jmbay.TakeThisOut@Stanford.EDU (Joseph Michael Bay) writes:
> Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au> writes:
> >In a roleplaying game, this doesn't often work: you can't expect
> >the players of high-power characters to be satisfied with the kind
> >of dramatic devices constantly employed by fiction writers to keep
> >those characters in check; but without that, the low-powered
> >characters will be outclassed all the time.
>
> An interesting exercise might be trying to work out point values
> for plot devicey sorts of things.
No need: we already have plenty of them. Dependents and Enemies,
Unluckiness and Cursed, Destiny and Secret, Duty and Sense of Duty --
all of these can be applied during the plot by GM fiat, all of them
have detailed point cost discussions. And that's before we even touch
on the dozens of problems that allow resistance with a self-control
roll.
If the GM wants to, she can require a pile of these traits on any
powerful character. My point is, beyond a certain level the player is
no longer in control of the powerful character they wanted to play,
but is instead an observer as the plot devices puppet their character
around.
It's for the GM and players to negotiate where that threshold is, but
my advice is: don't underestimate the arbitrary fiat applied in
fiction which features powerful characters mingling with
mundanes. It's often entertaining for an observer of that story, but
much less so if you want any illusion of free will for your character
in that story.
Unless all the characters are roughly equal in power, the game will
quickly get unbalanced -- either because the powerful characters
overwhelm the story, or because the GM overwhelms those characters
with arbitrary problems to keep their power in check.
--
\ "One of the most important things you learn from the internet |
`\ is that there is no 'them' out there. It's just an awful lot of |
_o__) 'us'." -- Douglas Adams |
Ben Finney
>> Stay informed about: The 4400