problem, that goes without being said.
Hmmmm. Careful, .castle dudes read outside .castle too. AND even non
.gaming.starship dudes have a right to their own special blend of the Obsession
:-)
> I've been following a large discussion over the past weeks (not post-by-
> post, but I have been reading) and I gather that there is an uproar over
> Castle World (CW). CW was meant to be similar to Starship, in that MOCs
> tell stories, but I don't think it ever really got off the ground. Now
> the whole community is "bickering and arguing about who killed who..."
> Ahem.
>
> So do we, as gaming veterans, offer advice? Do we make our own game and
> see how .castlers respond?
Mmmmmm. Again, Careful. I don't know that we are all that veteran. My sense
is that they have probably played more games than we, by the sort of distance
that makes the hop to Mars look small. To offer advice, we'd need to be very
well versed in what actually was the underlying issue (which would mean reading
everything, post by post, and probably for quite a while). And for a new
multigame universe to attract particpants from Castle World, you'd need to
demonstrate that the new approach is different in ways that would defend it
against whatever is afflicting Castle World now (which would require the same
research).
I am always a fan of simplicity unless there is a really (really really really)
good reason for complexity.
Just set up an inidividual castle game, and let players join in. No multi game
links etc etc, just enjoy the game. And/or, find a functioning game within
Castle World and join in to that, and ignore the wider game.
> And I sure as heck don't want to be swept up in a heated debate about
> website access or administration council members, etc.
I think that this is one of our strengths. No high expectations about websites
(we update them when volunteers feel like it, and if someone feels that they can
assist by taking on parts of it themselves, fine), and no councils, just one
almighty all-powerful galactic mediator. The clear distinction between what is
GM and what is SM also simplifies proceedings. So what we get is an exceedingly
low maintenace way to essentially leverage elements of one space oriented rpg
into another, into another, and the joy of being able to participate in a wider
array of rpgs at varying levels of involvment, with much deeper backstories.
Wins all round.
We have taken significant risks in concentrating so much power in the hands of a
GM from whose decisions there is almost no appeal, and in leaving the fate of
our vessels so completely in the hands of the SMs of the sectors to which our
vessels voyage, risks I am not sure the Castle Worlders would easily embrace.
For us it has worked fine, mainly because we chose our GM well, and because the
fact that poor SM performance results quickly in no players drives SMs to think
and SM well.
But even with that, I would not rush to assume it works for other folks. If
they're interested, let them come look and ask questions, and let them work out
whether it is for them. Part of my experience too is that there are those who
actually enjoy the process of arguing over the ashes of something - trying to
help them out only gives them new blood to stir into the black cauldron.
> Please post comments and suggestions. I have lots of ideas about how
> the game would work, but if there's interest, I'll post them at a later
> time.
I'd just make your own game, like the original Sector 62 and Spraw, and if there
is interest in developing a consistent backdrop for future games, worry about
that then...
Richard
Still baldly going...
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: .castle's problem
|
| (...) Late night post == Incoherent (...) Again, I couldn't make the words represent my real thoughts. A quick two-mile jog and now I'm sorted out again. What I wanted to convey was that I don't see why there should be a problem. We discussed this, (...) (21 years ago, 7-Sep-03, to lugnet.gaming.starship)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | .castle's problem
|
| Hey all This is probably the wrong place to post, but I thought I'd get some opinions from people who know what they're talking about. .castle has a problem, that goes without being said. I've been following a large discussion over the past weeks (...) (21 years ago, 7-Sep-03, to lugnet.gaming.starship)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
