thread: 2006-01-05 : I suspect but can't prove...
On 2006-01-06, timfire wrote:
I have 2 actual play experiences that speak to this. One is PTA, where we played it straight-up "pass the buck". Everyone suggested actions and whatnot for everyone else's characters, but the "owner" got to pick what they liked best.
The other was Uni. Now, I only played Uni that one time, and the session had some logistical issues, but what happened was that different people developed different ideas for the direction they thought different characters should go. Since no one had direct ownership, it ended up being a struggle over which direction to take the story. The game "worked" in that we were able to effectively deal with these conflicts, but personally I didn't find it as enjoyable as the PTA game.
My reaction to this is to say that each player *needs* ownership over something, if they want to make a statement. And the thing with characters is that a charcter is more or less the basic unit of a story. One character makes one thematic statement. So it makes sense that one player would own one character.
But I don't know, I need to mull over this. Maybe it's just a play preference thing.
