[Slynky]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:

---

While I realize (according to a poll I conducted some time back) that some people do things like that from game to game and don't carry the events from one game to another but I find it hard to trust those kinds of people when I find them in a future game. Just me. Perhaps I'm wrong but it's just my personality.

This is where "roleplay" aspects come into play... some people actually use those empire description fields to good purpose. I am one of those people. I find that roleplaying my empire rather than just treating it as a stale wargame adds whole new levels of fun, especially when others do so as well. If I am playing an "evil" race in a game, I will make that clear, and have no compulsions about backstabbing and all that stuff; it goes right along with an evil race. But in the next game, I might be playing a "good" race, and would not do anything of the sort.

---

And I think this is one of the things I was referring to. I remember chatting in the poll thread I referred to about the dimension of roll-playing. I can certainly understand that. For instance, in a "Star Trek" RP game, I can understand that when make a treaty with the Romulans (for instance), it's for convenience and that THAT convenience may disappear at any turn. But, just as I know about these various races from movies (or from the descriptions people fill in on their descriptions), and the fact that a game is billed as a roll-playing game, I can understand and accept people are playing a character and NOT themselves (per se). I trust Lord Chane to a "T" but if I found myself in a roll-playing game with him and he was playing the Ferengi, I'd always be watching my back because I know it wasn't Lord Chane playing the empire but that it was the Ferengi.

I was referring to games not of that genre. Games where I rely on how that real person plays from game to game.