View Profile: Nagol - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 10:47 AM
    Yes. You exercised supreme control over the world and its inhabitants and only relented to allow something once you were mollified. Sounds pretty par for the course to me.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 10:44 AM
    Because that is a noun and has no adjective complement.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 10:42 AM
    Of course I am. I control the whole in-game reality. If I say the PCs float to the ceiling and reman still as their opponents do the caramba around them, that's what happens. Authority given is still authority. Some philosophies suggest all power is given. If a player wants to stay at my table, he must suffer my rule. So? The ability of someone to overthrow authority does not...
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 10:36 AM
    I'd suggest to opportune time would be when the damage is recorded. There are a whole bunch of things that can happen to the total between when it is announced and when it is recorded.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 10:34 AM
    Words do have meaning, just not the one you want to assign. Fathers, coaches, and bosses are referred to as despotic without killing those who complain. Despot refers to the level of personal power held by a ruler, not how that ruler actually rules. The first example from Oxford: "‘Thirty years of rule by benevolent despots who promote economic growth and development - even if it made sense -...
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th October, 2018, 10:26 AM
    Despotism is negative to you. The first definition in the set posted by Imaro had no negative connotation -- merely a power/control requirement.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 12:36 PM
    Who's joking? /jk
    174 replies | 4538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 12:03 PM
    And you have mine.
    174 replies | 4538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 11:57 AM
    Why did Arthur pick Galahad? Why pit David against Goliath? There are nearly an infinite number of reasons. Of the top of my head: It's been granted to a young cousin. The position is both ceremonial and prestigious. Who is their right mind wold challenge the king? It's unheard of. It's been prophesied. The champion is a fraud/misidentified a la Brave Little Tailor or The Inspector...
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 01:59 AM
    Pants are outer wear, cars don't have boots, and we gave up torches for flashlights when electricity became a thing. Though we do tend to use all the letters in a word. Oh! and pudding is a specific dish -- not a synonym for dessert.
    174 replies | 4538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th October, 2018, 01:50 AM
    North American anyway. Canadians call them cookies too.
    174 replies | 4538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 10:34 PM
    One of my most frequent players has a strong palsy. Dread is great if everyone can participate.
    22 replies | 579 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 01:59 PM
    In that case, you can't make any sweeping claims what any role would require as it would depend entirely on the game engine and people at the table. Certainly, I've had king's champions that have run the whole ranges from inexperienced to highly experienced, low skill to high skill, no body count to high body count and I'm a single GM.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 11:50 AM
    It was a city campaign and the PCs were law enforcement. The players decided to "bring them in alive" as a credo. There was a lot of subdual damage done and the arcane casters concentrated on investigation, battlefield control, and buffing the martial combatants.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 11:38 AM
    I've had entire groups manage to get to the teens in both 1e and 3.5 without killing a humanoid. I want to say 'nothing sentient', but have to review a lot of notes which probably no longer exist.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 11:36 AM
    But you weren't talking RPG characters specifically. You were making wide statements to justify RPG character roles and behaviour. Galahad is a character that violates not just one but all your expected tenets. He was untrained, inexperienced, not a killer and yet he was the king's champion.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 02:29 AM
    How did the bad guy recognize and correctly name the TARDIS and not know who the Doctor is?
    174 replies | 4538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018, 02:15 AM
    Probably All Flesh Must be Eaten and associated Uni-system games. I also like Bureau 13, The Laundry, and Deadlands. I'd like to try Esoterrorists or Night Black Agents.
    22 replies | 579 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd October, 2018, 10:57 PM
    Yeah, I tried that a few times. I find it is less disruptive and more enjoyable for everyone to quietly withdraw if the rules I wouldn't have agreed to remain after I make a pitch.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd October, 2018, 02:55 PM
    Galahad would beg to differ.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd October, 2018, 01:48 PM
    In your cleric example, the player is forcing the situation into the foreground. Backgrounding is more a "I won't ask; you won't tell" situation. Both sides agree that the a particular thing is just going to bump along in a satisfactory way without spending table time at it. If the player breaks the agreement then the GM needs to respond. There is no loss of consistency from backgrounding...
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd October, 2018, 01:34 PM
    I always ask myself "Would I have agreed to play the campaign if these rules were disclosed at the beginning?" and let that answer drive my reaction.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Monday, 22nd October, 2018, 01:32 PM
    There's a difference between adding something new and changing something already established. I'm more open to the former than the latter. That said, I'd be tempted to only add new feats if the whole table agreed. The natures of spells and gear are more fluid; new stuff should appear from time to time.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Sunday, 21st October, 2018, 12:22 PM
    Table rules were set at the start of the campaign. The DM wanted to alter the rules without player unanimity. I believe that to be a big no-no.
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Friday, 19th October, 2018, 11:38 PM
    I agree with you. Especially about 1e. The first couple of spell levels don't require any form of agent. Only the last few levels come from the deity - so 6th and 7th level for a greater god. Although Deities and Demigods provided stats for gods, there was never any expectation that the gods would generally be interacted with let alone a common campaign element. The only published case I...
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Wednesday, 17th October, 2018, 03:17 PM
    My antagonists are drawn with a wide variety of backgrounds, attitudes, and outlooks. All of them are in some way at odds with the group's motivations and goals -- otherwise they end up not being antagonists -- so it is more a case the PC's beliefs drive the potential shapes of the antagonists.
    91 replies | 2684 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th October, 2018, 11:01 PM
    So I had a chance to watch the first two episodes. The first episode was a mixed bag. I was unimpressed by the "fall from orbit" resolution of the reveal at the Christmas special. The direction/editing seemed really choppy. The death of Grace seemed both pointless and unnecessary since it had been resolved the mass of cables was a sensing device and pointless to attack. Tossing the Doctor...
    174 replies | 4538 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th October, 2018, 12:08 PM
    If that's something I'd like explore and I think it'd have a strong positive response from enough players, sure! I remember one time where I wanted to run Ars Magica and I knew one of the players didn't like the requisite bookkeeping. He didn't play that campaign. He came back once we switched systems to something more to his liking a few years later. That's the only case I can specifically...
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Nagol's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th October, 2018, 10:34 AM
    I design campaigns based on what I want to run. Typically, I'll have 2-3 pitches to make at a time. The pitch that gets the best response is the one I'll run. There's no hard feelings if a player doesn't want to participate in a particular campaign; I'll see them at other times. What I won't do is bait and switch. I lay out the campaign basics and while individual adventures may vary from...
    1794 replies | 57410 view(s)
    2 XP
No More Results

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,485
Posts Per Day
0.67
Last Post
What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game? Thursday, 25th October, 2018 10:47 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
18
General Information
Join Date
Wednesday, 8th September, 2004
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

Monday, 29th October, 2018


Thursday, 25th October, 2018


Wednesday, 24th October, 2018


Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018


Monday, 22nd October, 2018


Sunday, 21st October, 2018


Saturday, 20th October, 2018


Tuesday, 16th October, 2018


Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast

Wednesday, 24th October, 2018

  • 02:04 PM - Blue mentioned Nagol in post Deleted Posts
  • 01:37 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...by improving in class ability. I think the answer to your "captain as henchman" question is trivially obvious, but at the moment I'll leave it as something for the interested reader to resolve. A more interesting question is whether a PC or henchman fighter enjoys the command abilities of a NPC captain if appointed to such a role. The rules don't tell us. I would suggest that they do, but that's an extrapolation from the rules, not an interpretation of them. It's a white room scenario pemerton. Knocking out the 20 goblins killing the townsfolk does nothing as the will just get back up and kill more. What is the party going to do? Leave them out in the middle of the forest to wake back up? It's not feasible to carry them to town. Carrying them to town will just result in the town killing them anyway, which will introduce the fighter to meting out death indirectly.I gave an actual play example upthread (from a different system, but no different in principle in this respect). Nagol gave an example. I can't remember the colours of the walls where I was playing, and don't know about Nagol's case, but white paint or not these are reports of actual play. As far as the goblins are concerned: (i) why is it not feasible to take them to town? (ii) where do the rules say that they will be killed in the town? (iii) handing someone over to someone else who then murders them typically is not a case of meting out death? (iv) why can't the PCs take an oath from the goblins to renounce their evil ways (thats what the PCs in my 4e game did on more than one occasion)? You seem to have an incredibly narrow conception of what is possible - presumably you think most of the above is house ruling, but I don't know where in the rulebooks you're taking your narrow conception from. In the game the PC has already hit and killed the opponent. Then, AFTER the player has found out that fact, the player can suddenly have the PC time travel back to before damage was rolled and decid...

Tuesday, 16th October, 2018

  • 11:28 PM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    To be perfectly honest, it didn’t really occur to me that this would be contentious.That surprises me! Although there are a wide variety of approaches expressed on ENworld (I'll point to eg Aldarc, TwoSix, Nagol in this thread), there is a default or dominant approach which is that RPGing = the GM establishes a fiction (which typically will take the form of some sort of "story") and the players' role is to work their way through that fiction. Hence any suggestion that players should exercise some control over establishing the fiction will be contentiouos.

Saturday, 13th October, 2018

  • 02:18 AM - Hussar mentioned Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    ...s the PC to be effectively "hands off" the element as well. So Background element of a factional membership/patronage/code of conduct could only remain on the Background so long as the PC is behaving in ways that are considered appropriate. A paladin of devotion can't go around burning down orphanages that were otherwise minding their own business; the player doesn't get a free pass from inappropriate behaviour. It's more of a "Don't ask; don't tell" situation. The DM won't bring situations into play specifically test adherence to the oath and the player will play generally compliant with the oath. A Warlock's patron might have him performing actions in downtime in the background, but the table won't be spending time on furthering the Great Old One's goals in the world. Sauntering my way through a lot of pages. This is a busy thread. But, it is good to see that someone here gets precisely what I'm talking about. If you don't like how I describe things, I suggest rereading Nagol's posts. He puts it perfectly well, gets the point immediately and can likely answer any questions better than I can.

Saturday, 22nd September, 2018

  • 04:13 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post Burning Questions: What's the Worst Thing a DM Can Do?
    ...ly 1 surprise die rolled for the party, using the best die (eg one ranger means the whole party is surprised only on a 1 in 6) - so 5e in this respect seems consistent with that strand of D&D tradition. You see, I'm still not sure that in Iserith's example that this would grant an active check. Or weather this counts as 'Keeping Watch' and therefore, in Iserith's mind, is still passive.I've asked him about this and so hopefully will soon learn! As for the example 'with context', take the example in isolation for a moment. There's a few contextual factors that might change the needle here but I they also change the purity of the example, I guess. Whatframing do you think underides the mechanics as set out?What I'm getting at here is my version of iserith's "telegraphing". When I GM, I don't do telegraphing in that way - rather, the telegraphing comes from what the PCs put at stake via the build and play of their PCs from the "story"/narrative point of view (see also my reply to Nagol not far upthread).
  • 04:09 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post Burning Questions: What's the Worst Thing a DM Can Do?
    Heh. I tried to say this in another thread and got dogpiled for it.To be fair, you got dogpiled for saying that it's a game creation engine in which the adventure/scenario is the game that is created. That's not what Nagol said - he pointed to a feature of adjudication of player-declared moves in RPGs.

Monday, 10th September, 2018

  • 09:14 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post X & O For More Fun
    If one person doesn't like horror films we don't invite that person on those occasions when we're going to see one. it's really much closer to the group having a horror movie night and someone else trying to change the genre.I don't have much to add to Nagol's reply. Turning up to play a RPG isn't, per se, turning up to be reminded of some unpleasant or traumatic personal incident that you're rather not (re)engage with as part of your leisure time. To use the spiders/bugs example that has been brought up a few times in the thread: is turning up to play a RPG ipso facto agreeing to be freaked out by bug narratives? I don't see how it is, and I don't see how it's any sort of "tyranny" or "entitlement" to ask the group to step back from that.

Friday, 8th June, 2018

  • 03:23 PM - Manbearcat mentioned Nagol in post Flipping the Table: Did Removing Miniatures Save D&D?
    Of course if it's the level of abstraction that is the issue with SC's for a few/some/many... a better explanation wouldn't have really helped. Some people just want finer granularity and tighter action association in their task resolution and mechanics. I definitely have some sympathy for this position (not because I hold it personally). Players like yourself and @Nagol have been very consistent on this point throughout many conversations over the years. If a gamer has strident Sim priorities and/or they have Sim priorities localized to their D&D play, then 4e's genre-logic and scene-based considerations/techniques (dramatic arc, escalation, narrative causality, fail forward) are going to be problematic, no doubt. And if you try to eschew all of these fundamental components to 4e scene-based play and smuggle in Sim priorities/approaches in their stead, the game is going to push back very hard. You're likely going to end up with boring, stale Skill Challenges where the situation doesn't change dynamically (or much at all), no dramatic arc arises, and it looks/feels like "an exercise in dice rolling." Our conversation many years ago (it was a good one) regarding "the gorge" is probably the benchmark for the dissonance you're ascribing to the game experience for you (and others like you). When your mental framework is predicated upon one very part...

Saturday, 14th April, 2018

  • 04:28 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    Pre-authored the secret door is there for PC's and NPC's to discover or stumble across even before it is "established" (At least in the way established has been used in this thread)...as an example that jumps readily to mind, in some games elves, whether PC's or NPC's would have a chance to detect said secret door just by passing near it, I'm not sure how an ability like this would work in a game where a secret door is never pre-authored it would either mean the ability is virtually useless and never discovers a secret door or it is rolled for every time they enter a room leading to a strange overabundance of secret doors in the world, often in illogical or strange places. Abilities like this definitely seem like a reason to favor one over the other. Nagol has already said some stuff in reply to this; I'll say a bit more. The PCs "stumbling across" a secret door really means that, at certain points, the GM tell the players that their PCs notice a secret door. These moments of telling can be regulated via a complex interaction of pre-authored and pre-mapped architecture, movement rules that require tracking the PC movement on the map, and rules for determining whether or not a PC notices a door when within 10'. That's how AD&D does it. But there are other ways to generate moments of telling. One of the PCs in my Burning Wheel game has the Dreamer ability: as a GM, I'm obliged from time to time to narrate portentous dreams that this PC has had. In effect, the player has paid a modest amount of PC building resources to impose this obligation on the GM. An elven ability to notice secret doors could be handled somewhat similarlly. As far as NPCs stumbling across a secret door - I'm not 100% sure what you have in mind, but that seems ...

Tuesday, 13th March, 2018

  • 11:08 PM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post Any Dungeon World players here?
    I would have pointed you to Cambelll and Manbearcat, but that already happened. I think Nagol also GMs Dungeon World. And I belive AbdulAlhazred has some experience. chaochou is an Apocalypse World player/GM and so might have something to contribute too. I've played it a little bit, and have a general grasp of its approach and methods, but am far from an expert.

Wednesday, 7th March, 2018

  • 03:04 PM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ... be useful if you can answer if you've been swayed in any way. If there are any decent answers to the question you posed in the OP. What is worldbuilding for? If you reply to me, I'd hope you would not cut this question out a third time. I think it'd genuinely be interesting to see your take on it after hundreds of pages of this thread. Certainly there must have been some take away for you?I answered this a long way upthread, I think in multiple posts. A range of answers have been given. Worldbuilding provides material for the GM to share with the players as triggered by their moves - this is generally described as "exploration". On the GM side, this can be a creative exercise. On the player side, it seems to be described mostly in terms of immersion. "Immersion" in this context seems necessarily to involve someone else telling fiction to the player, but that characterisation has been resisted to quite a degree. Worldbuilding provides the players with "levers" to do things - Nagol is the main poster to have talked about this. It hasn't been fully analysed in this thread, but there are multiple ways this could play out. One is in what I would call White Plume Mountain style - worldbuilding provides material, by way of fictional positioning, that the players can directly engage to proffer solutions to the puzzles they are faced with (I call it WPM because the paradigm, in my mind, is removing doors from their hinges so as to "surf" down the frictionless corridor over the pits with super-tetanus spikes). Another, which is less OSR-ish/WPM, and probably therefore more typical in contemporary RPGing, is that the players - by engaging with the "levers" - trigger the GM to narrate stuff in ways that go beyond pre-authoring. When this really starts to reflect player pro-activity, I think that we may see a transition to player-driven play without anyone in the game having to get self-conscious about it. Now that I think about it, AbdulAlhazred has, quite a way upthrea...

Tuesday, 27th February, 2018

  • 06:27 AM - AbdulAlhazred mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    1) principles play would be to curtail action negation through secret backstory. If it's never used, there's not point. No, instead, that was about the mere existence of secret backstory being enough to mean that the DM will not only occasionally veto a declaration, but that they will instead veto every declaration that doesn't fit their 'choose-your-own-adventure' novel backstory. This is clearly false. Well, that wasn't actually the question/commentary. The question was "if it is never going to use it to veto an action declaration, then why does it exist at all?" You COULD answer that, straight up, by providing some sort of reason. In fact some fairly plausible answers HAVE been presented. Nagol for instance suggested that a type of mystery story, and a type of exploration would both benefit from secret backstory or hidden world elements (which is a bit different but COULD be hidden backstory, they're pretty close anyway). I posed some questions, which we may yet examine :) 2) I don't think player-centered games provide all of the same depth of play experience. I think they provide a different play experience, one that can also be deep. This is a point that many have agreed upon, the chess vs checkers argument. The playstyles incorporate different approaches and goals and so can't provide the same experience because they aren't tuned to do so. You can mix and match a bit, but it's mostly importing some traits into a mostly DM or mostly player driven game. I think they can do different things. I actually tend to think that GM-centered play with hidden elements is MORE limited, but there are questions of aesthetics here and nobody can claim they own the final word on it,...

Monday, 26th February, 2018

  • 05:28 PM - pming mentioned Nagol in post Settling a player argument with Suggestion
    Hiya! So Charm Person lasts 1 hour per casting. Once it expires the person you charmed knows you charmed them and may not be all that receptive to you twisting their free will in this fashion. How does that days...weeks...months thing work in this case? I'll answer that for Nagol. He is/was playing 1e AD&D. In it, how long the spell lasted depended on the Intelligence of the creature charmed. If you were some sort of super-genius (19+ Intelligence), the duration was 1 Day. If you were dumb as a rock (3 Intelligence) it was 3 months. If you were of average Intelligence (10 Int, lets say), it was 3 weeks. Yeah...1e Charm Person is nothing to sneeze at. ^_^ Paul L. Ming

Saturday, 24th February, 2018

  • 10:17 PM - Lanefan mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ...ans appropriate to their characters. Yet here we have a player who would rather use exploration and wise information gathering in order to go where the action isn't; in effect mitigating or sometimes entirely denying the DM the opportunity to frame these dramatic scenes as long as doing so allows character goals to be met, missions accomplished, etc. This to me is an important form of player agency that is entirely denied by 'go where the action is'. I rather badly waved at this idea a long way upthread; I'll try again here, using the example from pemerton 's game where the PCs were looking for a reliquary, and met some angels en route that showed them the way to get there. As written, the PCs conversed with the angels after which pemerton-as-GM went where the action is and framed the scene in the reliquary; and things proceeded from there. (note this might not be the best example to use but it's one I can remember the gist of without having to dig around) A player using Nagol 's approach loses out on gobs of agency here: - s/he doesn't get the opportunity to explore the approaches to and surroundings of the reliquary before arriving at the drama; which means - - s/he doesn't get a chance to explore the area around the reliquary to determine whether there's more than one possible approach or exit - - s/he doesn't get an opportunity to pre-scout the reliquary itself via stealth or scrying or whatever other means might be available in order to assess its occupants, threats, hazards, etc. - - because of this lack of knowledge s/he isn't able to mitigate potential risks or prepare for a potential encounter via pre-casting spells, downing potions, or whatever other means might be available - before all this, s/he also loses out on any opportunity to explore whatever might lie between the angel encounter site and the reliquary - by bypassing this the GM has arbitrarily decided there's nothing there of relevance rather than allowing the players to find ou...

Friday, 16th February, 2018

  • 02:23 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    On fiction and existence: this is a response to Ovinomancerr, Nagol, Lanefan, Michael Silverbane and chaochou. To begin: reading, listening, imagining etc are real processes that take place. Imagining involves causal processes in the brain. Listening also involves processes in the ears. Reading also involves processes in the eyes. I am taking the above to be uncontenious, so if you disagree you're going to have to let me know explicitly. There is more to these processes, too, which I will get to below. The process in the brain when these things - reading, listening, imagining - occur involve the linguistic capacity of the person to a high degree. I'm not really across the science of this, and am going to describe it in more colloquial terms: the person who is reading, listening or imagining forms and entertains ideas. Assuming that they know what they are reading, listening to or imagining is a fiction, however, then they don't form beliefs (other than prsently irrelevant beliefs, such as "I am now reading Hound of the Baskervilles"). ...

Wednesday, 31st January, 2018

  • 09:52 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ...see the PF AP style as a descendant of this style. CoC is my favourite RPG to play in this style (with an evocative GM, and in modest doses). Then there is the "indie"/"no myth" style I like. There are variations in this style - eg I tend towards rather strongly scene-framed approaches, whereas eg Dungeon World is a bit structurally looser than that, with the GM decision-making a bit more on the micro-/granular rather than "big picture" side of things. But for the current thread these differences can be glossed over, I think. Then the "half-style": the one that is Gygaxian in some ways (pre-authored setting, but no fudging) but which has a scope and an approach that therefore makes player learning (through repeat attempts, use of divination resources, etc) hard; and makes the GM's role in choosing what to foreground about the setting much more important than the player's less mediated, more direct engagement with the dungeon map and the dungeon key. I think this is where you and Nagol probably fall (in terms of this thread - I'm not saying this is who you are as RPGers). I'll go this far in this post: I think this fourth style can tend to slip into a version of the 2nd ed style. Now just like there are variants in the "indie"-style, there are variants in that 2nd style. I'm running them together because the difference don't loom large for me (given my conception of player agency). Eg in a PF AP the players may be literally on a railroad (first encounter A, then encounter B, then C, etc). Whereas in some others that I'm putting into this category, the players can choose whether they go to A or B or C. From my point of view, though, the choice of A or B or C - if it is still a choice among things to be told by the GM - still makes the game a GM-driven one. The players just trigger which bit of his/her pre-written stuff the GM tells them. I think the fourth style can tend to slip into the "choose A or B or C" version of the second style. Without the clear stru...

Monday, 29th January, 2018

  • 02:15 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ...erate some of those answers: * Worldbuilding - designing a setting - is a worthwhile artistic and/or intellectual pursuit in itself, that bring pleasure/satisfaction to the GM who engages in it; * The game can't proceed without setting, and one way to get it is for the GM to write it in advance; * Some players don't want to write setting, and so the only way to get it is for the GM to write it, and this is easier done in advance; * Some players want to know that the GM wrote up all the fiction in advance, because that supports their immersion. And the OP itself offered one answer - to confront the players with a maze/puzzle (the dungeon) to beat. The OP also suggested that, as the setting becomes a "living, breathing world" which exists mostly in the mind and notes of the GM, rather than maps and room keys that are - through various, mostly conventionally-established moves - cognitivtely accessible to the players, the maze/puzzle rationale tends to be lost. I think Nagol doesn't agree with this, which is what our discussion in the thread is currently about (though it's moved on a bit from my starting maze/puzzle way of framing the matter). By declaring that playstyles other than purely player-driven content amount to "being told a story by the GM" you very much are saying that other playstyles aren't viable as a co-operative play experience. I haven't delared that those playstyles are "being told a story by a GM". I have asserted that certain aspects of play, which are often presented in metaphorical terms ("the player explore the setting") or in in-fiction terms ("the PCs travel from A to B") actually - when we analyse them as the play of a game among actual people sitting around a table - consist of the players triggering the GM reading them stutf. This is how a typical CoC scenario works, for instance, and most of the Planescape modules I can think of (Infinite Staircase; Dead Gods). It's how the Alexandrian's "node based design" and "three ...

Sunday, 28th January, 2018

  • 03:57 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ...raveller only. Traveller and RQ were niche only in the sense that they weren't D&D. Hidden-design play has been the default (and majority) approach since Day 1. Most contemporary D&D play is not "hidden design" in howandwhy99's sense. Just to give one example: in hidden design play the ability to try again is crucial: you can go back into the dungeon and have another go (at mapping and thus unravelling the maze; at working out the solution to the green devil face or the orange mist; etc). But very few contemporary D&D adventures are based around retries like that - they are one-way trips through a series of episodes/scenes. I do think you are wrong in saying players have no agency in my style of game.I think that the bigger the "sandbox", and so the more that the players rely on the GM to present them with bits of it, to make bits of it salient, etc; then the less agency they have, because their cognitive access to the materials they need to beat the challenges (related to Nagol's comments uptrhead about "levers") becomes dependent on the GM. Part of the cleverness of the dungeon idea is that the parameters (geography; social relations between NPCs/monsters; the possible subject matter of clues found; etc) are confined, so that the players can learn stuff and reliably act upon it. Conversely, if, in the fiction, everything is connected to everything, so that pulling on one "string" gives the GM licence to evolve the whole of the fictional situation as s/he thinks appropriate, in ways that aren't even in principle able to be known by the players, then I think the players' agency is considerably reduced. Because I don't know the details of your game, I'm not making any judgement about agency or otherwise in your game. What I am doing is trying to explain what I think are some practical limits on running what howandwhy99 has called a "hidden design" game.

Saturday, 27th January, 2018

  • 08:14 PM - Blue mentioned Nagol in post The Narrative Campaign, Utopia or Doable?
    It could work, though as Nagol pointed out there are systems that are much better suited to that then D&D. I personally go the other extreme. Before the start of the campaign I sketch out a few ideas - they don't need to be consistent with each other or fleshed out at all. Just so that I have some clues if the players come asking. Some I might be attached to, others might just be "hey, what about this". Then comes session 0, where we work our characters and motivations and hooks - and that's going to form the basis for where the campaign is going. At that point I pick up need ideas from the players on where they want to go, see how the ideas they have can hook into my pre-campaign ideas (and which ones don't fit), and steer people who are looking for hooks and connections into those that others are already connecting into. I usually end up with three or so big arcs that have buy-in from several players, as well as ideas for character arcs to drop in. During play, I lay pipe (as in the screenwriter me...

Thursday, 25th January, 2018

  • 01:20 AM - pemerton mentioned Nagol in post What is *worldbuilding* for?
    ...e checks against a difficulty), that doesn't tell us why it is the GM's job to do the stuff you say. To be clear: I'm not asserting that there is no answer to the question. But answers that don't take account of the range of ways RPGing works will (necessarily) be incomplete. I mean, obviously setting provides depth - but it doesn't have to be GM authored to do that (witness the various examples I've posted upthread). So a more complete answer adds information eg Caliban says that many players don't want to contribute to establishing the backstory, so someone else has to do it; Mercurius says that he wants the GM to tell him the backstory as part of his process of immersion (to me that seems very similar to being told a story by the GM - I think Mercurius queries that characterisation, but from my point of view I'm still working out why, and also why it's considered pejorative - I went to the pictures recently, and had a story told to me, and that doesn't make me feel offended). Nagol gave some different reasons: GM worldbuilding establishes levers/tools for the players. It makes sense that someone else has to do this, in that being able to just deem your own tools into existence seems a bit cheat-y. To me, that speaks to a style of play much closer to classic dungeoneering, though mabye Nagol would not agree with that. Also, the very term "action resolution" is here a bit misleading. Yes a PC has declared an action, and that action gets resolved...but the resolution of that action only applies to the PC and her immediate surrounds, not to anything static within the rest of the game world. Why? And which game are you talking about? In Classic Traveller (1977 version), the rules set throws required on a player's Streetwise check for a PC to find a shady official willing to sell permits/licences at a good price. That is an action resolution that is not confined to the PC and his/her immediate surrounds. If successful, it estblishes that said official exists an...


Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 60 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Wednesday, 31st October, 2018


Thursday, 25th October, 2018

  • 11:21 AM - Sadras quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Because that is a noun and has no adjective complement. At least enlightened is a complementary (and complimentary) adjective. :lol:
  • 11:11 AM - Sadras quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Yes. You exercised supreme control over the world and its inhabitants and only relented to allow something once you were mollified. Sounds pretty par for the course to me. I'm not sure I'd put that spin on it (relented). This site is clearly an indication we all view things differently. :) Me: Dan we need a narrative of how you got to 10th because of ....(consistency with the remaining PCs) Dan: How deep can the rabbit hole go? Me: Pretty deep. Dan: Because something kinda dawned on me. Something pretty crazy.... Sends me his pitch which includes Kelemvor (FR deity of the dead) as well as a prose of a conversation between PC and the Deity. Me: Yes. Great Idea. Dan: Now I'm really excited.
  • 12:43 AM - CleverNickName quoted Nagol in post What’s your favourite horror RPG and why?
    One of my most frequent players has a strong palsy. Dread is great if everyone can participate. As the child of a mother whose Gillon-Barre affected her hands in such a way that she could never play Jenga, even if she somehow developed an interest in RPGs, thank you for pointing this out.Agreed, that is an important point. One of our Game Night regulars has stage 2 Parkinson's Disease, and she can't play Jenga either. Our GM has offered to let her roll a stack of d6s against a scaling DC as a house-rule, but she always politely declines because truthfully, it just wouldn't be the same. Games with physical challenge mechanics are difficult for players with physical disabilities...and that is certainly a weakness of Dread.

Wednesday, 24th October, 2018

  • 07:25 PM - Tristissima quoted Nagol in post What’s your favourite horror RPG and why?
    My favorite horror game ~ as in, my favorite kind of horror ~ has to be Unknown Armies. You Did It, after all ~ the beautiful horror of broken people pursuing esoteric means to break or fix or both the world by means of utterly mundane banality is one that just tickles me even pinker than usual. It's not particularly Hallowe'eny, though. When it comes to the reason for the season, I'd probably hafta say that Deadlands, especially Hell on Earth, has to come second to the World of Darkness (1st edition thru 20th anniversary edition) for me. I was exactly the target market for it in a lot of the ways back in the 90s, and many of the ideas I encountered therein have been embarrassingly influential on who I've become since. I like to run or think of menagerie games, blending in the Chronicles of Darkness, hoping to build complicatedly deep, incredibly specific, themes by bashing together the various cosmologies and ethics and things. I've met two of my absolute favorite fan-authors fo...
  • 02:04 PM - Blue quoted Nagol in post Deleted Posts
  • 12:27 PM - Morrus quoted Nagol in post Thirteenth Doctor - First Season - Thoughts? (SPOILERS WELCOME)
    And you have mine. You can't just make my own joke back at me! :D
  • 03:23 AM - Maxperson quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    In that case, you can't make any sweeping claims what any role would require as it would depend entirely on the game engine and people at the table. Certainly, I've had king's champions that have run the whole ranges from inexperienced to highly experienced, low skill to high skill, no body count to high body count and I'm a single GM. Why would a king have a champion that would lose to the barroom bully?
  • 02:05 AM - Morrus quoted Nagol in post Thirteenth Doctor - First Season - Thoughts? (SPOILERS WELCOME)
    Pants are outer wear, cars don't have boots, and we gave up torches for flashlights when electricity became a thing. Though we do tend to use all the letters in a word. Oh! and pudding is a specific dish -- not a synonym for dessert. My sympathies.
  • 01:56 AM - Morrus quoted Nagol in post Thirteenth Doctor - First Season - Thoughts? (SPOILERS WELCOME)
    North American anyway. Canadians call them cookies too. My sympathies.

Tuesday, 23rd October, 2018

  • 01:47 PM - Maxperson quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    But you weren't talking RPG characters specifically. You were making wide statements to justify RPG character roles and behaviour. Galahad is a character that violates not just one but all your expected tenets. He was untrained, inexperienced, not a killer and yet he was the king's champion. I was talking about RPG characters specifically. The discussion was entirely about the fighter fluff in D&D, which makes it entirely about RPG characters.
  • 11:43 AM - Lanefan quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    I've had entire groups manage to get to the teens in both 1e and 3.5 without killing a humanoid. I want to say 'nothing sentient', but have to review a lot of notes which probably no longer exist.I could see how this would be quite possible by 1e RAW, e.g. a stealth group gaining all their xp for treasure and problem-solving and bypassing encounters while getting little or none for actual combat. But 3.5? How the ...?
  • 03:09 AM - Hussar quoted Nagol in post Thirteenth Doctor - First Season - Thoughts? (SPOILERS WELCOME)
    How did the bad guy recognize and correctly name the TARDIS and not know who the Doctor is? Well, it is supposed to be the first female incarnation of the Doctor, so, I could see not knowing who she is. Also, it goes back to River Song not knowing who the Peter Capaldi doctor was too. There are only supposed to be 13 Doctors (well, a bit less than that) so, any Doctor going forward might not actually be recognized the way the others were.
  • 02:32 AM - Maxperson quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Galahad would beg to differ. As pemerton is so quick to bring up when book characters are used against him, characters written for a book are very different from ones in an RPG.

Monday, 22nd October, 2018

  • 10:58 PM - 5ekyu quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    In your cleric example, the player is forcing the situation into the foreground. Backgrounding is more a "I won't ask; you won't tell" situation. Both sides agree that the a particular thing is just going to bump along in a satisfactory way without spending table time at it. If the player breaks the agreement then the GM needs to respond. There is no loss of consistency from backgrounding any element just as there is no gain in consistency from forcibly including elements a game implicitly backgrounds -- such as daily ablutions and use of the toilet. If you as a DM feel that you are just going to make the player jump through (almost) the same hoops every time the druid and T-Rex go to town but the town will relent and allow the obviously well-behaved, trained, and possibly magically controlled animal in, you might as well Background that hoop-jumping. The player asking for the Background is essentially asking "This thing is boring. I know what is required to move forward. You know I k...
  • 10:49 PM - 5ekyu quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    I always ask myself "Would I have agreed to play the campaign if these rules were disclosed at the beginning?" and let that answer drive my reaction.My general rule for every game i run is the rules at the beginning will be the rules at the end. Beginning can be defined fluid thru level 4, but tier 2 lock it down. Rulings will be made as needed. But new rules, new published products, etc **all** must pass a unanimous vote.
  • 10:31 PM - Lanefan quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    I always ask myself "Would I have agreed to play the campaign if these rules were disclosed at the beginning?" and let that answer drive my reaction.To add to this: if something changes that you don't like, one option is to stay in and see if lobbying to get it changed back gets anywhere.

Sunday, 21st October, 2018

  • 11:42 PM - Sadras quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Table rules were set at the start of the campaign. The DM wanted to alter the rules without player unanimity. I believe that to be a big no-no. So I imagine all the spells and racial feats would also be off the table, you know because they were not there at the start of the campaign?
  • 08:27 PM - messy quoted Nagol in post best/saved threads
    I spent some time today looking around the site for some link/menu item/any other method of getting to the archived threads and can't find one. thanks for confirming. thought i was overlooking it. :confused:
  • 05:41 PM - Arilyn quoted Nagol in post What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?
    Table rules were set at the start of the campaign. The DM wanted to alter the rules without player unanimity. I believe that to be a big no-no. Could be a bit frustrating, sure. Enough to leave a game and risk a friendship over? Would have to be a lot more than one rule I didn't agree with to cause me to quit, even if I assumed that we had agreed to not use that rule. Unless the rule changes mid-game became rampant and tyrannical, I'd let it be.


Page 1 of 60 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Nagol's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites