thread: 2011-05-11 : The Un-frickin-welcome
On 2011-05-10, David Berg wrote:
I hope I can parse that, but man, it's hard. Usually I don't really want to kill characters or let 'em off unless it's good for the game. And I usually try to set my "good for the game" standards based on the game itself.
This is why it was so hard for me to attach the word "unwelcome" to anything that happened in my AW game. Matt and Mendez, when I asked them, "Were there any outcomes in the game that you found really unwelcome?" also said no.
Anyway, here's my best shot:
If the designer's insights dictate that characters be threatened or protected at certain times (always, never, when it's dramatic, whatever), then the designer should evaluate (guess, then playtest?) whether that accords with the players' natural best interests (in the context of the game as designed thus far). If not, then rules are required for those times to provide those threats and/or protections.
"My insights pertain to characters who hit rock bottom and are then shat on further. In this game, with the people I expect to play it, in the circumstances I expect them to play it in, I expect they'll want to let their characters off the hook when they hit rock bottom. So, I will make rules that don't let them do that."
