Post originally by 6inTruder at 2004-06-07 00:54:33
Converted from Phorums BB System
If you want juice, and I give you oranges, I'd also ask you not to complain that you can't make apple-juice.
Or, in other words, Spiritual Attributes were designed to focus (hyper-focus even) the game on what the players want. Not what the GM thinks they want. Not on what the GM wants them to do.
Cast
------
"GM Plot" - Apples
Spiritual Attributes - Oranges
No acctual juice was made in the course of this posting.
Post originally by Balbinus at 2004-06-07 01:24:20
Converted from Phorums BB System
Which rather dodges the reviewer's point that focussing on spiritual attributes is not practical where different characters have different SAs. I didn't think the reviewer missed this to be honest.
Post originally by 6inTruder at 2004-06-07 01:40:30
Converted from Phorums BB System
"The game I was in was quite small, only two players, but in roughly the half the sessions that were played neither character was able to activate a spiritual attribute because to do so would basically mean highjacking the scene and possibly the game from the GM."
That's the bit of text his argument hinged around. My point was that he's critiquing it for not doing something it was never designed to do.
Post originally by Kobold Lord at 2004-06-07 02:09:50
Converted from Phorums BB System
The GM's plot is a necessary evil. There is no way a normal person is going to be able to extemporaneously produce a detailed campaign on demand during the playing session itself. Good players recognize the special challenge the GM undergoes, and make an effort to play their characters in such a way to minimize the GM's burden, even if this makes the game slightly less fun for the player in question.
The reviewer has pointed out that the spiritual attributes punish players for responding to the GM's humanity and encourages those players to act in such a way that continuity will be destroyed. You basically get the Knights of the Dinner Table.
Yeah, the GM should give the players the game they want. But the players do not have a hive mind, and the GM does not have ESP. The criticism does not seem entirely unreasonable to me.
Post originally by Thanaeon at 2004-06-07 02:23:00
Converted from Phorums BB System
The thing is, all that is required for SA's to work is that the players create characters whose goals (or at least main goals) are compatible or even shared. And this is quite plainly written in the book, as well.
Yes - if the players just show up with characters, you can bet there'll be problems. However, having run a few sessions of the game, I can say that as long as you go through the trouble of creating the characters to have goals that complement each other, things should work out just fine. It's certainly true that TRoS is harder to run an episodic campaign with. But a more free-flowing one where sessions logically proceed from each other should be no harder than under any other system.
Basically, what it comes down to is that the GM and the players must agree on some central theme that all the characters must be interested in. Other than that, they can have their own individual goals as well that they can pursue on the side.
Post originally by Wood at 2004-06-07 04:39:23
Converted from Phorums BB System
I dunno. I think it's perfectly possible with two players to run the whole thing on the hoof. It's the difference between a game which is plot-focussed (eg. Call of Cthulhu) and character-focussed, where the characters define the story, and around whom the story revolves.
My favourite campaign ever is also the easiest to run - it's a game where the motivations of the characters govern what happens next to them. It's great. It's more of a collaboration than anything else, as we share ideas about the plot. The GM doesn't really need to do more than come up with a couple of events and think about what the NPCs are thinking. Of course you need a bit of preparation at the start, but there's no rule that says you need to have a tightly-constructed plot in order to tell a class act of a story.
Post originally by Balbinus at 2004-06-07 05:03:33
Converted from Phorums BB System
Fair point 6intruder, although I think the point about multiple players having diverging SAs is still a real problem.
Not an insoluble problem as others have already pointed out, but a problem for all that. TroS desperately needs good GM advice in this area and I hope the next edition will have it.
Post originally by Chris at 2004-06-07 05:05:31
Converted from Phorums BB System
I think the main issue with SA's is that they can seriously limit your characters goals. You can create a group of characters all focused on the same SA's. We are loyal to king X, we hate Enemy B and we are all devote religious zealots. So while you are working for king X to defeat enemy B to help religion Y you will be able to use your SA's to develop your character and level up. It's all fine and good.
But anytime you aren't on a mission relating to XYZ you gain no experience and you are severly neutered. So what's the point of doing anything else accept XYZ. Sure it may be an interesting story so you play for the sake of the story which is fine. But there is no in game insentive to do anything risk if there are no rewards for it.
Linear Mode
