Difference between revisions of "Talk:Nephon Sector One-Shot"
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
You'll have to excuse my enthusiasm, though; I'm a big "less is more" kind of guy, and these rules are aimed right at my 'imagining a perfect world' brain parts. | You'll have to excuse my enthusiasm, though; I'm a big "less is more" kind of guy, and these rules are aimed right at my 'imagining a perfect world' brain parts. | ||
| + | |||
| + | --[[User:67.183.58.127|67.183.58.127]] 13:50, 24 February 2007 (MST)This system was the opposite of less is more. That concept is based on the mathematical idea of elegance, that no matter how complex something looks on the surface it can be reduced to a simple, profound core idea. This system over complicated the vast majority of conflicts by equating all conflicts. The rules are 160 pages to describe one extremely focused kind of encounter. And even in that tiny microcosm it was convoluted, unclear and unweildy in many common situations. Its probably the most overly complex system I have ever experienced; even the seemingly most simple task is clouded in handfuls of dice. There were good story elements but they were entirely unrelated to the system at hand and would have occurred had we been using Hero, White Wolf, Twerps, Palladium or no particular system at all. I understand you like the mechanic, and if you choose to use it thats cool. But this system is most certainly not less is more. This system is the lifeline from Donnie Darko: everything is either this or that. Facts are borderline irrelevant, lets roll some dice and let them determine truth. I am not against playing this; I am, however, against giving it accolades it does not deserve. | ||
Revision as of 15:50, 24 February 2007
--Jason 16:59, 18 February 2007 (MST)Har har, we are patrolling the Hero system, how ironic...
--Matts 17:25, 18 February 2007 (MST)So the deal is, the systems are analogs (in more or less name and rough 2d position only) to the 15 "designated cities" in Japan. One of those cities is Hiroshima. The opportunity for a horrendous pun ensued, and you know me; not only do I insist on shoving wierd systems down peoples' throats, I also relish the opportunity to inflict bad puns on a captive audience.
--BenofZongo 11:24, 24 February 2007 (MST)All heated discussion aside, I thought the one shot was a lot of fun, all the characters were interesting despite being made in ten minutes, and we definitely hit on some of the major advantages and disadvantages of the system. I'm game for trying this some more if that's what Matt wants to do.
--Matts 13:24, 24 February 2007 (MST)I agree, actually. I liked the way the system (and the story, hey!) played out in certain situations, and I think some of the suggestions we had to change it up are valid and would work out well.
You'll have to excuse my enthusiasm, though; I'm a big "less is more" kind of guy, and these rules are aimed right at my 'imagining a perfect world' brain parts.
--67.183.58.127 13:50, 24 February 2007 (MST)This system was the opposite of less is more. That concept is based on the mathematical idea of elegance, that no matter how complex something looks on the surface it can be reduced to a simple, profound core idea. This system over complicated the vast majority of conflicts by equating all conflicts. The rules are 160 pages to describe one extremely focused kind of encounter. And even in that tiny microcosm it was convoluted, unclear and unweildy in many common situations. Its probably the most overly complex system I have ever experienced; even the seemingly most simple task is clouded in handfuls of dice. There were good story elements but they were entirely unrelated to the system at hand and would have occurred had we been using Hero, White Wolf, Twerps, Palladium or no particular system at all. I understand you like the mechanic, and if you choose to use it thats cool. But this system is most certainly not less is more. This system is the lifeline from Donnie Darko: everything is either this or that. Facts are borderline irrelevant, lets roll some dice and let them determine truth. I am not against playing this; I am, however, against giving it accolades it does not deserve.
