John--
Factions as in political factions? Does it give you enough detail to play
satisfying consequences based on RP factions? My prior assumption would be
that the Ref would have to play the other factions to satisfy PC
expectations that other factions' responses are appropriate in detail to
things they did.
For example, "My faction rents a blimp and paints on it, "'Donald Trump is
a misspelling, it was supposed to say Donald Duck.'" And the system says
what? "X% of people are convinced that birds are running for President?"
"The opposing campaign slaps a cease-and-desist order on you?" "F-16s are
scrambled and shoot down your blimp; A which settles to the ground slowly
and embarrassingly [Helium], B explodes picturesquely, inspiring a viral
YouTube event [Hydrogen]?"
If I were the ref, I'd be thinking along the above lines, and if the
system can do that, I'm obsolete.
(I'd say "I'm obsolete anyway," but one or more Carpenters would smack me
and say, "stop sniveling." And they'd be right, but apparently I'm
oblivious. I'm getting into my White Ford Bronco.)
> On a more positive note I have found the scifi tabletop rpg called Stars
> without Number has a very good system for managing factions.
>
> The essences is you as the GM take a 'turn' at appropriate intervals and
> figure out what each faction is doing to each other and for itself.
>
> The game mechanics give you a framework and a bit of RNG for those that
> feel like they don't want to always just make 'everything' up or are
> willing to let the dice decide the outcome of events between factions.
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 2:56 PM, [Traveller_TNE] <
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Another way of saying that is:
>>
>> "We're all crazy. Let he who is without sin in his glass house cast the
>> first stone."
>>
>> NFL vs. Traveller, I don't think math makes ratios that small.
>>
>>
>> > Chuck, Rupert, et al.--
>> >
>> > Having given this a fair amount of thought over the years (being the
>> > target of some of this "enthusiasm"), my thoughts have included this:
>> >
>> > The population of people who get real value, pleasure, and excitement
>> out
>> > of RPGs (i.e., sitting around for large portions of their lives
>> thinking
>> > about imaginary worlds and what happens there), is only a limited
>> portion
>> > of the whole population, and I think we would all accept, a minority.
>> >
>> > As all characteristics in life are two-edged, this capacity for
>> sustained
>> > fantasy comes with an unnatural aversion to things that oppose our
>> current
>> > "what I want to imagine," as compared to our current "things I want to
>> > imagine."
>> >
>> > We all know that the things "I want to imagine" change over our lives,
>> but
>> > the issue is the INTENSITY of that desire/aversion, as that is
>> necessary
>> > for a person to want to play an RPG to begin with. As opposed to
>> waiting
>> > 364 days for the next Super Bowl. From what I hear, they still play
>> that.
>> >
>> > As I said, I've given this a lot of thought over the years, and this
>> is
>> > one of my thoughts, not all of them. But today, I think it is the most
>> > salient one. YMMV
>> >
>> > God bless us, every one.
>> >
>> >> On 5 Feb 2016 at 8:56, [Traveller_TNE] wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> What I have absolutely never understood about our "hobby" is the
>> level
>> > of fanaticism that seems to appear. I've got all of the editions of
>> > Traveller and I mix and match the pieces that work for me and ignore
>> > the ones that don't. I'd like to think this is a balanced perspective
>> > on a "game" that is meant to be an enjoyable experience for the
>> > participants.
>> >>> I've been around long enough to have seen the flamewars over any
>> number
>> > of different topics, and it's just utterly juvenile behavior to me. I
>> > realize that there are those individuals who have adopted a particular
>> > version of Traveller as a "religion" and in typical fashion are
>> > intolerant of those who don't share their "beliefs." That sort of
>> > behavior is just not acceptable for children, let alone adults. In
>> > short, if a game has become your reality then you have a problem
>> > bordering on outright addiction and you need to get a life and learn
>> to
>> > respect the opinions and perspectives of others without spiraling down
>> > into some petty, childish rant about a non-real situation. Intolerance
>> > and hate are for small-minded people. I'd like to hope that we can all
>> > be better than that.
>> >>> But...
>> >>> Your Mileage May Vary...
>> >>
>> >> It's common behaviour for people when it comes to hobbies. There is
>> only
>> > one correct
>> >> scale for a model railway, and so on.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
> would have been deserved.
>
Factions as in political factions? Does it give you enough detail to play
satisfying consequences based on RP factions? My prior assumption would be
that the Ref would have to play the other factions to satisfy PC
expectations that other factions' responses are appropriate in detail to
things they did.
For example, "My faction rents a blimp and paints on it, "'Donald Trump is
a misspelling, it was supposed to say Donald Duck.'" And the system says
what? "X% of people are convinced that birds are running for President?"
"The opposing campaign slaps a cease-and-desist order on you?" "F-16s are
scrambled and shoot down your blimp; A which settles to the ground slowly
and embarrassingly [Helium], B explodes picturesquely, inspiring a viral
YouTube event [Hydrogen]?"
If I were the ref, I'd be thinking along the above lines, and if the
system can do that, I'm obsolete.
(I'd say "I'm obsolete anyway," but one or more Carpenters would smack me
and say, "stop sniveling." And they'd be right, but apparently I'm
oblivious. I'm getting into my White Ford Bronco.)
> On a more positive note I have found the scifi tabletop rpg called Stars
> without Number has a very good system for managing factions.
>
> The essences is you as the GM take a 'turn' at appropriate intervals and
> figure out what each faction is doing to each other and for itself.
>
> The game mechanics give you a framework and a bit of RNG for those that
> feel like they don't want to always just make 'everything' up or are
> willing to let the dice decide the outcome of events between factions.
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 2:56 PM, [Traveller_TNE] <
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Another way of saying that is:
>>
>> "We're all crazy. Let he who is without sin in his glass house cast the
>> first stone."
>>
>> NFL vs. Traveller, I don't think math makes ratios that small.
>>
>>
>> > Chuck, Rupert, et al.--
>> >
>> > Having given this a fair amount of thought over the years (being the
>> > target of some of this "enthusiasm"), my thoughts have included this:
>> >
>> > The population of people who get real value, pleasure, and excitement
>> out
>> > of RPGs (i.e., sitting around for large portions of their lives
>> thinking
>> > about imaginary worlds and what happens there), is only a limited
>> portion
>> > of the whole population, and I think we would all accept, a minority.
>> >
>> > As all characteristics in life are two-edged, this capacity for
>> sustained
>> > fantasy comes with an unnatural aversion to things that oppose our
>> current
>> > "what I want to imagine," as compared to our current "things I want to
>> > imagine."
>> >
>> > We all know that the things "I want to imagine" change over our lives,
>> but
>> > the issue is the INTENSITY of that desire/aversion, as that is
>> necessary
>> > for a person to want to play an RPG to begin with. As opposed to
>> waiting
>> > 364 days for the next Super Bowl. From what I hear, they still play
>> that.
>> >
>> > As I said, I've given this a lot of thought over the years, and this
>> is
>> > one of my thoughts, not all of them. But today, I think it is the most
>> > salient one. YMMV
>> >
>> > God bless us, every one.
>> >
>> >> On 5 Feb 2016 at 8:56, [Traveller_TNE] wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> What I have absolutely never understood about our "hobby" is the
>> level
>> > of fanaticism that seems to appear. I've got all of the editions of
>> > Traveller and I mix and match the pieces that work for me and ignore
>> > the ones that don't. I'd like to think this is a balanced perspective
>> > on a "game" that is meant to be an enjoyable experience for the
>> > participants.
>> >>> I've been around long enough to have seen the flamewars over any
>> number
>> > of different topics, and it's just utterly juvenile behavior to me. I
>> > realize that there are those individuals who have adopted a particular
>> > version of Traveller as a "religion" and in typical fashion are
>> > intolerant of those who don't share their "beliefs." That sort of
>> > behavior is just not acceptable for children, let alone adults. In
>> > short, if a game has become your reality then you have a problem
>> > bordering on outright addiction and you need to get a life and learn
>> to
>> > respect the opinions and perspectives of others without spiraling down
>> > into some petty, childish rant about a non-real situation. Intolerance
>> > and hate are for small-minded people. I'd like to hope that we can all
>> > be better than that.
>> >>> But...
>> >>> Your Mileage May Vary...
>> >>
>> >> It's common behaviour for people when it comes to hobbies. There is
>> only
>> > one correct
>> >> scale for a model railway, and so on.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
> would have been deserved.
>