Yet Another Gaming-Related Rant

Because what else am I going to do there? >.>

I’ve been told resistance to changes in a game setting means I’m for a static, unchanging world. That’s not true. Let me try to put things in perspective.

My only real experience with Exalted seriously put me off. I read the main book. I came up with a character that I had in mind and that fit the world as I understood it. I submitted my character early only to have it looked at last-minute and be told “wait, there’s no way this would work.” Why? Apparently my understanding gained from the main book was completely invalidated on several points by information from expansion books I didn’t have. Well, I felt a bit betrayed because I wasn’t told that sooner, but more I felt upset with the game designers because they gave me a framework to build within that was, apparently, missing some major points that they changed later.



Those of us who played there before had a fair idea of most of the setting, though a lot of it was vague and not defined fully. So the MUCK is being redone and the setting advanced 20 years – some changes are expected.

The immediate result? A number of factions spring up, some others changed names for no apparent reasons. The city that had the largest temple to one goddess has somehow become the stronghold of a monotheistic religion with no real tolerance for other religions, though is run by a collection of guilds (until a religion-based, not nation-based, police force is introduced two years later). That same religion is suddenly the most populous and exists as a default when it used to be rarely mentioned. The core city of the setting goes from small and rural to massive while its force of police (who used to be primarily volunteer adventurers protecting their home) are legitimized as a force of martial law…

Some of this was jarring, but I could deal with it. Then things keep cropping up as time goes on:

An early quest takes a group east overland to a port in order to take a ship off to foreign lands. 6-12 months into the game, someone wants to play a pirate (impractical when the main city of the setting is landlocked) and the head wiz answers this by making a canal/river system to access the sea to the west, saying with a hand-wave that it was worked on over the last few decades. Sure, it could have been, but it wasn’t there before that moment and I have a map to prove it.

Along the way, I realize just what the rules allow magic to do, and I ask, “Why do nations not simply alpha-strike their opponents into oblivion?” There’s hemming and hawing, but this continues to bug me, so I offer up an explanation: the gods actively stop people from wrecking destruction of that magnitude. It’s a little heavy-handed, but the only thing I can find that fits and gods have to do something, right? A bit later, a player blows a city off the map. The active staff at the time didn’t use my reason, therefore raising the question again – if magic can obliterate cities that a mage doesn’t like, why doesn’t that happen all the time? Magic rules have been tweaked to make this less likely, but the question remains unanswered.

Similarly, I asked why magical teleportation portals aren’t common between population centers. I was told it was a security concern to the nations, so they didn’t allow established gates. That seemed silly to me, much like doing away with airports because you’re afraid of a military incursion when anyone who cares enough could still probably parachute troops in or something (because even without established gates, a decent mage could teleport people). Fast forward some months and we get PCs who want to set up permanent gates. Well, apparently that’s fine as no one in charge politically says anything and the head wiz okays it without blinking. Then, a couple weeks later, it’s announced that all the major embassies have existing portals to their home nations – stated as if they were always there. What the hell? Why have we been spending months in travel when we could have petitioned an embassy to shave that to nothing?

There’s also cosmetic changes: there have been at least two names for every style of magic, some orders, a deity or two, and even some cities undergo name changes in the middle of play for no apparent reason. It is sometimes hard to keep up with what’s what.

This is not me saying, "I hate change, leave everything as it is forever." This is me feeling lied to as answers to fundamental questions aren’t adhered to. I’m not opposed to evolution, but inconsistency ticks me off. Letting people play more months under certain assumptions, then saying those assumptions have been wrong… that’s truly annoying.

Addendum: No, Tashiro, this is not meant as a slam against you. Rather, I would like you to understand where I'm coming from when I seem upset by these changes.

Comments

  1. A part of it comes from trying to make sense of things that were not fleshed out, realizing they may not make sense as they stand, and trying to integrate things better. Another part is, if I focus my attention on something which hasn't been fleshed out, it means asking 'well, what would be there?' For example, the police force of Tarantis -- what would they be liked? Well, since it was never fleshed out, we don't know. As for the names of different styles of magic, I am trying to create a theme for them. Who would be the one to categorize and name them? What would they call them? As for the Embassies with the portals... well, it would make sense, they might have small portals to get around, but they wouldn't broadcast that such existed. Again, the problem is -- the more I look at the setting, the more I try to fill in the gaps, and the better I understand things, the more detail I can put in.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tarantis: To me, the switch from being Raveena's home to Joshuite central was jarring to me. I'm mostly over that. I would rather have seen a police force that had the flavor of a guild-heavy city rather than a bunch of church police (which I feel was covered by pre-existing Joshuite classes). Obviously your views are different, and I'm getting past that. Names for magic (and other things): I don't mind that you're thinking about better flavor for them in the tabletop game, but I seriously wish you'd stop changing things in what's already ongoing. One week, it's Necromancy. Then it's the Path of Ash. Then the Ashen Path. Other types of magic are being named things I don't even remotely recognize. It doesn't better the MUCK, it just makes it harder for people to keep track of. I f-ing refuse to call Anaitha whatever that got changed to. The portals... Yes, that would make sense. I said it would make sense over a year ago. You told me "they don't exist." Now you've completely flip-flopped. How, exactly, am I supposed to feel about that? My attempt to flesh things out was stifled. That makes me less inclined to ever try again. More detail is fine, as long as it doesn't conflict with how things have been played.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anaitha changed because Alaria (the creator) didn't want it used. It's like Typhon saying, "Aranous is mine chuckle-heads"

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Adventures in Rokugan (ongoing)

Harbinger of Chaos (Godbound)

RPG Desires?