Prev: RE: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding Next: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding

Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding

From: Brian B <brianbinor@g...>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 06:42:34 -0800
Subject: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding

On 1/18/06, Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com> wrote:
> >On 1/18/06, Samuel Penn <sam@glendale.org.uk> wrote:
> >>  On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:54, Brian B wrote:
> >>  > On 1/18/06, Grant A. Ladue <ladue@cse.buffalo.edu> wrote:
> >>  > >    I agree, whether a *race* would surrender or abandon it's
ships is
> >>  > > more of a campaign or setting issue.	I think that the issue
of whether
> >>  > > it's *possible* to surrender ships in battle is something we
can talk
> >>  > > about in general game terms.
> >>  > >    What I'm getting at here is that the major problem for
surrendering
> >>  > > your damaged/sinking ship in modern times (WWI -> ) seems to
be
> >>  > > communicating that surrender to the other side.
> >>  >
> >>  > A universally accepted pattern of strobe lights or  "surrender
beacon"
> >>  > transmitters, similar to distress beacons?
> >>
> >>  And then you come across a race that considers your distress
beacons
> >>  an attack against their spirit Elders, so they target all your
> >>escape pods...
> >>
> >
> >Sure, if you want to be a jerk about it, I suppose you could come up
> >with a similar objection to ANYTHING that could be suggested as a
> >signal of surrender.
>
>
> I think that was the point....  ;-)
> If you're dealing with a hostile first-contact situation, the two
> forces don't share any frame of reference at all; in this case,
> surrender would (IMHO) be most unlikely

Oh, I understood the point, I'm not THAT stupid.  Of course, one would
hope that by the point in the future at which such contact was
plausible, your officers would understand that point as well.

Furthermore, while it might be a fun plot twist for a GM in an RPG, if
I was playing a tactical wargame and my opponent arbitrarily decided
to use that as an escuse to keep firing on ships that I had retired
from combat or surrendered, if the 'first contact' scenario had not
been agreed upon, I'd decide he was a prick and probably would never
play him again.

I just get tired of the way when someone suggests something helpful,
people on the list tend to immediatelyt respond with the extreme case
that's an exception to the rule instead of acknowledging that in most
cases the suggestion might be a valid one.  The dismissive attitude
gets a little old.

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

Prev: RE: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding Next: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding