It is important when running a game to consider how grim you want to make things for the PCs. It is even more important if one PC faces particular challenges than the others. When running a game set between Episodes III and IV, it is right and proper that Jedi characters should have to keep one eye over their shoulders, lest they be hunted down and killed. However, it is also important that you don't go too far in modelling this aspect of the setting. If the character cannot ever use his coolest powers or he'll immediately be gunned down by Stormtroopers, that's really no fun for anyone, least of all the player of that character.
A similar issue appears when paladins appear in D&D campaigns. Very often, the DM spends a great deal of time creating moral challenges for the player of that character, out of some desire to see them fall. If the player doesn't have his character jump through all the right hoops, he is penalised. Which sucks for that player, who probably just wants to play his character. It also sucks for the rest of the group, who really don't want the trials and tribulations of their colleague to become the focus of them game - they'd quite like a look-in occasionally.
It should be noted that the Jedi classes are designed to be balanced assuming play in an unrestricted era. The paladin class is actually balanced so that it will work just as well even if you ignore the alignment restriction entirely. In short, the GM doesn't need to go to any additional trouble to keep these characters from getting out of line.
Now, that's not to say that the paladin should never face a crisis of conscience, or that the Jedi should feel free to use his lightsaber to cut his way out of every inconvenient room. Just that these things should not be the focus of the game.
(And please note: this is a general comment, rather than about anything in any game I've played, ever. Sometimes, I just ramble on for no reason.)
No comments:
Post a Comment