Re: [HOE] "easier" junker rules

["C M Hylton" <cmhylton@earthlink.net>]

Frankly, I actually like the idea of easier rules.  It seems that as much as
I can understand the junkers, they seem to be cumbersome.  They seem to bog
down gameplay in the games I have been in.  They are almost like "lepers." I
tried to make one before the source book came out and figured out a bit but
when they changed I tossed him into the "maybe next time"   Doing math and
trying to figure out "slots" and "spirits."  If it can be "dumbed" down for
us people who have a hard time doing alegebra in the middle of a gaming
session that's already going 4 hours, I say more power to them.  I don't
think they hafta be like the MS rules.  That I do agree that they are 2
different animals and should stay as such.  But anything that can possible
short cut those moments when you say "I need what power to make (example)"
should be beneficial.  Of course, i cannot judge that until the rules are
made.

C  M Hylton
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Burzelic" <zombi_bobb@yahoo.com>
To: <hoe@gamerz.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 5:42 PM
Subject: [HOE] "easier" junker rules


> Shane's description of Epitaph #4 had something that jumped out at me.
>
> Easier Junker Rules
>
> Maybe these were discussed while I was off the list for a while (which
> would explain why no one really responds to my queries) or maybe Shane
> just decided this for streamlining sake. But is anybody else at all
> bothered by this? I know that I can still continue using the original
> rules, hell, I could continue using the manitou beating rules if I
> really wanted to but what this is saying to me is that this old version
> will no longer be supported. Maybe I'm wrong, but saying they are going
> to be like the MS rules is very disappointing. One of the biggest
> reasons I liked both of these inventors the way they were is not only
> did they add their own aspects to each game, they made the player "act"
> like the appropriate Arcane Background. Mad Scientists slapped together
> a blueprint, came up with outlandish theories as to why something would
> work, built it and eureka! Crazy science stuff!
> Junkers did something similar. They know individual arcane snippets of
> creation, they know all the right arcane symbols and rituals. They get
> the right junk together and work out these rituals and symbols and
> viola, junk-tech. The player themself essentially committed the ritual.
> They sat down, worked out equations and math stuff and in the end made
> a neat device. One of the neatest moments of playing with the junker
> rules was when I looked at my notebook page when I was finished with a
> device. It was covered in equations, crossed out extras, little tables,
> arrows pointing to one thing, circles to keep other things from
> bleeding into other information. It looked like a strange arcane
> scribbling. That was when I realized THIS was thaumaturgical diffusion.
> MS inventing doesn't capture the feel of Junkerism. I'm sad to see that
> others don't agree.
>
> Jim
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
> http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net with
> unsubscribe hoe@gamerz.net
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
>