[War_ooc] Okay, so...

[lee.tarnow at utoronto.ca]

I agree that the point of WAR is to keep the story rumbling along, but  
I think that we need to put some structure in place to at least keep  
it moving along and sustainable enough that this incarnation does not  
end abruptly.

In terms of setting, I'm not terribly interested in doing something  
that's NOT realistic... That being said, I'd like to throw in my 2  
cents in terms of guideline.

I'm fine with doing something historical, but I think that it would a  
require a rule set to buck down the gameplay so that shit doesn't get  
crazy.

Similarly, if we do something sci-fi/futuristic, we'd want to  
implement a rule set that DOES NOT buck down the gameplay so that  
players don't get lost. Ideally, something in Kardashev k = 2 to 3  
land (If we were to do k = 1, we might as well keep the game here on  
Earth in the early 2000s).

Anyway, in summary, I'd be against using a licensed setting. Further,  
any rule sets that get developed should be sufficiently behind the  
scenes so that it doesn't interfere with gameplay, but are still  
hard-enforceable that it keeps gameplay running. One corollary of this  
might be that wiser decisions may come out of players that don't RP,  
and that their societies may progress regardless, but I'm sure that  
this can be ironed out in developing a rule set.

Cheers
-- Lee

Quoting John Penta <john.penta at gmail.com>:

> As I can sense a rabbithole looming...Let's set that argument aside til we
> determine setting? Please?
>
> Some settings lend themselves more naturally to hard rules (crunchiness and
> stats if I'm reading you right, Lee) than others; keep in mind that the goal
> of WAR, at least as I see it, in this incarnation is more story than
> anything else. If we do a modern setting, there are rules we've learned from
> experience; if we do a historical setting, much of that setting's nature
> will determine the rules; if we do a sci-fi/futuristic setting, chances are
> certain rules will basically present themselves as we do the world-building.
> Oh, and for the record: While I am not opposed to using licensed settings
> (settings from tv, rpgs, books, etc), they do come with certain
> complications. IE, Pern (as if anybody really wants to play WAR in a fantasy
> setting? Personally, I'd rather not) is right out because Anne McCaffrey's
> estate would likely find us and kill us even if we tried to ask for
> permission. And despite my love for Ender's Game, I would resist doing a
> game set in any of Orson Scott Card's universes, both because I don't think
> they'd fit WAR very well...and because I think the discussions to let us use
> his intellectual property would be painful.
>
> John
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 2:39 PM, <lee.tarnow at utoronto.ca> wrote:
>
>> I'm down as well. However, I'd like to see some *HARD* rules in place
>> -- it seemed a little loosey-goosey last time.
>>
>> -- Lee
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> War_ooc mailing list
>> War_ooc at esteroic.com
>> http://esteroic.com/mailman/listinfo/war_ooc_esteroic.com
>>
>