06-26-2017, 12:04 PM
Some people like OA, some people don't - different strokes for different folks, basically
As far as RPing here (and bearing in mind I am not a gamer) - As I understand it OA is moderately popular as a source for RP ideas, although I don't know if anyone has ever tried playing a game set in the universe itself rather than just using it as a source of individual ideas.
Also, it's not clear to me what 'too well defined' means. The rules of the setting are the laws of physics and that places limits on what you can do - but that also leaves a huge amount of room to play. One aspect of this might be that there is so much content making up the setting that it could seem overwhelming to try to master it all just to play a game. But I would argue that it's really not necessary to learn every aspect of the setting to play in it - although it might be necessary to learn the parts that pertain to whatever place you're playing in.
One issue we've seen raised in the concept of gaming is that OA doesn't really lend itself to powermodding and it definitely doesn't lend itself to either 'plucky baselines' or playing a transapient character. At least not realistically, as the setting defines it.
Finally, there is the issue that the structure of the setting doesn't really lend itself to zipping from one end of the galaxy to the other (or even one end of a solar system to the other) in an instant. If you're going to play in a way that is true to the setting, you either need to figure out how to sidestep that issue (perhaps by having your players go into stasis for such periods or just jumping around via GM fiat - 'you leave for location X and arrive 5 days later' kind of thing perhaps.
Or something like that - I honestly don't see this sort of thing as a true problem - but perhaps I'm missing something.
As far as OA being set in concrete - Do other settings allow their rules to be bent or broken at will for the convenience of players? I don't think so, but I'm not sure.
Or do they mean something else when speaking in terms of OA being built and set in concrete already? Perhaps they feel there isn't anything else to create here and that's what they are looking to do? I think the ongoing nature of the project shows that isn't true.
Did any of these people provide any further clarification into what it was about the setting they were struggling with?
Not that we're going to redo the whole thing just because some people dislike it - but it's interesting to gather this kind of information and it may lead to ideas to make the setting more widely appealing while also being true to its core principles. Or just explaining it better than we've been doing up to this point.
Thoughts?
Todd
As far as RPing here (and bearing in mind I am not a gamer) - As I understand it OA is moderately popular as a source for RP ideas, although I don't know if anyone has ever tried playing a game set in the universe itself rather than just using it as a source of individual ideas.
Also, it's not clear to me what 'too well defined' means. The rules of the setting are the laws of physics and that places limits on what you can do - but that also leaves a huge amount of room to play. One aspect of this might be that there is so much content making up the setting that it could seem overwhelming to try to master it all just to play a game. But I would argue that it's really not necessary to learn every aspect of the setting to play in it - although it might be necessary to learn the parts that pertain to whatever place you're playing in.
One issue we've seen raised in the concept of gaming is that OA doesn't really lend itself to powermodding and it definitely doesn't lend itself to either 'plucky baselines' or playing a transapient character. At least not realistically, as the setting defines it.
Finally, there is the issue that the structure of the setting doesn't really lend itself to zipping from one end of the galaxy to the other (or even one end of a solar system to the other) in an instant. If you're going to play in a way that is true to the setting, you either need to figure out how to sidestep that issue (perhaps by having your players go into stasis for such periods or just jumping around via GM fiat - 'you leave for location X and arrive 5 days later' kind of thing perhaps.
Or something like that - I honestly don't see this sort of thing as a true problem - but perhaps I'm missing something.
As far as OA being set in concrete - Do other settings allow their rules to be bent or broken at will for the convenience of players? I don't think so, but I'm not sure.
Or do they mean something else when speaking in terms of OA being built and set in concrete already? Perhaps they feel there isn't anything else to create here and that's what they are looking to do? I think the ongoing nature of the project shows that isn't true.
Did any of these people provide any further clarification into what it was about the setting they were struggling with?
Not that we're going to redo the whole thing just because some people dislike it - but it's interesting to gather this kind of information and it may lead to ideas to make the setting more widely appealing while also being true to its core principles. Or just explaining it better than we've been doing up to this point.
Thoughts?
Todd