Re: Was re: RFACS but diverging into philosophic ramblings about future tech...

On Wed, 16 Feb 2000 adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca wrote:

> As I said before:
> 
> "But I don't find it nearly as interesting as the alternative, which
is to
> self-limit the technological expansion and development in certain
cases.	I
> was advocating a technological environment which is of a greater range
of
> difference that what you and Tom B and others have suggested.  I was
doing
> so not because it makes more sense for it to be that way (in the end,
how
> could we possibly *know* anything at all... we're just making educated
> guesses), but because it makes for a more compelling story.  I can't
> possibly suggest that "my way is more likely than your way, and you
are
> wrong".  But I think that having the range of technology that I'm
> suggesting is both more interesting from a story sense, and more
likely
> given the way the game was written in the first place.  Though there
are no
> specific directives in the rules to this extent (and in fact St. Jon
et al
> have gone to great lengths to NOT impose a very detailed universe on
the
> game system), I get the feeling from stuff in the rules and in the
fuff
> that it isn't a universe where super-high-tech is totally
all-pervasive.
> 
> This is entirely a personal subjective view, but I think it makes for
a
> more interesting gaming environment."

ah, okay. on this point, we will have to agree to differ. personally, i
find that justifying some part of the future history by saying,
essentially, that it's that way so that the game is better, is missing
the
point. yes, we want the history to be good for gaming in, but for me,
part
of the fun is trying to explain how it could be like that in terms of
the
forces which really do shape history - politics, economics, technology,
sociology, psychology, astrography, etc. i just wouldn't be happy with a
glaringly illogical background [1] in which things were the way they
were
'just because'; i wouldn't find a story set in that universe more
compelling than one set in a coherently organised universe; in fact,
quite
the opposite. ah well, back to work :).

tom

[1] okay, okay, so the Tuffleyverse includes quite a number of insanely
unlikely events; at least there's *some* logic, though