verbose 
wanted to go back to dryma, but with an unusual perspective. We wanted to catch an important player and experience. We wanted it to be an incisive, a few words. We wanted a Uryen. We misfired 2 out of 4! Ramuel is a semi-noob with his manic incurable, but we like challenges.
Why Isylea and World of Warcraft, Assassin's Creed or GTA? Isylea is more stimulating, more fun but there's more. I've always loved role-playing, still Isylea burn across platforms and allows me to once I do not have to be the master but only the player and is something that I love. There is to be noted that Isylea hit me for one thing: it reflects exactly my ideal type of role play collaboratively. Let me explain meglio.Ho led a guild in WoW for almost 3 years bringing it up to good levels. We were about 80 active and thanks to all we could to play 50 people at night. We have spent money from website, ventrilo and mobile phone were like a family. WoW But I always went close for the philosophy underlying the game: Each class can do anything as good as the others. All the same, the death of role-playing game. So I started with Isylea, found for case while rummaging for the network in search of a MUD about 1 year ago. At the same time I left the guild of WoW friends and began to devote their free time in the MUD. Isylea than WoW is much more fun not to mention the graphics much more realistic.
say that a "realistic graphics" statement may seem surprising, although I think I understand what you mean. For safety, you better explain? There is the same relationship that exists between book and film. What I most appreciate when you read Tolkien or Martin, to name my favorites, is the theater of mind that accompanies you while you drink those pages. Better than the Lord of the Rings book or movie? Much better than the book [ah, for fans of the genre in the spring will be the show of The Song of Ice and Fire, I can not wait to get him the fleas]. So much for role playing. Seeing is only a tenth of imagining. While the games will usually have a view of a set of actions limitatio, Isylea gives you the ability to imagine a nearly infinite set of actions. Wanting to make a comparison to that effect I would say look at the blood * * runoff from the neck of your enemy with un'esprimi is immensely more powerful at the level of significance, compared to the red pixels on the screen to simulate the flow of blood.
Notwithstanding that principle is what you said I agree, what you really believe that users of the game face "appropriate" for this benefit? I can not say how many players actually read the descriptions to the end ... and it is true that when you "look guy, you go to see what is always the first image. In other words, the text features of this game you seem to limit its spread, and as an opportunity? The average user can not look at Isylea as a narrative, there is no doubt about this, for them Isylea a game. The difference is subtle but remarkable: the view changed radically changed and the target also changes the mood, sorry, the modus giocandi. In a narrative is told and it is narrated, in a game there other logic that victory. Even within the actual user, Isylea is a product for a few, there is a difference between those who play and the narrator. Returning to the concept of graphic / image you can tell, very banal, that this may be a limit but also a strength, depending on the viewer. For me it is a strength; away who does not have a good graphics card in the brain, selected on who * can * play and who's not. On the other hand I think that with time and proper education to become a player who plays a player that narrates.
I would rather stay on the concepts of "narrative" and "Game". Isylea is undoubtedly both, and can not be just one of them. The problem, both from the master-side player, is to find a convincing balance between the two. It 'clear that a player does not like "being told" without having the opportunity to "tell", as opposed to a master and would like to see the players more willing to be told. This is my idea, but I realize that some may look like a giant supercazzola, then, before exploring together, we try to explain well, point by point. What do you mean you, including through practical examples, with "tell" and "being told"? We agree that it is Isylea game narrative is often but the degree of consciousness of the average player stops at the first. The balance is common sense, no man's land, of course. Conceptually regards to narrate a series of player's ability to represent themselves in the minds of others. It 's a different modus giocandi but concerns the creation of texts [and willing to go beyond the contexts and subtexts]. Example: Chuk Khenam of the potter is a craftsman with smooth powerful and arrogant with the weak, it is prosaic, a blasphemer brisk when the clerics do not hear of Bill Kaulitz, and perjury and treacherous. Harry, the player who plays Chuck the potter creates a narrative not only convincing but even so marked as to render that unmistakable PG. The narrative has become a test of consistency: when the power to create the text is not but the player is a master or another player, take the narration is the best proof that a player role-playing can give, helping to enrich the text in a consistent manner. Example: If the potter Chuck is kidnapped by a tribe of mutants Gasparri will not hesitate to reveal the threat of torture where is the key that opens the temple of King Solomon or the secret of the legendary Pandora's box because this is the nature of Chuk the potter. Probably not much appreciate the idea and can help me to express it better, in any case I can think that the difference between a good player and a great role player role is that he knows how to lose having fun and enjoying it. A masochist. It is to be
say that there is a difference between the role play and paper role-playing type Isylea. In the first case there is hardly different groups of players at odds with one another, then a Master's degree is easier to accept a defeat, because in fact, when the player loses, who wins is not the master. I agree.
definitely a clear difference between role-playing "classic" and Isylea game: in addition to those already mentioned we want to see if we can find someone else? Yes! Consider the dynamic master-player role-playing classic, is certainly a dynamic collaborative agreement?
Yes, at least in most cases! find that even on Isylea is? Let me explain, before you said that the growing narrative is usually unpleasant for players Isylea.
I think it should be so, but with several distinctions. First, the master paper is to serve the players, who obviously need him for every detail, while Isylea is and remains a way designed to be more independent as possible. So happens that pg ask an animation, the Quester deny it, and often the player clicks the idea that "the master does not want to animate this, this and that reason", when in fact maybe the master has prepared everything in so the player can be autonomous. Second, Sometimes the Master has to play the "uncomfortable" role of the arbitrator, and less of the "narrator", as happens in RPGs paper. Let me guess: I'm not sure because I'm not a child of animated white hen and more referees are in the service of Moggi. A classic right? In any case, there is also saying that sometimes being independent does not depend very much on the player. On this I can testify directly, sometimes in the knowledge game are lost because there is no continuity. I have experienced both when I was in that of the craftsman with the clan is Khenam Uryen Fortunately, there was a good dialogue in both cases. Moreover, the autonomy of the players is different from the classic role player Isylea to: know the rules and if you have something in mind may consult a manual. Isylea is often used on older players or the Master. I believe that in both cases is the master classical and isyleano should have enormous capacity to listen.
When knowledge is effectively lost, we have every interest in returning it to the game (although, let's not forget, for the productions is the study or not). The problem arises when we receive requests for animations such as "Tom knows how to make the PlayStation 3, but I did not sign because I hate it. Animatemi the mob of the console!" In that case, if I come alive, Tom would come to say, but how, I am made to find out the deck alone, and he just make request to the mob? If you do not bring it to life, who made the request thinks, "I knew it, Tom is Paraculo and the staff does not want to spread that knowledge." Before I answer you get a confession?
Go son. The study production sucks, especially when you're alone. In any case this is not discussed, is sacrosanct that an animated mob does not go for these things. Take for example the Uryen: the old group has stopped almost completely and some aspects were lost between us and them because there was no continuity. The there to take the knowledge they have given the master then the rest of the game we made with the help of cousins the other tribes, there is obviously much more to do. Currently we do not have people over a veteran of weight but slowly we are growing, I'm happy how things go here.
Uryen Going on, you want to explain why, in your opinion, this tribe (which for me is one of the most fascinating) has so far never received the success it deserves? There is no single answer, I fear. I think there is a problem quite obvious especially for the role of playability that is the lifeblood of dryma that the warrior. The unarmed combat is a little confusing to be honest and the learning curve is slow. Undoubtedly the first thing at the beginning you think that is not a game for warriors disarmed. With patience and perseverance will do the trick, but players have patients is difficult. Often players contact me on msn to find out what life in the tribe of the sons of the wind, they want to see if he would like to change. The truth is that it takes patience, especially if you want to make the shaman or warrior. I've seen many go away or quit, or maybe try Baheli in humans, strong and a number of BG objectively very attractive, all the tribes have their attractiveness for better or worse, I'll say that up to a half a day before he wanted Yerba do the witch.
But look I would not be wrong because they do not understand is that a lot, But I think I can say with reasonable confidence that the learning curve does not vary that much from tribe to tribe. We enter the technical, I do not know how far I can push but I can assure you that the way you think the moves Uryen is objectively difficult and does not make it very playable at the present. One difficulty is that in any case I'm also pretty good, I do not like to see me the clan invaded by small Fist of the North. It 's also true that over time have left players with their history and the clan is empty. I believe there are many variables in the field.
What is the type of player to the game Uryen suitable for you? Besides being masochistic must be proactive and experienced enough practical mechanics. Lately I have two boys who were completely sealed fasting Isylea and now they are taking and promising. Finally, I will never say: patients.
And what kind of game gives the game Uryen? potentially big things, but now the clan needs to grow most of his characters to create a game much more exciting and dynamic. Wealth dell'Uryen is the pursuit of knowledge which gives depth to the role. The idea that I made at the time and I think that after all reflects the soul of the clan is that of a person running Isylea trying to learn all the knowledge existing on the other side for the BG clan plays a role * * within the political race. In short there is something for everyone.
the portrait seems dell'esicasta. How do you think you can play the "scholar dryma" race for the most perceived as a bunch of warriors snudadenti? First of all I tell you that Dryma are essentially perceived evil. Let me explain: Even listening to players with a track record it seems that this race is a synonym for Baheli. The Baheli are an aspect of race, along with Thrang are historically the most numerous. These two clans are the arms of the people Dryma BEYOND but there are two other clans like the more spiritual and Yerba Uryen. It comes out of a race seen as heterogeneous, but played and perceived as homogeneous.
Why do you think this aspect of dryma, beyond the perception that he has never managed to emerge in the game? What then, in my opinion, this is the problem of race dryma in general: it is played mainly as a violent people (bhael) and animal (Thrang), offers little chance of change from a mold of activity. Perhaps theirs is a kind of game that attracts. Play a spiritual character, perhaps very structured but very limited because of constraints on the full BG in the long run not having fun, I think it's exactly the problem suffered by the other side of the cult and Veitien Vilmis. It is often perceived as a specific role or a little monotonous. It follows that these roles are marginal within the logic of race. The paradox is that Thrang Baheli and impatiently waiting for the other two bloom in order to "complete". However
Uryen known that lately the clan is well fleshed out, it's the right time? Yes we hope to have some continuity. We all eight active even if all relatively new. We look forward to a craftsman and maybe another son of the wind, but for now it's just fine. We hope to continue like this but you know better than me, clans inflate and deflate very easily even if now we are all pretty well together both on and off.
I believe that 90%, even 99% do it, success depends on the skill of a clan / charisma of a chieftain. In your opinion, what are the characteristics that a chieftain must have to determine the success of a clan? Leadership is a complex phenomenon to describe. Charisma is certainly important, but I, as a good communicator, the ability to put down a lot about cooperation, involvement, communication and informal dynamics. Over time I refined a little look on the management of groups and I can say that if you are not a good team off, often can not be on, so a guild that works is based on a cooperative relationship based on trust bonds as solid as possible. In this, the chieftain, and more immediately, those who are veterans can establish dynamic listening / help / cooperation both on and off to strengthen the spirit of the group.
A few examples of these "dynamics" of which you speak, so that maybe someone can take inspiration! First, it is advisable to be on the forum to share ideas of race to play, ideas for new applications, or trying to give a systematic game of the clan is a good thing. In addition to forums we have a race almost permanent MSN group where not only do you feel about the dynamics inherent in the game but we also go a bit beyond that, joking or condividento moments away from the game. It is a dynamic that brings out the mood and makes the vicissitudes of the clan, are relaxed. On the other hand, if people can communicate and feel part of a group linked to the group and will certainly have less incentive to leave. Obviously when you feel part of a group, you feel recognized, you're more incentive to cooperate, to create the game. Make listening a bulkhead still makes more close-knit group, and once you have a hard core have good ground on which to build a clan. In any case, the fact still remains that if the player is not enough for the group are all the dynamics of informal cooperation and the whole of this world. They know all the chieftains in a more or less explicit. In the words of wisdom Uryen: 'And I want' to put rum, who was born Strunz 'nun bit' addiventà babbà [For non-bilingual translation footprint would be: those who are born round do not die framework].
Since you're a communicator, and the fact that lately I'm trying to explore the theme of "rules of language as a client, I would like to use your expertise to ask what you think. More specifically: I think, like all things, it takes a while to learn how to best register used for the purpose by the client (and I'm not just referring to the various vintage items such as "sir"). For example, we want to talk about the express? What is the right way to use them? What is their real purpose? When did you can avoid use them? Yes, indeed there are many ways to ruin the atmosphere like a Dryma that of you or worse yet you still see PG or run naked for Khenam. The express, ie scrittine yellow, yes, bell'argomento. I do not think there is a rule between them when and when not, but certainly I can say is that the quality of a player is denoted by what is essentially able to make the idea with esplimi and the descriptor: _. We
a kind of game I want you to make me believe that an express exploited to raise their game, and I explain why and then I want to express an example of "wrong", and explain why the same! : Raise PippoBaudo looking for the eyes to look and has the contrite face into a grimace angrily raises his eyes toward supporting PippoBaudo watch it for long moments without end, and his face exudes an air of defiance The first is surely correct, the possibility of the showman consideration, or not to pay attention, that leaves a good margin of freedom. The second leaves no way to PippoBaudo. The'm having an action that is looking at me. I tried two examples which apparently can go very well but at a closer look conceal a subtle difference. I think the first good rule is not to force others to be secondary characters in what is my story. But both play a descriptive and make roughly the idea of \u200b\u200bwhat is happening or could happen. I do not think it is right to regard the second wrong for * all * but I think there is a respect for another's narration in the first case in which there is no second. PippoBaudo certainly will support my vision and gnashing of teeth and then devastated with his scalatta. But that's another story.
Ah, the famous express constrictive! For example: a knife to your throat. We take this case to investigate. Let's pretend we distinguish between two "levels" of narrative: the mechanical (forged sword) and that of express (: make a snowman). The two levels often end up confused, and sometimes come into competition. For example, in a meeting between two hostile pg where the mechanical outcome of the meeting is granted, and pg "losing" claims, legitimately or not, have a chance of winning by using the second level, that of the express. Do you think this claim is legitimate? The question is very complex, first of all I can say that my approach to the definition of the game is certainly much less tied to the grid default mechanism that assume the fight. To give you an example I prefer the combat system of Cyberpunk [called for just Saturday Night Fever for its unpredictability] compared to d & d in which the harness very welcome challenge to the outcome the clash. For Isylea everything is much more complex, of course. From these statements indicate that they are led to give voice to those who lose a clash 100 times in 100 if you have a topic / knife by the handle. Everything is to understand how we arrived at a knife to my throat. If you played? I found sleeping? It took me behind? The ending is anything but obvious, I think I'll go out with a fight but not with a mechanical coupling, are for the most expresses express and respond to mechanical mechanics. What do you think?
I think to really do such a thing must be really talented, and above all we must accept the possibility of losing. The possibility of losing, right. It 's so strange to lose? Not that I would go for that first game to lose, but I think it's better to play, lose and remain imprinted in the minds of other players respect and good game to be remembered for a very bad bet. There is also to say that I speak not only for understanding of the game but also because I do not have anything to protect shrinkage, no equipment came out for a thousand hours of on skilling of blacksmith and convalescence [...] better not talk about it. If you forget that many players do not have this concept would be hypocritical, even if they are features that characterize the other races and should be played, this will not waiver from their defeat.
The fact is that the PCs, and also rightly feel entitled to win if, for mechanics, they can win. How Morkai said, few are willing to lose to express what would win mechanically. 'S why I was talking to two levels of narration: the first is the mechanical one why do not unions, to express what comes next because it is not considered "super partes". In fact, I happened to see pg who were very willing to be influenced by the express when it was played in the presence of the master, just because the master is (more or less) are perceived as impartial arbitrators, who will not try to force the situation to their benefit but rather for the benefit of the quest. In short, the discourse is more or less the same: those who consider Isylea a race where you win or lose will not really use all the possibilities that the game really offers. seems a very appropriate speech. I believe that in each case depends very much on the stakes. For example, if there is only one death to win mechanic is one thing, if there is something bigger jumps often express fairplay. After those who have invested time and desire in a play went back home with nothing done decreed by express? I do not think there is a right way, but if the bet has been prepared and have to rely on the first level, with all the trappings of the case. Certainly no one
would like, and indeed there are express and express. "Did a knife to the throat" is not the best, and you can expect an enthusiastic response. Now I wonder: in some games there are only two outcomes? That is, I win and I'll kill you first, you win and run second. There is no higher possible outcomes? I can win and let live. In any event, even if we could find middle ground alternative would always be a part that had not, by choice, perhaps, but in any case, though it is meant in an adversarial relationship, there is always a game where someone loses. The degree of victory / loss is very free, of course. Then in any case, the reasoning in the abstract limits us to a logic of short term.
Ok, since I think the interview is coming along, how about if we go to the final questions? Concorde, I think, to read a ton, I believe that the law in three.
So let's start with the classic staffico opinion on the work in all respects: outspoken. Just yesterday I read a post in coordination Seavel Dryma. I think that many things the player if the images if they are skilled enough, but I think that most of the ignorant. For the layman Dryma, the post goes over the reasons for the widespread discontent of all races addressing managerial issues, mechanics and staff linked to real life. I believe that those who read he's helped a lot. I think the staff has invested much of his energy to multiply the communication from the bottom up, but smoky and dark are the ways of common descent, and this with regard to internal communication. For external communication are quite disappointed that it is not done or that attention is kept at very low levels. I understand that the rest have 50 new players the day after tomorrow and 75 is considered, on a conscious level or not I can not say, as a kind of catastrophe to the upper floors. This was off. With regard to on, my experience is very limited. For the two Quester dryma I can only say that I am always amused when there was another, but I can not tell you more here. In any case I have to confess that I have a master of games paper innate sympathy towards those who moderates the game, and also by a mindset in which the master does not play to lose the player but to keep them entertained, the master is not a ' interference, even when it may seem, it is impartial. Then if I am injured at issue, this is beyond doubt.
Let the game of the races. We talked about plenty of dryma then pass to humans! Humans, yes. The game of the races is always very complex, then surely the human reality is even more. First of all I have to say that the game is not mediocre human as they try to make believe. Excellent role players are also there, as everywhere else for that matter. Unfortunately, the breed is large and therefore easier to have players not great. As there are three cities and dozens of clans, of which only a few or very few in normal operations, to raise the human game, in my humble opinion, only serve more people. But many many players.
Then we spend the dwarves! that I have not had two interactions with this breed, in both cases seemed more than I am worthy. I do not know their problems, I do not know what else to say!
Elves! Same as above.
You see that you are noob! Orcs? Even interaction.
Argh. Goblin? good, with the goblins I feel a little better prepared. Playing with them I always had the idea that it is a race that is not only ordinary, but manages to create very game. In other words appeared to me as a race that has done testing and can fly high. Their size is clearly qualitative, it can not make a speech in number for these pelliverde. Probably their game one thousand hidden problems that do not know but I can not but admire the maturity with which the players who play the goblin face racial differentiation.
Imagine that you are interviewing me, shoot the question would you ask a staff member! Well I will try to ask you something fairly generic, maybe you can answer; Isylea do what he wants to be?
It 's a good question, and I'm sure the person best suited to answer! What I can tell you is that we never stop up here, and if the side implementative think really miss you very little to reach the age of reason, from the side building there say limits. What we would like (and we are trying every day to do) the BG is increasingly deepen and broaden the horizons of the game. My personal dream is that the map has not one day more than those natural boundaries of a round world. We're working on, but it takes a lot of time! Move to the last question: What is
was the most exciting ruolisticamente talking about your (brief) career Isyleiana. certainly spent my Dryma there are many exciting games. I love the exploration of dungeons and here we do not complain at all but I would not go too far and pointed out some details that would be better not say. The most exciting was undoubtedly the last meeting Uryen, with eight of us in the same box. It 'was very nice, I took it as a victory for the whole group.
Luckily I brought with me a sedative, and I managed to inoculate a microsecond before they start talking. But it was a challenge that we had to overcome in order to prepare for the next: In fact, we're going to interview a Karden to finally discover what it feels like to die every time you turn on the client!
Here 
