[War_ooc] Okay, so...

[John Penta]

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Michael Downey <
michael.michaeldowney at gmail.com> wrote:

> > We need to figure out the line between unlikely and not-possible. We can
> > find plenty of examples of stuff sitting way past the line (you listed
> only
> > WAR's classic examples...), but it's hard for me to figure out the stuff
> > that's merely unlikely or just-barely impossible.
>
> I think that in this we simply use our judgment. We're all fairly
> worldly and have a good understanding (I hope) of both quality
> writing, history and modern politics. The GM(s) simply need to sit
> down and critically think "How likely is this? How difficult would it
> be to implement? Does the quality of writing and details provided
> justify it working? Will allowing this push the envelope too far?"


And when the GM is stressed, harrassed, off their meds, etc.?

Well, IMHO, them's the breaks of WAR. Others may disagree, but my personal
opinion is that WAR needs very few hard-and-fast rules. ("No launching nukes
and making the game post-apocalyptic" being basically the key one.)

It might be *helped* by rules of thumb like "X numbers of troops takes Y
hours to move Z distance", but that's really just for the "Ahh wtf do you
mean I gotta decide all this at once?" moments.

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://esteroic.com/pipermail/war_ooc_esteroic.com/attachments/20090621/890f3b19/attachment.html