April 23rd, 2009


[s7s] A Question: Player Narration of Success and Failure (longish)

Occasionally when doing game design, I come up with a mechanic or a take on a mechanic that seems really obvious/intuitive/easy/fun for me, but that some readers just don't get, some readers get (and decide whether or not they like it), and some readers really really groove on.

Collapse )

Back to the point at hand: Is player narration of both success and failure one of those bits of "mad rpg theory" that you -- personally -- do not get, get and dislike, get and like, or get and groove on?

Inquiring mind (er, me) would like to know!

[books] Why Did I Not Know About This?

Whilst puttering around B&N the other day, I found a book I didn't know existed:

The Reavers, by George MacDonald Fraser

It looks to be like The Pyrates (which I loved), only with highwaymen!

Most awesome!

Just started reading, and I've already found a great quote:

[after several pages of snarky and anachronistic historical detail]

"None of which really matters to our story, except as a brief erratic survey of the distant background, and to set our narrative tone, which may have already have convinced the reader that he has not stumbled on a supplement to the Cambridge Modern History. Far from it: this is just a tale, and if it takes occasional liberties of style and speech, who cares? If Shakepeare can have clocks striking in Caesar's Rome, and give his plebs the street-smart backchat of Tudor London, a poor romantick can surely have similar licence. If we seem to treat history lightly in this regard, that is not to say we are false to it; mad fancy may go hand in hand with sober fact so long as the two remain distinct."

I love it.