Olympia reviews/post-mortem From: troyer@cgl.ucsf.edu (John M. Troyer) Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 21:53:50 +0000 I've been thinking about pbm's & rules/playability. I was wondering if anyone would be willing to give a post-mortem on Olympia? I didn't play, but I was scanning the old issues of the Olympia Times. It seemed as if by the end, there wasn't a lot to do. Long-time people were very rich, and controlled areas. They had enough strength to kill off any violent warlord-wannabes (i.e. Dr. Pain). New people had trouble making ends meet & couldn't do much. Now keep in mind this is just my impression from reading the Times & looking at the rules; I never played. And I realize this was a rules playtest. But is this correct -- was Olympia about ready to become stagnant? Was there enough game structure for old players & new players to do things? Or was the player interaction enough to keep it interesting? In an actual, long term game, would the diety have to sprinkle lots of external forces into the mix? (quests, GM-controlled factions & monsters, invasion forces, etc.) john the rules hacker troyer@cgl.ucsf.edu Referenced By Up