Forum:
Hello,
I have this rule about scene framing power, but the game shouldn't need scene framing. Either I say "if there's a problem around scene framing power you guys are way off the game intended territory." Or I do something about it and give the rule as a compass to lead them on the way back. I could also give the rule and then propose to drop it. But then I lose too much : fluidity, creative freedom, learning opportunities ; and give the wrong impression that rules are discardable.
So maybe it's a rules redaction question, but I feel it's about shoulds/have tos. Do I include this advice in the rules ? In a FAQ? It's a hybrid grue/bleen goo I have a hard time getting off my fingers.
I think it depends on the specifics?
Neurotrash - Fri, 09/13/2019 - 07:05What exactly is the rule?
Or maybe the question is, "why shouldn't the game need scene framing?" I mean, I don't know what the nature of the game is, but unless it's "24 - The RPG" where there you never break away from the characters or skip ahead in time, I'd assume scenes would have to be framed by someone at some point.
The simplest egalitarian rule
DeReel - Fri, 09/13/2019 - 07:51The simplest egalitarian rule if someone clings to the "remote control" (the tool for changing scene and beginning a new one) would be "take turns". There are other good alternatives ("lowest XP" or "first to pass" gets the remote). The risk still exists that wrong minded players will want to strategize a predictable scene framing order. Which is like : unescapable.
Until now, scenes are framed alright. But... if someone wants to abuse their unconditional framing power, right now there's nothing but good sense and table manners to stop them. Maybe I worry too much but leaving a curve without guard rails is not satisfactory.
In the meantime I worked a bit on having players set their limit before play (Monte Cook's consent leaflet influenced me, for sure).