(09-21-2015, 10:27 AM)Warren Castille Wrote: It only sounds like an issue if you're in it to win instead of telling an interesting story. The whole concept of trying to write someone into a corner with a "tactical checkmate" reeks of AOL speed-posting bullshit from 1997.
I've always felt someone should give as good as they get. If you randomly get into a fight with a stranger and they're completely no-selling reasonable attack posts because they're just that good, they're not trying to have a dramatic scene, they're trying to measure their dick in public.
My memories of that era are not fond.
Well, I've RPed effectively across all those eras. Â And yes, we had open RP and, yes, that meant combat with strangers. Â We can debate "interesting stories" all we'd like, but a stranger in combat, whether for narrative purposes or not, is a part of any RP where I'm carrying a sword. Â You may not be fond of the era, but I both RPed effectively and told interesting stories as I went.
I'm simply relating where the format came from and why it exists as per Kage's request. Â I'm not passing judgement on you for disliking it or attempting to stir up your unpleasant memories.
However, despite where you were and how you RPed, I can say that quite a few bits of narrative combat arose during RP sessions and we effectively handled it via tactical checkmating. Â And, should an altercation arise where grammatical tense is suddenly important, you can't always pull the narrative to a screeching halt to negotiate a neutral party and dice rules. Â Tactical checkmating still exists whenever a stranger has a reason to not like you.
And, in the end, that's where the live RP format comes from. Â We didn't often write in a past-tense narrative format and that was the reason.
