|
|
|
Apprentice
 
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Friday, July 18, 2008 9:56 AM
Posts: 19,
Visits: 625
|
|
Daisy (8/2/2007)
Hence I've no problem with Fidelia being Russian-influenced (whether Matt said so in a forum somewhere before event 1 or not) equally, I wouldn't mind if the players as a whole had shaped the culture in another direction. To take this a step further, should there be anything stopping any players from taking the Fidelian (or any other) culture in a different direction? Just because a number of players to date have decided to play Fidelia with a "pseudo-Russian" influence surely should not mean that another group/individual could come along with their own take on the culturual background and approach Fidelia in a different way. This point extends to all cultures and is not Fidelian specific, this is just the example that has been discussed to date. Personally when I first read the Fidelian almanac info I read it as being something more akin to Oliver Cromwell's Puritan republic, and I got more of a tribal native-american thing than mongolian yak herders for the hinterland dwellers. A perfect example, surely, of different people reading the same thing and interpreting it in different ways. In many respects I think that the choice that PD made when setting up the backgrounds will inherently lead to differences in what a culture is supposed to be like. Hence the reason for limited briefs (even the cultural briefs are not the bee all and end all) and for making the Old World countries so massive (which gives loads of scope for variation). I feel that if PD had wanted to, they could have been much clearer and more definite in what the cultures were like, but they deliberately didn't do this to encourage differences within the cultures because differences= potential conflict = more RP fun...(?) Si
_________________________________________ Everyone loves Hypnotoad!
|
|
|
|
|
Heroic Knight
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:00 PM
Posts: 156,
Visits: 2,755
|
|
Damn. Now I want to play a borogrove... 
--------------------------------
Varas II - This time it's personal
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 5:25 PM
Posts: 1,482,
Visits: 2,105
|
|
Daisy (8/2/2007)
Excellent point theoxfordgirl.
I strongly feel that the culture should, like other things, be player led to a reasonable extent. If Bob's group all turn up in green and purple then that proves that green-and-purple Borogroves are NOT in fact very rare, and that Pogonian Borogroves are NOT almost all blue-and-orange, no matter what the briefing sheets say (or at least the ones in the New World aren't). It would be rather counter-productive for the culture-writing team to leap up and down saying "but you're supposed to be rare" once this has happened, surely? So roll with it instead, and let the player-base as a whole shape the culture...
I have to say I disagree with what I think is implied, albeit unintentionally, by your post.
Supposing our briefing material says that the Pogonians absolutely hate Bicycle worshippers because their name begins with "B". But the 17 Pogonian players in play all decide to be Bicycle worshippers for perfectly valid IC reasons. Should we tell those people "no, you're doing it wrong?". I don't think so, I think so long as those players are aware of the fact that their choice is IC unusual then it's perfectly valid.
But if we allow the player-base to "shape the culture" does that mean we should change the briefing sheet to say that all Pogonians are Bicycle worshippers? I don't think so. Assuming that those Pogonians have read their briefing sheets (and I prefer to assume that all players are good players!), then they presumably chose to be Bicycle worshippers partly because they knew it would cause fun and fireworks with other Pogonians. Changing the briefing sheet, "shaping the culture", actively robs them of their choice.
Provided you hit minimum standards (don't drop OOC and avoid inappropriate references) then I think PD has no part at all in telling you what or how to roleplay. I've no interest in marking player's roleplaying, I never have had. I think it's an ugly idea. How players react to you in play should surely be dependent on your characterisation and their characterisation which is informed by the setting but not dictated by it. What PD controls and what players should expect us to control is the reaction of the NPCs in the world. If our Pogonians write home asking their government for money to build a cathedral to the Bicycle they should expect a very unpleasant response in my opinion. I think it would be very wrong of us to say "lets drop that bit, because players aren't playing it".
In Romeo and Juliet, some geezer falls for some bird despite (and because of) the fact that their families hate each other. And much hilarity ensues. I'm not aware that at the time of it's performance the audience left the theatre in droves outraged at the fact that the characters of R+J blatantly violated the established setting about the Montagues and the Capulets which had been established but moments earlier. But equally the play would have worked less well if on learning of their secret love everyone around them suddenly decided there had never really been a fight in the first place... That I think would have "surprised" audiences.
There's always a justification for any 'inconsistency', and in my humble opinion, the inconsistencies, once played, are not 'wrong', they are established as real in the game world and outwith the writers' control. Hence I've no problem with Fidelia being Russian-influenced (whether Matt said so in a forum somewhere before event 1 or not) equally, I wouldn't mind if the players as a whole had shaped the culture in another direction. It's fictional so doesn't have to be Russia just 'cause the captial sounds a bit Russian - the live roleplay quickly becomes far realer and more memorable than any briefing sheet, and IMHO should supercede the writers' intent.
I remember early on a long discussion about how PD had created the conflict between the Kamakurans and the Malathians using the setting so it wasn't really player-led. Regardless of the fact that we had done nothing of the sort (facts? Who needs em!), I think any attempt to create conflict through setting material is always a bit doomed. What is played, what actually happens in the game. Those things are important. The briefing material just sets the scene.
Players control their characters (and in PD everything their character controls). That's their part of the game. What you pick is up to you. Surely that is the whole beauty of roleplaying over any other related form of entertainment. In Maelstrom, PD, controls the world. You can make IC efforts to change the world, but you shouldn't be able to make OOC decisions to change it, in my opinion.
History is an important source for LRP. Along with other works of fiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Champion
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 5:25 PM
Posts: 495,
Visits: 5,924
|
|
TheThomas (8/2/2007)
Disadvantages: it would make it easier for people to show sheets to others; or they could create a character, read the sheets, then create a different character instead and so on. Do secondaries get briefing sheets at present?
The first point, agreed, that would potentially be the case. (Though frankly, if someone's planning to break FOIP in that way, is there that much difference between ten minutes' work typing up and thirty seconds' work copy-pasting? Genuine question - I don't know how much the paper nature of briefing sheets is currently a deterrent.)
As for creating multiple characters - that's why I suggested that the information should become available online upon booking one's first event with the character, rather than merely creating the character. I do see the potential for abuse but presumably it's non-trivial to change bookings about in order to see all the info, and would indeed be obvious to PD if someone were abusing the system in that way?
As I understand it, secondaries currently do get briefing material, but only if you've booked the event as your secondary?
--
PD: Then: Some dead Wemic, some dead Puritan, Peggy Novak. Now: Samael den Shemhazai of the Sephirot.
White City: Then: Cpt. Ambriel Chermes, Broken Guard. Now: Sir Cordelia of the Shining Order.
RL: Helen W, RPGSoc.
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 5:25 PM
Posts: 1,482,
Visits: 2,105
|
|
Brand (8/2/2007)
I feel that if PD had wanted to, they could have been much clearer and moredefinite in whatthe cultures werelike, but they deliberately didn'tdo this to encourage differences within the cultures because differences= potential conflict = more RP fun...(?)
The choice was deliberate, but for once that wasn't the reason. Well not my reason anyway. My reasoning was that I wanted to leave room for player interpretation and creativity. We couldn't have detailed every last element of a culture, but even if we could it I think we'd have simply driven player creativity out of the game. At some level you have to invite players round the table and encourage them to bring their own imagination to the character creation process. Otherwise you end up with "I'm a level 9 barbarian with a 17 strength".
Occasionally we get asked very specific questions about history and culture and we try to avoid answering for this very reason. If we say that Pogonians eat eggs for breakfast then we rule out the brilliant characterisation that Daisy and the Oxford Girl have just thought up all based around eating toast for breakfast....
Hence we gave broad over-views, a bit more detailed information in the extended briefing sheets and left the rest for players to make up. Then we said that the countries were "huge-normous" so that players could make loads of shit up and it didn't matter that it didn't agree with what the next group made up because those groups were clearly from different bits of the country.
History is an important source for LRP. Along with other works of fiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Champion
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 7:54 PM
Posts: 295,
Visits: 890
|
|
Fatelf (8/2/2007)
Before the first event Troll, Wookie, Fatgoth & Myself took a fairly large risk in asking if we could play the dis possesed nobles of Mill'en. I imagine that this was not strcitly something which was envisaged as a player group when the system was designed. However it is testament to the system that they let us run with it even turning round and saying "yeah sure, go for it. Does one of you want to be the Dauphin because that would be pretty cool!".
And then ran off and let me deal with all the crap :p
But seriously I like to see characters based on the information we have in cultures but they are vast and this allows for discrepancies. Just looking at Flambard the Hartnells and Cardini's are 2 different groups both playing Flambard, both with a distinct upper and lower city feel but each group has quite a different historical feel (one rennaisance England the other more Italian City States) but both work and work well.
The New Fidelian group added a dimension to the game again, yet again to Cultural Brief, but different to the white lions (who are great Fidelians as well)
I always find it hard when Mill'en comes up as I am playing one. See i see it is to the cultural brief. I think Frieboden without Mill'en and vise versa would be a much more boring game. The Revolution is current people on both sides lost people in their memory and hence Mill'en are part of the cultural brief as much as Freiboden are as Royalists are mentioned. There are things i think we are not covering in the cultural brief and i would like to see in Mill'en to show more of it but then a new group doing that aspect of the culture would be great (and unfortunatley it is in the briefing sheets but the skills you get as cultural skills do not add to this particular feel as well). But i have heard it referred to as an exception which we are as well as we are not loyal to the current government of our country. But this Schism is a major part of the Freiboden background.
I do think the fact that some info you do not get until you book but it is a hard balance to get enough info to players without every player knowing all the secrets of a culture. I personally think PD do a very good job on it especially when they will answer questions if you ask.
Tom J
PD: Comte Delano
Forum at http://millen.freeforums.org/index.php (old forum www.mill-en.org)
wiki at http://millen.wetpaint.com/
webpage at http://amoss.co.uk/millen.php
SG: Dr Kibble,
EOS: Alfgeir Bergson, Raggard Elder
|
|
|
|
|
Champion
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Sunday, December 28, 2008 9:16 PM
Posts: 331,
Visits: 2,302
|
|
I've always found PD willing to discuss character concepts with people over email, that way you can avoid bumping into things in the background before you've read it. They can also point out parts of the background that may not have entered play yet, the Merchant followers of Fidelia for example. As long as you keep it as a summary, you should be able to get a response in time to edit your background. I've also found that if your character has just died you can on occasion have a quick chat about that sort of thing in GOD as long as it isn't Friday night  .
Hmmm can someone from PD tell me if I'm talking shash or not here?
A voice was heard to say, “Who dares disturb the crypt of the Immortal Space Bitches?”
“I am Grimm Shado,” said Grimm Shado, triple wand claws extending. “And I am here to take it to the limit.”
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 5:25 PM
Posts: 1,482,
Visits: 2,105
|
|
Fatelf (8/2/2007)
Before the first event Troll, Wookie, Fatgoth & Myself took a fairly large risk in asking if we could play the dis possesed nobles of Mill'en.Was it a risk?! I'm not sure what the risk was... Other than being dreadfully disappointed I suppose...
I imagine that this was not strcitly something which was envisaged as a player group when the system was designed. However it is testament to the system that they let us run with it even turning round and saying "yeah sure, go for it. Does one of you want to be the Dauphin because that would be pretty cool!".
I can honestl | | | |