View Profile: Aldarc - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
Tab Content
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Today, 02:11 PM
    I always find it surprising how many DM's insist on only the DM calling for skill rolls. I've honestly never played this way. We've always assumed that a player can make a skill roll whenever the player chooses. Granted, of course, sometimes the DM will call for rolls too, fair enough, but, I've never played in a game where the players are not allowed to make skill rolls. Maybe I'm just too...
    47 replies | 1001 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Today, 10:22 AM
    It also proves that you definition of "metagaming as cheating" is far from universal. Upthread, you were suggesting that nothing about the RQ instructions contradicted your own views. But now it turns out that there is such contradiction.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Today, 03:18 AM
    Considering you had Abrams do both Star Wars and Star Trek, having Gunn do an MCU and DCU movie doesn't seem like a stretch. I imagine that the circle of people interested in directing a superhero movie is fairly small and probably a lot more friendly than fans.
    16 replies | 499 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Today, 03:11 AM
    On a successful roll, I'll straight up tell the players that the NPC appears to be telling the truth. Only problem is, how do the players tell a successful roll vs a fail, which would also give the same answer. Solution? Roll in the open. Let the players know that they succeeded. Let them know that they failed. A fail doesn't mean that the NPC is lying, just that the players don't know...
    47 replies | 1001 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:54 PM
    And guess what else - the RuneQuest rules that I quoted upthread, which you asserted expressed the same view as you about "metagaming", assert the opposite from you. Which simply reinforces my contention that your idiosyncratic preferences as to what "metagaming" is permitted and what is not do not tell us anything about the nature of RPGing per se as an activity.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:42 PM
    The only definition of actor stance that I'm familiar with is Ron Edwards's: In Actor stance, a person determines a character's decisions and actions using only knowledge and perceptions that the character would have. This is a particular mode of or orientation towards action declaration. It says nothing about who gets to decice what knowledge and perception the character would have. ...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:19 AM
    Actually, according to Wikipedia, the original Conan The Barbarian actually wasn't a blockbuster, although it was a commercial success. It made money, but, that's about as far as it goes. To be fair, that's a lot better than the Jason Momoa Conan. :D
    53 replies | 1272 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:32 AM
    For me, this pretty much cuts to the heart of it. Every action declaration (not just resolution, but declaration) appears to be gated by the GM, who regulates what motives and beliefs the players are allowed to draw upon in making those action declarations. But you've said they need your permission to have their PCs recall something. I quoted you fewer than half-a-dozen posts upthread saying...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:27 AM
    Yes, I've pointed to this weirdness upthread, that the insistence on feigning ignorance precludes the experienced player from declaring actions that are open to the new player. Just another weirdness about it.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:14 AM
    The thinking being referred to is thinking by the players. The PCs can't have metagame thinking unless you're playing a game like Over the Edge, which has a self-referential dimension within the fiction. I was going to post a reply to this but then saw that iserith posted exactly what I would have done. All I would add is that it's not true that a GM gets to adjudicate every declaration of...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:29 AM
    I don't see these as challenges. The sucess of Marvel and even DC movies shows that cheesy/cliche will draw big crowds if the production and the laughs are done OK. A half-successful LotR/Hobbit rip-off would be a good D&D movie!
    53 replies | 1272 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:17 AM
    Cortex+ (which I know through MHRP and the Fantasy Hack variants) is a dice pool system that is (according to designer commentary) designed to make it hard to caculate the odds - so shifting the emphasis to "I've got a handful of dice!" rather than "Have I got the right handful of dice?" It's true that the maths is hard, but that doesn't stop my players trying to optimise their pools!
    170 replies | 6739 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:09 AM
    Nothing wrong with being a cricket hater! But out of curiosity, are you from a cricket-playing culture, or looking at it as a horrified outsider? (And apologies if that dichotomy is too simplistic.)
    170 replies | 6739 view(s)
    0 XP
  • darkbard's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:58 AM
    You guys keep doing you. The posting history makes clear what's what.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:29 AM
    Yes, this link describes your argumentative style pretty well. Roleplaying a character who knows things without asking for DM permission to know them is not metagaming; it's just called "roleplaying." Your entire DMing approach has been advocating for players fishing for DM permission out of the wazoo. Including what the characters can know. How is that not MMI?
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    2 XP
  • darkbard's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:48 AM
    At this point, I hope we all might be less concerned with attacking the troll with fire than not feeding the troll, defined by Wikipedia as one who "In Internet slang starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:04 AM
    What do you like to say again? Oh, yes. False equivalence is false. Mother May I. Roleplaying a character and their headspace is not inventing a rule. I believe that it's called "roleplaying a character." You should try engaging those parts of the game some time. LOL. You just literally described how the Mother May I children's game is played. Both here and practically earlier as...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 04:08 PM
    1) This is an assertion about your play preferences disguised as rules facts. Do I need to pull up your quote on facts and opinions again? ;) 2) Max, I think you need to actually demonstrate some awareness of how the game exists in a more open space than your own narrow reading of the game rules. One can also note, for example, that although you may say that there are no rules allowing...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 10:21 AM
    I'm not familiar with the FR stuff S'mon, Hussar et al have mentioned. To me DragonLance seems obvious and far-and-away better movie-fodder than anything else D&D-ish that I'm familiar with. Another option would be to try for a sci-fantasy vibe that tries to ape some aspects of Dr Strange, Guardians of the Galaxy etc and do Dark Sun - but the relative suckage that was the John Carter movie...
    53 replies | 1272 view(s)
    2 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 10:06 AM
    Cricket is umpired, not refereed, at least in the usage I'm familiar with. (I don't think you've got the match referee in mind.)
    170 replies | 6739 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 10:00 AM
    I don't think this is true at all. When I think of systems I've played over the past few years, I don't throw out large chunks of Prince Valiant or Burning Wheel. I wouldn't describe myself as throwing out large chunks of Marvel Heroic RP/Cortex+ Heroic, but that would depend whether you count not (yet) using story situations that have been professionally published as "throwing out large...
    170 replies | 6739 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 09:38 AM
    This is the bit that I regard as mere assertion. It's not stated, nor implied, in any rules of any RPG I play. In my Moldvay Basic days, as a player I knew that swords hurt more than daggers because I read the variable weapon damage chart; and I knew that green slimes need fire because I read the Monster chapter. The rules directed me to read both bits, and drew no distinction between the two...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 09:35 AM
    But this is metagaming through and through! That is, had it been thought of earlier, then you would have authored other things differently. I mean, even if that's true, so what?
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 09:30 AM
    This, this, this . . . Especially make something up! And so often, that something itself need be nothing more than a sketch or a hint. For instance, And did he have ninjas helping him? Was he under a curse of Coventry? (Some Rolemaster supplement had such a thing.) In my Traveller game, we know that one of the main PCs regained consciousness in a damaged cold sleep berth stacked in a...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 09:18 AM
    I "laughed" your post because of the first 4 lines! But this is true too. And to satisfy some other posters, it's obvious that there are many systems which have zero chance of producing various experiences; this isn't anything unique to 5e, or AD&D. Eg you can't get BW out of MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic - it's not gonna happen no matter how you wish for it, because the system (i) makes action too...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 08:58 AM
    Was going to say. Didn't Hasbro pony up something like 10 million dollars in prize money for the 2019 season? One of those is a 1 million dollar prize for MTG Arena IIRC. I'd say they're doubling down on their digital products pretty hard. Thing is, after the 4e online debacle, I can't see Hasbro or WotC being in any hurry to bring D&D into the digital realm. But, if this new E-Sports...
    44 replies | 1340 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 08:43 AM
    Why would D&D find it's niche in R rated? It's not like the game is R rated, nor is it even remotely meant to be. The game is very, very much PG. Curse of Strahd is just warmed over Dracula. It's been done to death. What would differentiate a Strahd movie? Confusing people because your obvious Dracula stand in complete with bog standard Dracula plot (Strahd's lost love) has a funny name?
    53 replies | 1272 view(s)
    6 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 03:34 AM
    The part where you actually manage to establish that this is knowledge that the PC doesn't have.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 03:27 AM
    Over the Edge (a Jonathan Tweet RPG) includes a three-column essay by Robin Laws, "The Literary Edge" (at pp 1912-93 of my 20th Anniversary edition). I'm not going to type out the whole thing, but it has some interesting stuff to say about "metagaming" and about authorship of the shared fiction: Role-playing games changed forever the first time a player said, "I know it's the best strategy,...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    2 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 02:53 AM
    To me this all seems very obvious. Which is not to criticise you for posting it (on the contrary - XP given!) but rather to say that it's odd to me that this needs spelling out in such detail. I mean, the very first time a wandering monster appeared from around a corner that the PCs had themseles just walked around, the need to fit newly-authored elements into the established fiction arose....
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    2 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 02:33 AM
    Manbearcat - one moral of your posts is that there's no uniform thing good GMing (and hence no uniform thing jerk GMing). This can be set out in terms of both risks and skills. An obvous risk in GMing AD&D in a non-class dungeoncrawling context (and 2nd ed AD&D really brings this risk to the fore) is railroading/"Mother may I" - because the system simply lacks a mechanical framework beyond GM...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Friday, 22nd March, 2019, 12:33 AM
    Yeah, I think Kobold's Deep Magic https://koboldpress.com/kpstore/?s=Deep+magic&post_type=product series is what you are looking for.
    5 replies | 213 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 11:59 PM
    This reminds me of a Ron Edwards post that I've posted from time-to-time: if your "story now"/"scene framed" game sucks, what you probably need to work on is coming up with interesting situations!
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 11:22 PM
    Here's Eero Tuovinen on the GMing demands imposed by (what he calls) "the standard narrativistic model" of RPGing: The GM might . . . needs to be able to reference the backstory, determine complications to introduce into the game, and figure out consequences. Much of the rules systems in these games address these challenges, and in addition the GM might have methodical tools outside the rules,...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 11:15 PM
    No. There is some established fiction - call it F. And there is a newly-introduced element - call it X. I am confident for any F, and for any X, there are indefinitely many ways of reconciling them as fictions - call these R. Any valid R will render it evident (if it's not already) why F happened given that X. You seem to be focusing on identifying possibilities that aren't R - call them...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    4 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 01:30 PM
    Are you suggesting that my life as a RPGer isn't "RL"?
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 12:53 PM
    The point is understood. It's generalisation to trolls still puzzles me, because (i) when I started playing the rulebook told me to read the monster chapter (so not secret), and (ii) whether or not I've read the book, once the monster's been encountered, it's continuing status as a "secret" in the GM's notes is a bit weird. To me, it seems very clear that the reason why new monsters and new...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 12:03 PM
    I've been playing RPGs for over 30 years. The idea that players who know about trolls have to pretend not to know is something that I've never encountered in real life. I'd not come across it until I encountered it on ENworld. Which I posted already upthread. Maxperson is the one who suggested that if a table is happy with not feigning ignorance about trolls, then they must also - by...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 09:59 AM
    Rand564: from your description of events in your game, I can't tell how they came about at the table, in the course of game play. Eg was the spread of the fire in the city your establishment of a consequence for a failed check by a player, or was it you as GM freely narrating stuff that you thought logically followed from the actions the players had their PCs take? The same question applies...
    9 replies | 287 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 09:39 AM
    But that generates my next question: these PCs know enough about what "dungeoneering" is to understand what a proper "combined arms" force looks like; but are completely ignorant of trolls' vulnerability to fire. They know that dungeons have traps that the "sneaky-types" might spot and disarm; they know that dungeons have monsters who will hurt them, thus generating a need for healing; but...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    2 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 09:36 AM
    And this idea, of the player keeping keeping hp scores secret, was a widely-discussed technique around 40 years ago. But I don't think it's much in vogue anymore.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 09:32 AM
    How do you know? I have no idea how to reason out either of the things you mention; and I certainly know more about troll vulnerabilities than some of the polearms listed on Gygax's weapon table. This is what I mean when I say you are making arbitrary assertions. Nothing in the rulebooks of any version of AD&D supports this claim. It's purely a table convention for your game.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 09:27 AM
    What’s wrong with the Baldurs Gate storyline? One of the larger issues with using dnd stuff is that DnD has always been derivative. So much of it is based on other fantasy works. Which makes it somewhat problematic in trying to present a new story that is a DnD story.
    53 replies | 1272 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 09:25 AM
    But this is just poor management of the fiction: introducing an element which contradicts what's already established (in this case, the absence of tracks on a muddy road). (And as per hawkeyefan's post, without introducing something else - like a magic spell or charm of traceless passage - to explain away the seeming inconsistency.) If a player is going to write in new bits of fiction, it...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 09:21 AM
    I dunno. 4e proved that they could create very good digital tools for delivering material. They had a functioning vtt within a handful of months of development. Give me a product that combines DnDBeyond with a decent VTT, charge a subscription for access to the entire library and you’ve got a pretty decent way forward. Like I said, 4e proves the can do it.
    44 replies | 1340 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 09:16 AM
    Given the choice between a dnd movie that makes a truckload of money or one that people consider “good”, I’ll take the money every time. Money means we get more movies and means more people actually watched the movie. Rather than be some cult hit so fans can look down their noses at other folks. Show me the money!!
    112 replies | 2559 view(s)
    3 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 09:10 AM
    But surely you can see that this begs the very question at issue: why would the character not know? You are posting as if those who disagree with Maxperson are spinning nonsense out of whole cloth. But in my case I have the whole of the play tradition that I started with on my side: the rulebook told me to read it, so I did; articles in White Dwarf, by people like Lewis Pulsipher and Roger...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 08:50 AM
    Then why do you think a RQ rulebook admonition against using real-world chemistry in playing one's PC equates to, or implies, an admonition against using one's knowledge of trollish vulnerabilities in playing one's PC?
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 02:54 AM
    My totally unfounded, purely gut feeling (stupid gut) prediction. 1. VTT play will continue to grow and expand while face to face game will remain largely static, or will grow at a much slower pace. 2. Print publication will continue as it remains the primary means to draw new gamers into the hobby. Even those of us who do play online still own at least the core books in paper form. ...
    44 replies | 1340 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 02:41 AM
    Bot?
    15 replies | 672 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 02:24 AM
    Fair enough. :D
    209 replies | 6633 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 01:20 AM
    Well, considering they're launching a Section 31 show, it would be hard for it to be dead. But, I can see the show being about Section 31 trying to root out this AI Control. Would backfill a LOT of canon about ST really. As in why AI is barely used by Star Fleet and virtually no robots or androids (Data excepted). I have a sneaking suspicion that the Red Angel is Burnham, but, I rather...
    14 replies | 241 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 01:10 AM
    ROTFLMAO. I see. We're going with the "what I like is the definition of core fanbase" argument. Snort. Giggle. Gimme a break. Hrm, most popular show on CBS's streaming service, responsible for huge upticks in sign ups, rates about 80% on Rotten Tomatoes, critically successful. But, you hate it, so, everyone must hate it. :uhoh: Look, I get it. You don't like it. You like the...
    209 replies | 6633 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Thursday, 21st March, 2019, 12:06 AM
    I remember playing a bit of 2E in high school. I came in late during the campaign. We encountered a troll, and the other players informed me that trolls in the game were vulnerable to fire and acid. So that's what we used to defeat it. When we started a new campaign in 3E, our new characters were never forced to "relearn" this weakness. It was understood that these were things that our characters...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    3 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 11:50 PM
    How is knowing about trolls because I've played the game and/or read the rulebook the same as using my knowledge of real-world chemistry?
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 11:44 PM
    It's never been obvious to me that the troll thing is a secret - because the first version of D&D I played was Moldvay Basic, and as per the instructions to new players I read the monster section. And I did the same when I got the Expert book. The idea that players who know about the troll weakness, but whose characters have never encountered a troll, would pretend to be ignorant about the...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 05:49 PM
    Such presumptive condescension you have. But obviously others disagree with your assertion. And thus it is not self-evident as you assert here. But I suppose if you put the word 'obviously' in your opinion then you can present your singular reading as a fact while discounting the genuine readings that others have? You are obviously not being genuine, Bedrockgames.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 04:38 PM
    My knowledge of trees comes from the real world, does this mean that my character can't recognize trees with it being metagaming? Or how about a sword? Or how about what it's like being a peasant? Why do you keep using the word "obviously" as if your opinions were self-evident truths? It's not just here in this post but also in many beforehand.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 03:18 PM
    We are sincere in our readings of the RQ text, though you seem to be insinuating here that we are not, or that we are misreading it. So perhaps you are confused that others would have different genuine readings from yours? This. And also this.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 03:09 PM
    I have not suggested, nor even remotely hinted, that the RQ text is insincere. I think it's compoletely sincere. And it doesn't say the same things as some posters in this thread have suggested is definitive of good roleplaying. Gygax's AD&D rulebooks talk about the importance of party composition, but they have no discussion of the idea that playing one's PC should be guided by considerations...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 03:04 PM
    What systems do you have in mind? I assume D&D. EDIT: Depending on system, killing a PC may be a consequence of failed action resolution on the part of the player; a framing device on the part of the GM; or sheer fiat narration of the fiction. Which it is is relevant to whether or not it constitutes sentimentality in action resolution.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 02:58 PM
    Nor am I. I'm responding to Maxperson's claim that it is cheating to (i) impute my knowledge of troll weaknesses to my PC, and (ii) to explain this, within the fiction, as stuff I learned from my dear old uncle. All "cheating" means here is that Maxperson doesn't like it. But he presents it as if it is something more. And his argument for the "something more" rests on a general critique of...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    4 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 02:18 PM
    I highlighted the bolded bit only because surely a better choice would be to retire to the thermal baths.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 02:15 PM
    No he's not. In 2000, Ron Edwards wrote a very praising review of Hero Wars. In 2003, he discussed setting-based "story now" play, again putting forward Hero Wars as an example. In 2011, he wrote the "setting dissection" that I linked to upthread, that is, a fuller account of how to run setting-based "story now" games (unsurprisingly, HeroWars/Quest again figures as a prominent example). In...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    4 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 01:53 PM
    There is a point that may have come up earlier in this thread, or perhaps in another one - I remeber I was responding to Campbell - that I want to come back to: the role of GM sentimentality. In the campaign with the fox and the nobles and so on, the resolution of the campaign saw the PCs acting in defiance of Heaven. In addition to the edict-disobeying fox, there was a paladin whose patron...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 12:55 PM
    ...as previously rebutted by others.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 12:40 PM
    Because a player can use their college-learned knowledge of real life trolls in this game? :confused:
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Aldarc's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 12:01 PM
    Hey, look what we have here. It's an old man yelling at the sky while complaining about young kids these days. :p
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 10:40 AM
    I've never had a player decide that his/her PC was a noble during the course of play. But I have had a player do something similar. At the start of the campaign we thought his PC was an animal (fox) that had been able (through meditation and other appropriate practices) to transform itself into a human (inspired by the movie Green Snake). At the start of the campaign the character was living...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    3 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 09:39 AM
    The problem is, "that certain feel" is far more in the mind of the fan than in anything real in the show. You can point to all sorts of elements that aren't part of the "feel", but, apparently, we're not supposed to look at those things. We're only supposed to like the same things and we're all supposed to keep liking the same things so the franchise can keep pumping out the same thing over and...
    209 replies | 6633 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 09:22 AM
    But we already know the answer to the bit that I've bolded - the PC was not accompanied by any entourage, given that absence of such entourage is already an established element in the fiction. (Subject to corner cases - maybe as part of collaboration between players, another PC is revealed to have been an entourage all along!)
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    2 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 09:11 AM
    There's no "field" because there are no "adventures" in the D&D sense, at least as I run it. The PCs don't go "into the field" to adventure, and then return to a "safe place" for downtime. The PCs do their thing as their motivations and capabilities dictate. There are rules for having an entourage as an element of one's PC. But they don't depend upon any idea of, or contrast between, "at home"...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 08:34 AM
    Cthulhu Dark
    4 replies | 305 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 08:22 AM
    The big issue for me, in the setup Maxperson describes, is how do we know how many children are eaten? In a skill challenge, this can be managed through failures - each failure is more children dead. But in other D&D versions, which have no rule for determining children eaten per orc-time-mile-unit, it becomes GM fiat. So the stakes and the action resolution become somewhat illusory.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 08:19 AM
    To relate this to AbdulAlhazred's posts: a really strong set of assumptions underlies this post. Some of those are sociological/economic: that a noble family has readily available assets that it is able to repurpose at the behest of the character. As a matter of human history this isn't always true; in the context of a fantasy RPG it's even easier not to proceed on the basis of its truth. ...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 07:39 AM
    Providence knows, and that's virtually everything in Tolkien's world. There's no reason in the fiction why a 20-something year old, inexperienced wizard could not have inherited a fortune of many thousands of gold pieces. But the standard D&D rules for starting money make this impossible, purely for balance reasons. One fantasy RPG that makes it possible to be a wealthy yet novice wizard is...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 06:41 AM
    Hrm. Coffee that tastes like coffee. Would that be Kenyan, Vietnamese, Arabica, or one of the thousand variations of coffee that taste very, very differently. Hot dogs that taste like pork? Yuck. Gimme beef hotdogs any day of the week. Or goat. Goat hotdogs are actually surprisingly good. :D Thing is, your better is my worse. You want Roddenberry era Star Trek? Blech. First...
    209 replies | 6633 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 06:07 AM
    These are really strong posts. They capture what I was trying to get at upthread with some remarks about "cargo cult" and similar. That is to say, particular design/play features that can work well as elements in a "skilled play" game simply don't make any sense in other RPGing contexts. Hence treating those particular design/play features as if they're part of what it means to roleplay makes no...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 05:49 AM
    I don't care whether you think he's an expert or an amateur. The point is that he shows how a game can proceed with metagaming about "the party", "team cooperation" etc - which helps us identify the presence of such metagaming advice in the RQ rules.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 02:02 AM
    No they're not. They're also talking about sticking together and cooperating as a party ("the participants work together for a common goal"). By way of contrast, here's an extract from some advice from Ron Edwards on how to run a setting-focused game using a set of rules that doesn't directly address the issue: Preparation 1. Choose a location. The group must discuss and become...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    4 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 02:02 AM
    Ok. Who's arguing with you?
    75 replies | 2357 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 01:45 AM
    The text advises players to inform their declared actions by considerations of the need, in the real world, to maintain harmony at the table. That second thing is "out of character knowledge" - the characters don't know that they are pieces in a game whose participants can't easily have fun if the characters don't hang out together in a more-or-less friendly fashion.
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Hussar's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 01:44 AM
    Y'know, sometimes it's an advantage being so far away from all the hype machine. I saw virtually no promotional material for Star Trek. Heck, I see very little promotional material for nearly anything unless I go looking for it. Means I get to judge things based on my own views. Nearly all the criticisms that Jester David brings up really don't bother me. I don't judge shows based on other...
    209 replies | 6633 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 01:42 AM
    Where did this come from? I am assuming the GM - that is, I am assuming that it was not a player action declaration or an element of player-atuhored background that made the witch a focus of play. I am also assuming that this came from the GM, in the sense that the leader, and the leader's connection to your family, were not things that resulted from player action declaration nor from an...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Wednesday, 20th March, 2019, 01:37 AM
    Who established these conventions, and the contrast they draw between "class" and "background" - Lanefan's table? Your complaint was that it is unrealistic to permit significant numbers of PCs of noble background. But now you say you are happy with realism giving way to a "convention" whereby a signifcant nunber of PCs are MUs or highly-trained warriors. Well maybe at some tables there is a...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Tuesday, 19th March, 2019, 11:41 PM
    Well, I think your interpretation makes no sense. How can it be true both that there is a universal metagame ban and that players are told to cooperate so as to make the game work? The latter is precisely an instruction to metagame!
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Tuesday, 19th March, 2019, 11:32 PM
    Well, clearly an RPG can be more like a book that's still being read. A lot of RPGing seems to take this form, as best I can tell. But I agree with you that RPGing is better when it is approached through the lens of group authorship as much as group audience. I think that brings out what is strong in RPGing (the collective creation) while reducing the impact of what is weak in RPGing...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    2 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Tuesday, 19th March, 2019, 11:25 PM
    My comment really was intended as rhetorical humour. But given you've offered a literal reply: why would one expect any given party of characters to be a representative sample of the gameworld society as a whole? Society as a whole, in the typical fantasy game, is farmers and pastoralists. But in my experience very few players player farmers or herders. Eg if 1 in 5 PCs is a MU, that's a much...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    1 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Tuesday, 19th March, 2019, 11:10 PM
    I think this is an extremely shallow reading of LotR. Aragorn's status as the rightful king is fundamental to his character from the moment he enters the story. Assuming you use the standard D&D rules for starting money, aren't they exactly an example of this?
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
  • pemerton's Avatar
    Tuesday, 19th March, 2019, 10:57 PM
    What interpretation? Do you disagree that "there is no statement of any universal metagame ban"? Do you disagree that "the approach to rules questions, and the emphasis on collaboration/consensus rather than GM rulings and GM decision-making" is interesting? As Numidius posted, it talks about player knowledge of chemistry, not player knowledge of the gameworld. It encourages metagaming -...
    1805 replies | 48796 view(s)
    0 XP
More Activity
About Aldarc

Basic Information

Date of Birth
January 19, 1985 (34)

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,824
Posts Per Day
0.46
Last Post
Check Out Wayne Reynolds' Pathfinder Bestiary 2 Artwork! Yesterday 11:56 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
2
General Information
Last Activity
Today 02:26 PM
Join Date
Wednesday, 12th June, 2002
Home Page
none
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

8 Friends

  1. 76512390ag12 76512390ag12 is offline

    Member

    76512390ag12
  2. Afrodyte Afrodyte is offline

    Member

    Afrodyte
  3. darkbard darkbard is online now

    Member

    darkbard
  4. Hussar Hussar is offline

    Member

    Hussar
  5. Lord Mhoram Lord Mhoram is offline

    Member

    Lord Mhoram
  6. Mark CMG Mark CMG is offline

    Member

    Mark CMG
  7. pemerton pemerton is offline

    Member

    pemerton
  8. TheCosmicKid TheCosmicKid is offline

    Member

    TheCosmicKid
Showing Friends 1 to 8 of 8
Page 1 of 25 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Sunday, 24th March, 2019


Saturday, 23rd March, 2019


Friday, 22nd March, 2019



Page 1 of 25 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast

Saturday, 23rd March, 2019

  • 08:47 AM - Sadras mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Yes, I've pointed to this weirdness upthread, that the insistence on feigning ignorance precludes the experienced player from declaring actions that are open to the new player. Just another weirdness about it. @pemerton, @hawkeyefan and @Aldarc: @Maxperson's game (and he can correct me where I'm wrong) advocates for actor stance, not necessarily for first person dialogue but for the character behaviour/thought process. So yes at times, probably many, the player will know more than the character about the in-game fiction, as the player dives into the role of the character. Added to the above, at Maxperson's table the players may not create backstory fiction on the fly as that could be seen to circumvent much of the player knowledge-character knowledge divide and allows one short cuts/maybe even considered as a cheat in the roleplay (actor stance). From Maxperson's PoV, he is not gating anything or playing a degenerate form of MMI. He, as referee, is ensuring that everyone follows the roleplay in actor stance. Hence metagaming is an abomination in his eyes as is the circumventing of any kind of actor stance by players inputting backstory fiction or any in-game fiction which could viewed as a cheat. You and others (the col...

Monday, 18th March, 2019

  • 09:24 AM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ..., for instance, that traps in stonework figure prominently in the game, either because they've read the books or they've been brutally educated in a 1st level dungeon - and it gets imputed to the player's PC. Imagine a RPGer whose first game was Classic Traveller. Doors, traps and all the other paraphernalia of D&D dungeoneering play no role in Traveller, and a player could be a first-rate Traveller player but be very unskilled in a D&D game because unfamiliar with the tropes and expectations of dungeon exploration. That wouldn't in any sense make his/her PC unrealistic or unreasonably ignorant! What knowledge checks? If I can have an uncle that knows about monsters that I have knowledge of, I can have an uncle that knows about monsters that I as a player do not have knowledge of and that he has told my PC about. I have no idea where you're pulling this from. Self-evidently you're not describing your own opinion of the situation. And you're not describing anything that I, or Aldarc, or hawkeyefan has suggested. So whose game, whose play, do you think you're pointing to here. I'll start with 4e, because that's the version of D&D I know best. In 4e, there are three ways it can become the case that a PC can know something: (1) The player imputes knowledge; (2) The GM tells the player something that the PC knows, whether because of ingame situation (eg "You're in a windowless room") or because of background (eg "You remember that, as a child, all the householders in the village would sprinkle salt on the doorstep on the night of the full moon"); (3) The player succeeds at a knowledge check which obliges the GM to tell the player something that the PC knows (in some circumstances a successful ritual may augment or take the place of the check). There is no way a player, in 4e, can establish a background element that obliges the GM to tell the player stuff that the GM knows without requiring a knowledge check. That I have an adventuring uncle might be a...

Sunday, 17th March, 2019

  • 11:35 PM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...and "variant" is barely a rules construct, as opposed to a table convention. It's easy to decide that a creature's vulnerability will be reflected in its appearance or constitution in some form which is evident to those trained in arcane or occult ways. I've never checked for traps for real in my life, but I can still check for them. You are just searching for things that are out of the ordinary and indicate that a trap is presentWhat does this mean, though? What is an "unusual" bump on a stone wall or statue? What is an unusual component of a door handle? People aren't born knowing these things. Gorgons and Medusae are not basic monsters. The average person is not very likely to know about them.Again, this is just stipulation. If you want to treat D&D as a board game to "win" and not an RPG, then doing this is the way to go. I avoid playing with gamist people, though, so it's not an issue I or my players have.And this is uncalled for. For many players (me, I suspect Aldarc), the essence of roleplaying is "inhabiting" one's character, and declaring actions from that position of inhabitation. And the objection to your treatment of troll vulnerability, in the context of a player who already knows what it is, is that it inhibits inhabitation because instead of playing my PC from within, I have to step outside and speculate about what a person who, unlike me, is ignorant of trolls, might do. It is a move from first to third person; a move from sincere inhabititon to alienated authorship.

Wednesday, 13th March, 2019

  • 06:13 PM - lowkey13 mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Aldarc Ovinomancer Sure. You guys are right. I mean, whether we're talking about politics, or religion, or playstyle preferences, or steak/sushi .... ...or someone saying that maybe it's not a communication issue ... the real problem is people just don't understand you well enough. Got it! Carry on. I'm back out of this thread, because I'm too dense to understand y'all. :)
  • 02:45 AM - AbdulAlhazred mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Wouldn't you say that this is probably the crux of contention? ;) The extent of the "problem" is generally exaggerated. I'm not so sure. All you are doing is creating a post hoc in-game justification for the metagaming (with big spoonful of self-delusion) rather than actually stopping the metagaming. :erm: Value system differences. I believe what Lanefan is putting a high value on is inducing a mental state during play which is focused on "thinking like the character", not on achieving goals or narrative, nor anything else particularly. Narrative serves then simply as a medium by which the proper inputs arrive at the players and they can adjust their pretended character mental state and shared understanding of the fictive world they form a part of. Other things are there, gamist considerations, player goals, etc. but only in a secondary place. At least this is how it looks if idealized, actual play is rarely so clear-cut. Aldarc is not really THAT interested in the character mental state and maybe it is simply a part of the general fiction state which conditions how the game proceedes. It may have mechanical constraints and systems associated with it, etc. The content of the fiction and narrative, and the fun derived from "doing cool stuff" (or something) prevails. I'd note that D&D (even 4e) has an absolute insistence on PC's thought process being entirely free of mechanical constraints. The unspoken assumption being that this is the domain of 'RP' in which it is the player's job/prerogative to model the PC's mental state without constraints. Well, I would note that there ARE some constraints, but they seem, mostly, to be aimed at insuring more consistent modeling. Alignment for instance, ideally, provides a scaffold on which to hang the character's different proclivities and traits (albeit it doesn't necessarily work too well). Alignment change punishments then simply show up as 'sticks' to encourage this ...

Tuesday, 12th March, 2019

  • 12:16 PM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...very PC will have the ability to do meaningful amounts of fire damage, and so their is a tactical challenge in bringing the right sort of damage to bear against the right target. Another obvious approach would be to make the whole thing mechanically more abstract: a character has to succeed at some sort of knowledge or inspiration check in order to then generate a change in the game state which enhances attacks against the troll (the change could simply be a changed status, or perhaps a bonus die like an asset in Cortex+ Heroic). But this isn't consistent with D&D's approach to knowledge, equipment, etc - which assumes players are free to choose what their PCs are doing (subject to what's on their equipment list), rather than gating those choices behind successful checks. Which takes us back to the general territory of the contrast between D&D and something like DW's Spout Lore and Discern Realities moves. EDIT: I think there's some overlap, and synergy, between this post and Aldarc's just upthread of it.

Saturday, 9th March, 2019

  • 06:43 PM - Aebir-Toril mentioned Aldarc in post Do orcs in gaming display parallels to colonialist propaganda?
    ...e are setting appears to be affecting quality and peoples’ ability to express themselves fully. I understand why you are framing it this way. But I think you are barking up the wrong tree. And again, I want to emphasize,you can characterize this as a lack of concern for certain people on my part if you want but that absolutely isn’t what is going on here. Like I said earlier I think this kind of stuff often makes it harder to resolve some of the inequities we are discussing. I also think it approaches infantalization. I don’t fault you for disagreeing. We’ve simply reached different conclusions here. I can tell you are motivated by good intentions. I do wish you could see my good intentions as well. I didn't want to get involved in this conversation originally, but it has been fairly stimulating and surprisingly civil, so I have decided to join. I agree that the censorship of art can reduce the quality of expression, but I think that you have misunderstood the exact purpose of Aldarc's posts. Aldarc is stating that, in media, it is denigrating and harmful to recreate steryotypes merely because they are "appealing". Please correct me Aldarc is I am incorrect. Best regards, Aebir-Toril.

Wednesday, 6th March, 2019

  • 02:21 PM - Sadras mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...ike you said some time back it is not worth it - it does nothing for the conversation. My attempt was to rather use his definition of MMI against his own playstyle, but if one plays with that much transparency (monster knowledge checks) and less of a player-puzzle, that argument falls flat as I discovered. My definition of MMI is much narrower, probably similar to yours I presume, but Pemerton sits very firmly in the other tent so from his POV any GM adjudication (no matter how justified) reflects as a MMI. I borrow ideas from all games (DM or Player-centric) so even though I'm in the opposite tent, I don't view the Say No as something negative but rather as another tool in the art of DMing that I can call on - whether it be for rule-of-cool, internal consistency or to punish players (KIDDING). Having said that - the play reports, with the limited information, from @AbdulAlhazred 5e were in my definition heavy within MMI territory. Having said that, it means nothing much given that @Aldarc views my Frost Giant write-up as MMI and our table does not. @Numidius play report on the other hand is just something else completely. I mean WTF!

Tuesday, 5th March, 2019

  • 02:34 AM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Aldarc, Lanefan - I've got a lot of actual play reports on these boards, so they would give a pretty good idea of what I have in mind by drama/excitement/thematic choice. Over the past 6 to 12 months the two campaigns I've played the most have been Prince Valiant and Classic Traveller. In Prince Valiant the drama is often social as much as physical adventure - whom to befriend, whom to snub, whom to woo. In Traveller the drama can be social/political, but more often is sci-fi adventure/thriller. In Sunday's session, the players (as their PCs) had to make choices that include: (i) how to deal with arms smugglers they encountered in orbit, while engaging in their own undercover activity; (ii) whether to break into an installation they were spying on; (iii) what to do when pursued after deciding not to enter the installation (that pursuit was a direct consequence of the decision they made at (i)); (iv) how to handle being interrogated, once they surrendered; (v) in one case, whether or ...

Saturday, 2nd March, 2019


Wednesday, 27th February, 2019

  • 11:48 PM - Maxperson mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    I refer participants who reach Aldarc's current level of frustration with Max back to Max's post on 21 April, 2018, here, wherein he confesses that he deliberately "twists" (his term) what others are saying in an intellectually dishonest move: "For my part, once I get frustrated with someone who continually misrepresents what I am saying or doing with my style of play, I'll begin to toss back all the same "twistings" at that person to show that it can be done to their style as well. My hope is that they will see as they start defending what they perceive as an incorrect application to their playstyle, and come to the realization that what they are doing accomplishes nothing." Here's the relevant part. "For my part, once I get frustrated with someone who continually misrepresents what I am saying or doing with my style of play, I'll begin to toss back all the same "twistings" at that person to show that it can be done to their style as well." So what you are saying is that Aldarc has been continually misrepresentin...

Sunday, 24th February, 2019

  • 01:54 AM - pemerton mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...(IE the PCs go to every bar and dive in the town and post messages or something similar for a week).Good point. Which in my mind just reinforces the point I was making, that an action declaration we look for sect members at the teahouse doesn't generally bring with it any particular assumption about how long is spent on the endeavour, and certainly doesn't imply a quick look for 10 minutes then heading off elsewhere. However, most other games, at that time or others, really didn't talk about time. <snip> This is a pretty common pattern for games in this time period. They may note some few specific situations where a time cost exists, but there isn't really a coherent concept in these games of time as a structured resource or some explicit way to manage it or use it dramatically (drama is rarely mentioned in these early games). It is generally just assumed that time is the purview of the GM and may come into play in whatever way he sees fit.To me, at least, this connects to Aldarc's recent post about system assumptions and the like: what we see in a lot of late-70s/early-to-mid-80s games is a "cargo cult"-like emulation of certain features of D&D without serious consideration of why one would emulate them. So eg we get healing times in games like CoC, RM, etc which ultimately are mere colour in play, because the passing of time has no cost except insofar as the GM decides otherwise. (RQ is an exception, because time not spent healing can be spent training; and BW builds fairly extensively on this idea, further adding in a systematic living cost/maintenance system.) Our term for this is "rubber time". It usually happens when a party's in town for some downtime <snip> But in the field time is very important even when the mission itself isn't time-sensitive: spell or effect durations, resource consumption, time taken to recover from injury - all of these and a bunch of other things need to be somewhat carefully tracked. Never mind tracking a split party...

Wednesday, 13th February, 2019

  • 12:09 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...cting to each other. Perhaps the goblins all start to rush. But what if 3 pull out crossbows? Goblins will react by getting out of the way. The PC will react by trying to get to cover or low to the ground. The crossbow goblins maybe aim lower, or maybe move to get better position. And on and on. That just can't be effectively modeled and even if you try, it will take huge amounts of real time to play out a combat like that.Hogwash, Max. You just got done saying realism is a spectrum and any move towards the deep end is good enough for you to satisfy your goal of realism (for the sake of realism). Yet, here, you've set up another new (false) dichotomy that games either have to be gamey UGoIGo or there has to be constant reaction abilities (which you still see as just a finer grained UGoIGo for some reason). You just said it's not enough to move towards the deep end of the realism pool, you have to meet your new goalpost of high fidelity realism or you've failed. That's why Aldarc said you move goalposts. In reality, many systems do a better job of simultaneous combat. HERO, Powered by the Apocalypse, etc. Many of these also model injury better. Some are more granular thar D&D (HERO), some less (PbtA).

Saturday, 9th February, 2019

  • 05:01 PM - Manbearcat mentioned Aldarc in post Introducing Complications Without Forcing Players to Play the "Mother May I?" Game
    Yeah, let me double down on Aldarc ‘s “I don’t always xp posts where I’m in full, or even partial agreement with the author.” I’ll gladly xp stuff I disagree with just because I like the effort to communicate or the way a point was put or how tempered it was amidst hostility. My xp is pretty arbitrary, because I’m not reading posts chronologically in threads like I used to. I’m just scanning here and there as time allows and, if I’m interested, I’ll throw some words at the conversation.

Thursday, 7th February, 2019

  • 11:27 AM - Sadras mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    I'd be infinitely curious to hear from the One-True-Sandboxers out there if they really do like "sandboxing" the whole time----or if the "sandboxing" portion of the campaign is just a ramp-up to get their hooks into the game world / plot so they can start pursuing stuff that matters to their character. I'd like to think I run a very Sandbox-styled game and the reason for this is twofold: (1) To truly give the PC's choice to pursue their desires; and (2) To, for lack of a better word/phrase - don't kill me @Aldarc, run a realistic or the illusion of realistic styled campaign. I run a mish-mash of storylines and published modules/AP all happening concurrently, but I provide opening for the PCs to 'escape' all that. It could perhaps mean a lot of effort lost on my part, nevermind the AP's purchased, but I'm willing to sacrifice that for our table. So far the PCs have decided to remain on the train (many tracks). :) EDIT: To answer your question - For a campaign, it is the style I prefer to run, so the answer is yes. If I were only running a module then it would be less sandbox-y and that would be established at session 0 where you'd get everyone's buy-in.
  • 05:17 AM - Ovinomancer mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...e looking for some other thing and realism is just a means to that end. Why would that question make you hostile? It isn't challenging your preferences, it isn't saying you're wrong to want to play how you play, it's asking you to consider if there's another goal you're aiming for but misidentifying because you haven't stopped to really think it through. I used to be you, man, used to fret of realism, used to fret over how much my game "made sense". So, I get it. And, it's likely we want different things, even when I thought like that, and I certainly don't think my current play is in any way better or superior to how I used to play except that it's better for me. Still, being able to actually talk about how games work, what they incentivize, how they do it, is very interesting because I'm still on my journey, but you get mad when asked what your journey is. I don't get it. Or, rather, I do, but I hope you might realize how silly it is to be mad about this kind of question. Aldarc has been pleasant in his posts. If you're taking offense, you're looking for it.
  • 01:02 AM - Ovinomancer mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Hey, Aldarc, you're killing it the last few posts.

Wednesday, 6th February, 2019

  • 06:44 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned Aldarc in post Introducing Complications Without Forcing Players to Play the "Mother May I?" Game
    ... sense of the fiction. An example from the BitD SRD: This is where Effect would come into play. One example they use is that a character could attack a stone wall. There is no "Hard No" with that action; however, using a standard side arm weapon, the Effect would be Limited, if not negligible. But this would likely be understood through the conversation between the GM and players. I apologize for not explaining clocks. I was in a bit of a rush to wrap things up. Here I will quote Ovinomancer's explanation so that it's readily available.I mentioned Countdown Clocks for the Frost Giant encounter because it would have been one possible way to adjudicate the stakes of the negotiations. The PC had something the FG wanted, and the FG had something the PC wanted. Their interactions and the Countdown clock make the stakes become clearer for the PC such that the issue becomes less a matter of pulling the rug out from under the PC by having the PC's heirloom taken.Just as a tack on to Aldarc's good stuff, limited effects are more prompts for the player to expend resources/increase risk to get a better effect. A player can spend stress, for example to push an effect up a level, or declate a more desperate attempt instead of a risky one. Also, the Blades engine rests on the idea that most rolls will be Risky/Normal rolls, and a change in position or effect will be clearly driven by the current state of the fiction. A good example of a desperate/normal attempt from film is Conan holding up the falling stone so his friends can escape. Clearly a deckaration that entails great risk, and the effect is to delay, not stop, the stone. As Conan probably has a huge Wreck, he got a 6 on his four dice.
  • 02:20 PM - Maxperson mentioned Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Max has a habit of making commonly understood terms so broad, that they lose a lot of their discussion-value, and this keeps coming up again and again in lots of discussions on this board. Perhaps it would be more constructive to stick with the convential way in which the term is used, Max? I think you (Max) know that when we use the word realism, we are referring to a style of play that mimics real life in more detail then conventional modes of play. So maybe it would help, for the sake of discussion, to use this commonly understood definition instead, and continue from there? I am using it in the way it's commonly used. Aldarc seems to be intentionally minimizing realism in order to win a point, so I demonstrated the importance of realism in RPGs in the hope that he would at least acknowledge that realism has more meaning than "pocket lint." Alas, he seems to be one of those who would rather stick his head in the sand and sing la la la, than to admit when he is wrong about something. Realism is present everywhere in an RPG. Once people realize that, then it's pretty easy for them to understand the concept that realism isn't all or nothing and that the only difference between Aldarc and I is where on the realism line we each prefer things. Let's say that D&D sits at X amount of realism on the line. I prefer to add a bit more realism to the game, making it Y. He may like to keep it the same or perhaps even reduce it. Realism does have value for him, though, even if he won't admit to us or himself. Something that is necessary to even be able to play the game has value. Period. For example, wh...

Tuesday, 29th January, 2019



Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 90 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Saturday, 23rd March, 2019

  • 05:32 AM - pemerton quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Your entire DMing approach has been advocating for players fishing for DM permission out of the wazoo. Including what the characters can know. How is that not MMI?For me, this pretty much cuts to the heart of it. Every action declaration (not just resolution, but declaration) appears to be gated by the GM, who regulates what motives and beliefs the players are allowed to draw upon in making those action declarations. Um, no. My players don't have to ask my permission to have their PCs wake up in the morning. Or get dressed. Or make breakfast as they break camp. Or ask me if it's okay if they set off to the north. Or, or, or, or, or... That's what "Mother May I" is. It's having to ask permission for every little thing.But you've said they need your permission to have their PCs recall something. I quoted you fewer than half-a-dozen posts upthread saying that very thing.
  • 03:15 AM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Your entire DMing approach has been advocating for players fishing for DM permission out of the wazoo. Including what the characters can know. How is that not MMI? Um, no. My players don't have to ask my permission to have their PCs wake up in the morning. Or get dressed. Or make breakfast as they break camp. Or ask me if it's okay if they set off to the north. Or, or, or, or, or... That's what "Mother May I" is. It's having to ask permission for every little thing. Had you ever played the game, you'd know that. That's why it's a pejorative term.
  • 01:57 AM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    What do you like to say again? Oh, yes. False equivalence is false. Let's see. Your example was of something being included in the game just by virtue of it not being explicitly denied. So were mine. That is not a False Equivalence. Here you go by the way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy Mother May I. Roleplaying a character and their headspace is not inventing a rule. Metagaming is not roleplay. I believe that it's called "roleplaying a character." You should try engaging those parts of the game some time. You are mistaken. It's called metagaming. LOL. You just literally described how the Mother May I children's game is played. Both here and practically earlier as well. So I guess that means you will never mention "railroading" or "metagaming" (which you equate to 'cheating') in your posts ever again? Ever. So this claim that simply asking some questions and getting some answers is "Mother May I" is so absurd, is has to be a joke. It ...

Friday, 22nd March, 2019

  • 10:54 PM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    One can also note, for example, that although you may say that there are no rules allowing players to make up backgrounds on the fly there are also no rules that prohibit it. This utterly failed argument again? Really?! Once again, no preclusion does not mean inclusion. There is also no rule prohibiting my PC's longsword from now detonating a nuclear blast destroying a 2 mile radius around him with each hit. There is a rule stating that if you roll a 1 on the d20 for an attack, you automatically miss, but no rule that prohibits the normal longsword from casting hold person whenever that happens. If something is not explicitly included or precluded in the rules, it can only happen in the game if the DM agrees to allow it to happen. Players do no get to invent rules for the game without the DM giving them that ability. Normally there freedom exists within the spaces where rules are silent rather than restrictions. Quote me the rule that explicitly allows players the freedom to...
  • 05:32 PM - iserith quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    3) Perhaps most damningly, your post, most especially the first sentence, is a glaring admission that you operate by Dungeon Mother-May-I when it comes to character knowledge. The DM decides = The Mother decides when it comes to giving the other participants permissions in play. When I run D&D games and a player asks me, "Would I know about X?" my response is typically "I can only describe the environment and narrate the result of your actions. Do you have an action you want to take?" I discourage all questions from players in most cases, but this one in particular is a sign that the player comes from the kind of game where the DM has to sign off on what you know before you're allowed to take action (else you risk the ire of the DM and/or the rest of the group). Some retraining to undo the work of previous DMs is often required.
  • 09:38 AM - pemerton quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    The part where you actually manage to establish that this is knowledge that the PC doesn't have.The DM is the one that decides these things, unless the DM changes how the game runs. There are no rules allowing players to make up backgrounds on the fly, or to just decide the players know things about the game world.This is the bit that I regard as mere assertion. It's not stated, nor implied, in any rules of any RPG I play. In my Moldvay Basic days, as a player I knew that swords hurt more than daggers because I read the variable weapon damage chart; and I knew that green slimes need fire because I read the Monster chapter. The rules directed me to read both bits, and drew no distinction between the two bits of knowledge I gained. And nowhere did they say that the GM could direct me to pretend I didn't know one or the other or both. Maybe such a rule is stated in the 2nd ed AD&D DMG? I've never read that book.
  • 07:53 AM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    The part where you actually manage to establish that this is knowledge that the PC doesn't have. The DM is the one that decides these things, unless the DM changes how the game runs. There are no rules allowing players to make up backgrounds on the fly, or to just decide the players know things about the game world. The DM is the one that decides whether it's a yes, no or uncertain which requires a roll. Thank you for sharing that you don't understand metagaming and the DM's role, though.

Thursday, 21st March, 2019

  • 05:14 AM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    My knowledge of trees comes from the real world, does this mean that my character can't recognize trees with it being metagaming? Or how about a sword? Or how about what it's like being a peasant? What part of metagaming being "Bringing in real world knowledge THAT THE PC DOESN'T HAVE." do you not understand?
  • 01:56 AM - Lanefan quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Not if its a Schrodinger's Gorge spanning a river (with egress into the safety of the forest on the other side) and you've got an overwhelming enemy force chasing you on horseback through the badlands (and the success or failure of the Skill Challenge is riding on this last action declaration/Group Check!)!Schroedinger's Gorge is so going on a map somewhere in my game world! :) I would also push back against the idea that D&D presents a "zero-to-hero" narrative. The earliest fantasy of D&D, IMHO, never really seemed to care about "heroes." Or zeroes. It seemed to be about "rags-to-riches". Or at the very least: the game words may have said one thing or referenced heroes on occasion, but the "meat" that propelled the game said something else entirely. You are not leveling up to become a hero. You are leveling up to gain riches, titles, and property. So zero to hero then, only in a financial/capitalist way rather than social. Perhaps a better term for a PC's progression might be "little ...

Wednesday, 20th March, 2019

  • 06:47 PM - Bedrockgames quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Such presumptive condescension you have. But obviously others disagree with your assertion. And thus it is not self-evident as you assert here. But I suppose if you put the word 'obviously' in your opinion then you can present your singular reading as a fact while discounting the genuine readings that others have? You are obviously not being genuine, Bedrockgames. I am being genuine, but there has been a style of argumentation here that doesn't strike me as genuine at all. And you are misunderstanding what I am saying about RQ. I am saying people are looking at it through a skewed lens, interpreting it through their own playstyle and not seeing what I think most people see when they read that. In terms of Maxperson's use of metagaming being the obviously common, mainstream use of the term. I base that on my experience in the real world. I've encountered so many people using the term metagming as he is. And I've encountered so many people who take his view. It has never been difficult for m...
  • 05:40 PM - Bedrockgames quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    My knowledge of trees comes from the real world, does this mean that my character can't recognize trees with it being metagaming? Or how about a sword? Or how about what it's like being a peasant? Why do you keep using the word "obviously" as if your opinions were self-evident truths? It's not just here in this post but also in many beforehand. Because it is pretty self evident to anyone who has been in the hobby for ten minutes
  • 01:13 PM - Bedrockgames quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...as previously rebutted by others. Not sure what this means in terms of what I said
  • 12:44 PM - Bedrockgames quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Because a player can use their college-learned knowledge of real life trolls in this game? :confused: Then you are not being genuine. Obviously we are talking about the player’s knowledge of the MM or their knowledge gained from previous D&D experiences.

Tuesday, 19th March, 2019

  • 02:49 AM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Your character has never encountered a trap before. Good roleplay involves intentionally triggering the trap to doom your character. ;) It depends. PC's have brains, so it would depend on what the trap looked like. A spear trap in a wall is pretty clearly something you don't want to trigger, even if you've never encountered a trap. A button on the wall might be something the PC pushes. Circumstances will determine whether it's good or bad roleplay. Ah, yes. Again, the previously discussed situation where the mental headspace of your PC exists as Schrödinger's Cat. Which is the same exact position every other PC's mental headspace is at. Every time your PC encounters a new situation that you as a player have no knowledge of, the same Schrodinger's headspace exists. The PC both knows and does not know the knowledge until determined by a roll or game play.

Monday, 18th March, 2019

  • 03:20 PM - Numidius quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    the previously discussed situation where the mental headspace of your PC exists as Schrödinger's Cat. Wanted: dead or alive Schrodinger's Cat
  • 12:37 PM - Bedrockgames quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Incidentally, player vs. game is a guiding tenet and point of identity for the OSR community. They largely agree this was the principle focus of the "old school D&D" era. And this is congruent with what pemerton and AbdulAlhazred have said. I know that Bedrockgames also has experience with the OSR community and games, so he may also have some insight to shed on this issue as well. . I am just one point of view, and there are much better people at explaining the OSR than me. All I will say is OSR, at this point, is not so easily boiled down to one thing. It is a spectrum of views. I think it leans to challenging the player (though I have absolutely seen OSR people raise concerns about split between character and player knowledge---you can take either view and be old school in my view). I think the chief, governing, viewpoint though is: does this work in practice on a weekly basis (preferably in a long term campaign). Also I think OSR folks tend to eschew anything that feels like RPG theor...

Sunday, 17th March, 2019

  • 08:18 PM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Even now, you can't help but avoid treating every conversation as something to be won with a quip. You don't get to tell me what I am doing or why I am doing it. Only I can do that. And I'm telling you in no uncertain terms, I am not doing these things to "win." If you are seeing that, then it's caused by your misperception. Now that you understand that you are perceiving things incorrectly, any further such accusations by you will be deliberate misstatements on your part.
  • 07:43 PM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    That's only how you choose to run it, Max. Yes, I choose to run with the intent of Gygax. Rarity is a thing. You just aren't going to encounter as many hydras as you do goblins. It's also clear that players were supposed to use their knowledge and wits to overcome challenges to achieve the victory conditions of the game. ;) Yes, but within the restriction of not having the characters use knowledge that the player has, but the PCs don't. Gygax was clear about that in the quotes I used from the 1e DMG. You should know better to equate silence with agreement or victory. Please, stop treating conversations as something to be won. Cool, as I didn't do either. The reality is that I don't necessarily want to pursue every single adventure path or plot hook you put forth. You cut out the most important point in that post to burble about the unimportant ones. That smells very much like an evasion. That doesn't mean win or loss for me, it's just telling that you evaded like t...
  • 04:30 PM - darkbard quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    You should know better to equate silence with agreement or victory. Please, stop treating conversations as something to be won. The reality is that I don't necessarily want to pursue every single adventure path or plot hook you put forth. QFT. This grows tiresome and resembles baiting or bullying more than debate and analysis.
  • 03:52 PM - Maxperson quoted Aldarc in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    I meant the classical sense of "gorgon," since Medusa is actually the personal name of a gorgon. I thought that would have been obvious given the and/or slash. :shrug: It wasn't, since both the Medusa and Gorgon are D&D creatures that turn people to stone, so you could have been putting them together with the slash as creatures that turn things to stone. That's only how you choose to run it, Max. There's a big difference between common creatures, and rare or very rare creatures. The latter simply aren't going to be common knowledge, and even uncommon creatures won't be known by all. You're arguing that some peasant who has lived his whole life in the middle of a forest is going to have working knowledge of what Solars can do, because folklore. Leaving your play preference snobbery aside, this was how RPGs were played before people got into their head notions of acting and voicing characters using silly accents. It's still an RPG. Incidentally, the word "game" exists in "role...


Page 1 of 90 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Aldarc's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites