In a message dated 1/30/02 8:06:38 PM, gary.sturgess_at_-6D34n7IwhvrPByOsv4cvFhO21YfdqChBUQcpf2OG_AbjKFijLORZUKyBeLUxnKlOOgJPXqXqD5eckISGIXXx2lKgQ.yahoo.invalid writes:
<< Jim Chapin says:
>The proper gamemastering style seems to me to be a balance between
>the game master's narrative, the player's actions, and chance.
>
>Without all 3, you are doing something, but it isn't a role-playing
>game.
With all due respect, who died and made you the official authority on this?
The point I particularly object to is your statement that chance is required. Ever heard of diceless roleplaying games? Amber, for instance? Or is that not really roleplaying? >>
I said, "it seems to me." I may not be the official authoity on anything,
but I AM
the official authority on the way things seem to me. Why the nasty tone? Just
a tad defensive?
Yes, diceless rpgs -- I've played them and they mostly seem to be scripts, not rpg's.
Very well-written scripts, many of them.
Jim Chapin Received on Wed 30 Jan 2002 - 17:14:49 EET
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri 04 Jan 2008 - 22:54:46 EET