On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Karen J. Cravens wrote:

> I tend to look at rules (in the ideal case) as serving a different 
> purpose:  codifying the gameworld so that players (including the GM) 
> are all on the same page.  That is, making sure we're all imagining 
> things the same way,

This is where I was having trouble running Fudge very freeform.

As a specific example, when I wasn't paying attention to the numbers, 
I had a lot of trouble keeping in mind how _light_ Stalker's armor 
was... it could be penetrated by an M-16, and I kept imagining it as 
being much more robust than that.  I found it easier to say, "What's 
your armor value" than to say, "Can your armor be penetrated by... an 
M-16? A 9mm pistol?  How about a frag grenade?"  And then I'm dealing 
with the _player's_ idea of how powerful these things are vs my idea 
of it... and then the player wonders something that punches through a 
brick wall can't penetrate his armor, when he really thinks it should.

I found it much, much easier to just assign numbers to these things 
and use the numbers.  I can just use the numbers and move on, knowing 
that we all agree how these things work because we wrote them down in 
a concrete way.

-- 
Carl D Cravens (raven@phoenyx.net)                Gamers List Owner
     [                     Trim Your Quotes!                     ]
Where am I . . . and why am I in this handbasket?
----------------------------------------------------------------
GAMERS Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gamers/