thread: 2008-01-07 : Another year's worth
On 2008-02-11, Joshua wrote:
I was thinking more about this too and wondering if my comment wasn't unfair. It strikes me that Shock *can* support as-iffy protagonism as in Sorcerer, but the game isn't written in that fashion and my inclination, as a player, is always to rely on that PRO- prefix as a given thing. Much as in most movies, one doesn't have to grapple with the protagonism of the lead character, it's just there. That's not a bad thing at all, and I think (in application) it's one of Shock's strengths.
Ron, playing iffy Protags is one of the "Hacks" on page 66. Just like giving yourself a negative Story Goal. They're counterintuitive but robustly supported.
The point is the issue, not the person, ultimately.
Yep. And that's why it only matters if the Protag is clashing *about* the Issue, not which side zie's on or if zie's successful in that clash. Sometimes, it turns out your guy was just there to get crushed by history.
You do, however, get a say in what happens
Who gets to decide if your character's a good person? Who gets to decide if your character's sympathetic? In Shock:, you do, and the game's system is there to back you up. In Sorcerer, you don't, the game's system is there to do it, and you have to deal with that.
You should talk to Dave Cleaver about his Christian missionary on Europa. He made that guy as a villain and realized all too late that he was actually kind of a good guy doing good things. You don't get to decide, but you get a vote.
