LoL.

Yeah, well, my group's games have always been on the cinematic side,
so we've been naturally attracted to rules-light, fast paced
systems... We've never tried anything quite like this, though, so I
can't say how well it'll work for us yet. I don't think I'll have any
objections, at least if we try it out on a one-shot scale, but whether
the players can use the system to its full potential, i.e. get more
narrative detail into the action instead of just reverting to 'I hit
the bad guy' mode, is a completely different question...

And as for traits and weaknesses, I just like to keep things
flexible... One 'distiction', as you put it, might be fine for one
character, but a couple of more specific flaws might suit another
better, and I want to keep that option open. I like systems that are
very flexible and suited for many different types of characters, and
Wushu certainly has that potential.

But I'm just repeating myself, so I'll shut up. If anyone has more to
say about my character sheet, feedback's always welcome... (But I
probably won't make changes to it until I've at least used it once...)


Ben B.




--- In wushurpg@..., "Nicholas Novitski"
<nicknovitski@g...> wrote:
>
> Ha! That'll teach me to make assumptions. Your reasoned response has
> revealed the ugly arrogance hidden behind my kind words.
>
> On 4/8/06, Ben B. Bainton <ben@b...> wrote:
> >
> > I totally agree with you. And, as a GM, I don't really give a rats ass
> > about what numbers players have written on their sheets. However,
> > players love juggling numbers. Well, mine do anyway. ;)
>
>
> Hmm.
>
> Well, I'm glad they like Wushu, then! Or, rather, I sure hope they
will.
>
> Certainly, everyone's welcome to their tastes and preferences. But,
nothing
> can be all things to all people. I have a friend who has bravely
vouchsafed
> to me that he cannot play Wushu, because it doesn't have the
shopping-list
> particularity that he so loves. After a long, depressing while, I
realized
> that there was nothing I could actually do. Changing the game to
fit him
> would have changed it into another game, which would not have been
as fun
> for him as a game focused from the start of its design on what he likes.
> Changing the person might be possible in the case of people who are
knocking
> it before they tried it, but this is someone who tried it and knows
> themselves pretty well. Having accepted this, I moved on to playing the
> game with people who liked it.
>
> I think Wushu is such a great game as to be nearly ideal for me and
many,
> many other people. Some of those people might not even know it yet.
But
> not everyone will be able to play it and have fun at the same time.
>
> Also, do check out the wiki for info on adding a little more crunch
to the
> game. Some of the rules mods are pretty swank.
>
>
> Also, I'd like to keep the number of weaknesses flexible. While a few
> > positive traits might well be enough to portray different aspects of a
> > character, I feel that limiting characters' weaknesses to one may not
> > work in all cases... Depending of course on the style and setting and
> > how specific you want weaknesses to be, etc...
>
>
> Ahh. You've hit on it in that last bit. In my games, weaknesses are
> indistinguishable in their descriptions from any other trait. Actually,
> I've taken to calling them Distinctions, to leave out the "Can't
ever" or
> "Vulnerable to" that people seem to like to sneak in. Un-entertainingly
> specific for me. Even leaving the mechanics otherwise untouched,
just the
> name change has made for some much more interesting characters. It got
> people away from (what I think of as) the Gurps approach to character
> limitations. Many disadvantages from other systems are entirely
> uninteresting. King Kong doesn't have the disadvantage "Berserk,"
he has
> the Distinction "In All the World, Unique." Only one of these can
have a
> full-length movie of emotional depth based on them.
>
> ...And the problem with my saying that is that 'uninteresting' is
relative
> to me. Some people seem to like what I don't. Shocking, I know.
>
> - Nick
>