Re: Re: scenarios

From: Wayne Shaw (shadow@qedbbs.com)
Date: Wed 17 Nov 1993 - 13:26:52 EET


David Dunham (via RadioMail) <ddunham@radiomail.net> writes:

>
> Wayne, this is terrible, once again we're in agreement!

David, far as I can tell, ALL the disagreements we have had can be traced
back to the fact that we want vastly different levels of detailing in our
game mechanics. Given that game mechanics are the primary topic of this
list, that's going to tend to make for a lot of disagreements between us.

But I recall seeing any number of things you've said in the past in other
venues that I agreed with. You also wrote one of the very few pre-done
adventures I've ever used (at least I beleive it's you; the one that
appeared in the Space Gamer many a moon ago and was recently redone for
GURPS in GURPS Fantasy Adventures.)

>
> I think what made Griffin Island look bad was the fact that Griffin
> Mountain is the best roleplaying supplement ever produced.

Possibly. I'd never owned a copy of the old version, so it didn't suffer
by comparison to me.
>
> Actually, I could quibble that it's truly generic -- I was forced to add
> orcs to my campaign because if I didn't, I wouldn't have been able to use a
> single Griffin Island handout.

I gather the technique of telling your players to substitute some
appropriate race in your campaign (trolls, say...I think in the original
Griffin Mountain set-up they were actually filling most of the roles the
orcs did) wouldn'
t suffice?
But I do get your point. I'm just not sure that sort of thing is
avoidable without making the product incredibly clumsy to use. But it
was generic in the sense it made very little assumptions about what the
world outside the Island was like.

------------------------------
shadow@qedbbs.com (Wayne Shaw) or qed!shadow
The QED BBS -- (310)420-9327


0,,


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:30:36 EEST