That's part of the process we're in now--turning it more into what the world is, rather than what it isn't, making it more about the myth than the philosophy. Version 0.2 just tries to get the ideas down; in 0.3, we're focusing on presenting them well, and following them through in the mechanics. I think you're right, as it is, it
is preachy. One of our top priorities right now is to tone that down.
Thanks for the suggestion about the Maya calendar--we'll keep that in consideration.
We didn't elaborate on weapons or equipment because they don't really play that much of a role; there will be more in 0.3, but it still won't be much. You make a tool, use it, and usually abandon it right there. We'll be elaborating more on how that works and the crunchy bits involved, but a chapter on equipment just wouldn't make sense in a world where possessions are ad-hoc and disposable like that.
I suppose you could run the game about picking berries like you said, but removing physical combat really just changes the kinds of conflicts that appear most often. In our playtest, one scenario we ran involved a draught, and the characters needed to discover why the water spirits were so alienated, and then put it right. Another one involved a tribe that dug up some old nuclear warheads.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Wil
To myself, and a lot of other people, the collapse described in the game is going to really push the limits of credibility.
|
That's funny, because that's how every real-world civilization has collapsed. It never happens the way you hear about in most post-apocalyptic fiction. We're trying to make a realistic post-apocalyptic scenario, which is what makes it so important to get across the etic perspective, how a sustainable culture thinks of itself. Doing that without getting preachy, that's the challenge we're really focusing on now.