View Profile: hawkeyefan - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Today, 05:02 PM
    Well it's different for everyone, I would think. Would you agree that it's a scale? Personally, I like to use evocative description when it's called for. Usually at the start of a new scene....I'll deliver a few lines to try and set the scene. If there's a particular mood I'm going for, I'll try and tailor what I'm saying to reinforce that mood. But this isn't something I always do....
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Today, 03:24 PM
    "Poorly" is where I get confused. Who wants poor delivery by the GM? People have said that the quality of the GM's delivery is not the most important thing to them....but that doesn't mean they want or expect crap delivery. As an advocate of quality narration, and use of evocative language and/or literary techniques to strengthen your game, does that mean that you expect your content to be...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Today, 03:09 PM
    Who's advocated for such limited description? No one. Bedrockgames says that he prefers conversational language rather than trying to create evocative, literary minded narration. I don't think that means that description is absent....do you? When people have a conversation, are they somehow incapable of describing things? Must you make a strong effort to evoke mood and theme in order to...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Today, 05:34 AM
    Hussar I donít necessarily agree with pemerton. I simply understand what he is saying. I think RPGs can contain literary quality. They can important and meaningful...although itís usually only so for a handful of people. But thatís not really the point. Letís say a new GM came to you for advice, and said ďgimme the ONE THING that I need to know about GMing a gameĒ what would you offer? ...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Today, 12:32 AM
    Looking at his post that I quoted above now, would you say itís unclear? Like I said, I wasnít entirely on board after the OP either. But when he clarified, I took notice and adjusted my responses accordingly. I think that his point has been clearly stated and restated at different points throughout the thread, but a lot of posters (not excluding myself, either) got more hung up on the...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:11 PM
    Although I wasnít entirely sure about the point made in the OP, hereís pemertonís follow up post on page 2, which to me, made his point very clear. I think this post makes it pretty clear. I know that the choice of the word ďcoreĒ threw some people off, but the actual point is clear.
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    2 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:45 PM
    So you consider everything written or spoken to be literature, but here you indicate concern about the quality of the description given by the GM. Would you consider this a question of literary quality? If so, do you assume that if major focus is not given to this element, then the game will be bland and unenjoyable? Does literary quality have to be the primary focus in order for a game...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 20th May, 2019, 06:25 PM
    Sure. I don't think the OP or most following posts are saying that the presentation doesn't matter at all, just that it's secondary to the actual content. I don't see presentation as being wholly absent, though. I absolutely use presentation to evoke mood and so on. Others likely use more, and some other folks likely less, but I do use it. I'd agree with your recent post that an...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 20th May, 2019, 05:50 PM
    Yes, exactly. This goes back to the fact that a RPG is a conversation. It's a conversation because there's back and forth, there's an exchange of information and ideas that goes both ways. Generally speaking, we don't hold folks to literary standards when speaking to each other in that capacity. I don't think that's the same as saying presentation can't matter, but I don't think it's what...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 20th May, 2019, 05:23 PM
    See Hussar's post about a detailed map versus a basic "no frills" map, or a detailed miniature rather than a board game pawn, and so on. See Maxperson's posts about how unless something is described well, players will lost interest. These examples make a correlation between "more" and "better". It's not a false dichotomy. I'm not saying it must happen, simply that it may. Ideally, it...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 20th May, 2019, 04:15 PM
    But that's just it....there's a range that is being discussed. Where exactly each person's preference falls in that range is going to vary. And that's fine. I provided actual literary examples of authors who are known to provide highly rendered prose, and others who use a minimalist approach. Both are literary in that sense. Applying the term as broadly as that is ignoring the original point that...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    2 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 20th May, 2019, 02:56 PM
    Itís been clarified again and again. Heís talking about the quality of the presentation. The literary quality of a GMís narration isnít as important as the content of the narration. Thatís pemertonís claim. Heís clarified it again and again, and done so specifically in reply to you. If you think the thread is off the rails, then why not help get it back on track? Why continue to rail on about...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 20th May, 2019, 03:50 AM
    Yeah, well, thatís just, like, your opinion, man.
    107 replies | 2695 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Sunday, 19th May, 2019, 06:04 PM
    Isnít it more a case of the quality of the gallery art or map or pawn or GM voice? All the things youíve described, youíve made a distinction between the base requirement for such a thing to be part of the game, and then an improved version designed to enhance the experience. A bare bones map is certainly sufficient, no? Especially since it may only be the GM who actually sees it. A basic pawn...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Saturday, 18th May, 2019, 08:55 PM
    The presentation is important, of course. Canít have a game without it. The literary quality of that presentation is another matter. Itíll matter quite a bit to some, and only a little to others. Personally, I can see both sides of the discussion. I can understand someone wanting clear and concise description only from the GM so that they as a player can decide what they want their character...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Saturday, 18th May, 2019, 03:10 PM
    I think ďgood writingĒ and ďpresentationĒ are getting mixed up here. For something like a pre-written game module, the quality of the writing may or may not be relevant to the game. For some GMs, that may be the selling point that inspires them to use the material. Certainly, in such a case, the quality of the writing matters. However, for other GMs, itís more a matter of the content...
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Friday, 17th May, 2019, 12:51 AM
    Yeah, thatís something different at every table, I would guess. For me, itís a pretty broad category and can consist of a variety of things....which is why if it was somehow avoided entirely in a session, Iíd probably not be all that interested. Thinking of my two current campaigns....a D&D 5e game and a Blades in the Dark game, Iíd say that each is probably the ďstoryĒ of the party or crew....
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Friday, 17th May, 2019, 12:32 AM
    Maybe a 3. I want there always to be some forward momentum. I donít mind the occasional dip into in character discussions. In my experience, those usually remain story focused, though. An entire session spent having a conversation that has little to no impact on the game doesnít really do much for me.
    629 replies | 12193 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 06:56 PM
    Oh it's all certainly subjective. Each of us will have our own way of viewing it. I think for me, something ringing false would be more about the content. It would have to seem more contradictory than someone hitting a dragon with ballistae one day, and then missing the next, when different conditions apply in each case. As I said, I think the first scene could have been constructed a bit more...
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 04:35 AM
    Sure dragons make sense in the fictional context. And so would weapons designed to combat dragons. Especially when those weapons are designed by a mad scientist capable of creating flesh golems and with the full resources of the crown in a world where extraordinary materials exist.
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 03:18 AM
    Let me ask you....is it more implausible than the dragon?
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Wednesday, 15th May, 2019, 02:59 AM
    You know the range for ballistae in a fictional world, huh? And how likely it would be for one to hit a moving target? And who says the ships are slow moving? I get it if it didnít work for you. I wasnít crazy about how the scene where Rhaegon was killed either. But not because it was implausible....more that it was poorly presented.
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 11:13 PM
    I mean....Iím donít typically criticize GRRM for taking so long with the books....but I canít really blame anyone who doesnít take his advice to increase the length of their series....
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 05:22 PM
    I'm not sure, really. I'd have to see it to know it. But I think it would be something that was very concretely contradictory rather than just poorly presented. To use the Scorpion example....I can believe that the Iron Fleet could hit a flying dragon who was not expecting their attack, and I can believe that Dany and Drogon could effectively attack and defeat the Iron Fleet despite their...
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 04:11 PM
    I said that the portrayal of the scorpion use could have been handled better. The angles could have been clearer or a line of dialogue could have been added to help clarify what was happening. I simply donít think that the lack of clarity is as egregious as many others. Nor do I think itís something entirely new. Plenty of examples of it prior to the last couple of seasons. And I agree...
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 04:44 AM
    Eh tomayto tomahto, Max.
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Tuesday, 14th May, 2019, 03:56 AM
    They were behind the rocks and waited till the dragons flew into their line of fire. Dany and the dragons were caught unaware.
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 09:28 PM
    The walls were out of reach, and the boats were all ready, yes, but with the cloud cover, where were they aiming? Given the speed she hit them with, and the time it took for a crew to aim a scorpion, don't think they had all the time in the world by any means. So the way I saw it was that the boats were all kind of clustered, but not in a set formation....each was facing its own way, and they...
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 08:42 PM
    I don't think that was portrayed perfectly....they likely could have established the situations more clearly. But I do think there's a difference between ships striking from hiding against an enemy that was unaware of them. The dragons were just floating along at that point. Then Rhaegon got hit, and thrashed a bit, and was vulnerable to more hits. Dany sees him go down and begins to fly...
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 07:31 PM
    Well I invented television! So there! And my daddy can beat up your daddy!!!
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 05:17 PM
    All in all, I think the pace of things since they show moved past where the books are has been a bit too fast. But I think maybe they're taking the lesson of the books to heart....that a story can take on a life of its own and get away from you, and then you can struggle to finish. The last two seasons have felt a little like bullet points, in some ways. I think maybe a few more episodes...
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 13th May, 2019, 04:20 AM
    Yeah, quite a turn this late in. Pretty crazy.
    179 replies | 4095 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Friday, 10th May, 2019, 12:55 AM
    No worries....itís a good question! I assume he has. He has 2 copies of his own and Iíve seen him thumb through it plenty during play. Heís read most of the Champion Fighter abilities out loud during play (most more than once)! I honestly think itís just that he canít shake rules from past editions. He always references 5 foot steps and flanking and full attacks. Also, he intentionally made a...
    19 replies | 1127 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 06:07 PM
    Hey, at least I brought a comparison of specific game elements to the topic, instead of simply continuing to argue about arguing. Speaking of which...what do you generally tend to mean when you say you don't like to do something? :p
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 05:26 PM
    Oh sure....I'd personally never quesiton someone's use of a word in that manner. I think that lo those many posts ago, I became involved in this discussion to point out that there is a difference between conversational language and technical language. But then claims were made about realism when comparing systems or games, and that's where the interesting debate is at.
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 04:08 PM
    Honestly, I think this is the general consensus that's been established for a while now. The preferred method used to determine when the air will run out will vary from person to person, but that's all that it is.....a preference. A method may feel more real to you, and another method may feel more real to me.....neither is right or wrong, it's just opinion. And as realistic as we attempt to...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    5 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 03:56 PM
    New to the internet, huh? Or to people? ;)
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Thursday, 9th May, 2019, 01:14 AM
    One of the players in my 5e game cannot grasp the difference between Action Surge and Second Wind, and has no idea how often he can use whichever heís trying to use, or what kind of action it requires. He just canít get it. Weíve been using these characters since the launch of 5e, and theyíre level 12, and heís been playing RPGs for about 30 years. I attribute a lot of it to what we can...
    19 replies | 1127 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Sunday, 5th May, 2019, 10:14 PM
    But what if no system is mathematically closer to the real world? If a given real world disease affects 1% of the population, and a game system about disease indicates that a PC is afflicted when they roll a 1 on a d20, the thatís a 5% chance. 0% is closer to 1% than 5% is. Hence, more reals. What youíre claiming is simply not objectively true. It works for you and you think itís more...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Sunday, 5th May, 2019, 10:12 PM
    Not if you have a whetstone!
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    2 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Sunday, 5th May, 2019, 05:59 PM
    So how do we determine that? Thatís what quantify means. If youíre going to claim that something is objectively true, that A is more than B, then you need to be able to show how. You need to show the value of A and then the value of B, so that the objective difference is clear. This is my point. There is no way to do this on this topic because it is simply a matter of preference. It...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    2 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Sunday, 5th May, 2019, 05:50 PM
    No, a flawed model can be less use than no model. And what about when comparing two systems that add some kind of realism, but do so in different ways. How do you know which adds more realism? Itís opinion. Probably not, no.
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 04:36 PM
    Okay, gotcha. By ďgreaterĒ you mean in the sense of being ďmore meaningful to the individualĒ. Hereís where I donít think your take holds up. Thereís no objective addition. There is only a sense of realism, which will vary from person to person. I donít think youíve established this objectivity that you insist is present. I donít think it can be established.
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 02:00 PM
    Lanefan This is all well and good....although the Non-Living Meat Ward seems to be about as troubling as Otilukeís OCD Sequential Backpack Exploder spell! Iíll grant you that the D&D method ďbeatsĒ the Blades method in relation to sequentiality. Iíll say that I absolutely understand the reason that you prefer that method. My point is that the Blades method ďbeatsĒ the D&D method in that it...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    3 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 08:15 AM
    What does ďperception is greater than realityĒ mean? I think you mean that a person can be misinformed and therefore their opinion about added realism could be wrong? Am I following? I donít know if I see a distinction between ďsense of realismĒ and ďrealismĒ in this way. Whatís the difference? I would think itís all ďsense of realismĒ. Thatís all seems reasonable, thanks for...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 08:02 AM
    Well, not necessarily....see the mention of bad models in recent posts. But aside from that...the two systema weíve been discussing each have a nod toward the real world. One mirrors real world sequentiality (it is a word!) and the other mirrors the ability of a criminal to effectively plan for a crime. Is one of these objectively better than the other? Or is it just a matter of...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Saturday, 4th May, 2019, 07:51 AM
    But the same could be said of the D&D player...they didnít know about the dog when they decided to select a hank of meat for their inventory. They had no real reason to prepare for the dog. The only reason they may have had is the hunch that it might come in handy. In this case, that hunch is the playerís more so than the characterís. What Blades does is create a model that reflects the...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 09:19 PM
    Sure. I think when research enters the situation and people are attempting to accurately model some real world event in a statistical manner, then we can perhaps compare models and determine which is more accurate. I think you're using "real" in place of "accurate", but yes, I otherwise agree with what you're saying. Do you think such statistical analysis is what's used to come up with a...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    2 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 04:37 PM
    Okay, so you're saying that the addition of realism is objective, but that opinions about the value add of a realism injection will vary, and you care about that? I can at least understand that. I don't think it quite addresses the issue because I think its the Objectivity or Subjectivity of "added realism" that's in question. To use an example that's already been brought up, you think...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    2 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Friday, 3rd May, 2019, 01:15 PM
    Iím genuinely asking for clarification. You said both those things....and they seem contradictory to me. How do you reconcile them?
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Thursday, 2nd May, 2019, 06:55 PM
    So you're replying to a post where I asked Max to clarify what he's saying to tell me that I should ask Max to clarify what he's saying? Not sure how you see what I asked as defending anyone, but I can assure you it wasn't.
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Thursday, 2nd May, 2019, 05:51 PM
    So what you're saying is that their experience doesn't matter....but you care about their experience?
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Wednesday, 1st May, 2019, 06:07 PM
    Yeah, the setting and mechanics of BitD are very tightly interwoven to produce the desired effects. The mechanics lean into the setting, and vice versa. It's actually very impressive. Sure, and this is true of any game, ultimately. In BitD however, there are actual mechanics that come into play...ratings with other factions within the city will fluctuate, and the crew can find themselves...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    2 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Tuesday, 30th April, 2019, 05:20 PM
    Yeah, that's kind of the intention. The setting is designed to promote the play style and the mechanics. The city is for all intents and purposes closed off from the rest of the world. So the Crew can't simply get out of dodge when things start to get hairy. They have to deal with the repercussions of their actions. This is why I wouldn't say that the game is not a serial because new events very...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 09:37 PM
    Sorry, that was poor wording on my part. What I meant was that you may have a difficult decision about gear without there being some RP related reason to make a supoptimal choice. Like the fastidious elf who wants to have a grooming kit....the game is not as concerned with such RP only related decisions. Well, every serial is made up of episodes. What Blades does is try to make those...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 08:13 PM
    I agree with you here. And I also want to point out that in both games, it is certainly possible that the question of load or encumbrance or carrying capacity may not come up in a given session/adventure. I have found that Blades and the way it works makes the choice of gear a more meaningful decision overall, but there have been several instances where a character never even came close to...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    3 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Monday, 29th April, 2019, 07:15 PM
    Well, there are some items in BitD that are light enough that they do not count toward the character's load. There's a handful for each playbook, and they are marked by italics, and are freely available. So these are essentially brought on every score, or can be. The same ruling could be applied to other items of negligible weight such as a keepsake or a grooming kit or the like. Basically,...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Saturday, 27th April, 2019, 05:43 AM
    It could, sure. Itís not meant to, but thereís no reason you couldnít select all your gear prior to the score and have that gear be less useful. The game does push players towards involving their characters flaws....each PC has a vice that influences them, and if they allow it to complicate matters for them, they get XP. PCs Could also suffer traumas through play, which will have a lasting...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    3 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Saturday, 27th April, 2019, 05:14 AM
    Actually, those things are equally realistic. Cats fart and people roll dice. But at this point, I donít think youíre ever going to see the point, so Iíll stop going on about it.
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Saturday, 27th April, 2019, 05:08 AM
    I always took the bag of holding and similar items as being rewards for progressing through the game. Usually, you didnít get that kind of stuff right away. So it was a kind of ďGuess what? You donít have to deal with this tedious game element anymore!Ē Which, honestly, seems to me like a pretty glaring sign that some design change is in order.
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 03:40 PM
    Not exactly.....there is the matter of selecting Load size ahead of the score. You have to pick Light, Normal, or Heavy Load.....which would mean you had 3, 5, or 7 inventory slots available, and that chocie alone will affect your speed and stealth and even how obvious it is that the character is up to some kind of job. So there is still consideration given to the situation ahead of time, and...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 03:29 PM
    I think Ovinomancer explained it well, but I do want to address the description of how Blades handles gear being "totally gamist"; that's really not the case. There is game consideration given to the mechanic, yes, but it's also rooted in character. The freedom to choose gear as needed in play is meant to mirror the character's knowledge of the world and their specialty as a professional...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 03:10 PM
    I don't think that it's semantics at all. If you roll a die or play a card or spend a hero point or whatever other mechanic you may use in a game for a character to make an attack, the fictional result is that the character makes an attack. In other words, there are different types of mechanics that can be connected to the same type of fictional action, and none of those mechanics is "more...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    1 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Friday, 26th April, 2019, 02:56 PM
    I agree with you that it's a matter of opinion, and that what helps immersion or a feeling of authenticity will vary from person to person. In this case, what makes Blades in the Dark so immersive is that the character feels more like a person that actually exists in the world the game is portraying. The character is capable and has the ability to plan correctly. This is a trait of the...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    3 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 07:34 PM
    It's ALWAYS cheating!!!
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    0 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 03:11 PM
    Sure. But most campaigns don't deal with ALL swords, do they? They deal with the swords of the protagonists and their enemies. It's pretty clear that there are many other swords out in the fictional world (even if the DM hasn't introduced them). So, really, we're looking at the career of PCs and their exploits, and in that case, perhaps they go their entire career without having a weapon...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    3 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Thursday, 25th April, 2019, 03:37 AM
    I think you need to stop and give it some thought, Max. You just said that having cow farts break swords is more realistic than swords not breaking. You know some swords donít break, right? Sure, everything wears down eventually. But most RPG campaigns have a beginning and an end. So within the scope of an RPG campaign, itís perfectly reasonable to not have any swords break.
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    3 XP
  • hawkeyefan's Avatar
    Wednesday, 24th April, 2019, 05:33 PM
    Yeah, I'm all for trying to understand and discuss intent rather than get caught up in semantics, but there are times when precise language can certainly matter. I think that when it comes to people describing mechanics they've added to their games as being added in order to be "more realistic", that's fine....I get what they mean. When they make such a comment, I'm not going to correct their...
    2689 replies | 85118 view(s)
    2 XP
No More Results
About hawkeyefan

Basic Information

About hawkeyefan
Location:
New York
Age Group:
31-40

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,252
Posts Per Day
1.37
Last Post
Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour? Today 05:02 PM

Currency

Gold Pieces
0
General Information
Last Activity
Today 05:05 PM
Join Date
Monday, 17th November, 2014
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
1
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Friday, 24th May, 2019


Thursday, 23rd May, 2019


Tuesday, 21st May, 2019


Monday, 20th May, 2019



Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

Friday, 24th May, 2019

  • 10:02 AM - Hussar mentioned hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    pemerton. Nice tautological definitions there. Until such time as youíd care to plant the goal posts, this discussion regardless of how much blather you want to add, is pointless. óóó hawkeyefan - I would tell such a new DM that there is no single most important thing but rather dming, like any creative exercise is a combination of multiple factors that need to be addressed.
  • 05:13 AM - Hussar mentioned hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    ...is about. REH isn't high art either, but clearly Tower of the Elephant and The Scarlet Citadel are literary endeavours. Read the recent posts from @hakweyefan or uzirath. Those engage with the theme of the thread. Here a quote from you from a way upthread: Assuming that you haven't changed your mind, then this is something that we disagree about. And it's something that, in the OP, I am denying. ROTFLMAO. Oh, goodie, we're right back to swirling around the rabbit hole of what does "literary" mean. Yay. See, folks, this is why this thread is 50 pages long, and you can talk about pemerton being clear with what he meant all you like, but, this is about as clear as mud. REH is "literary"? Seriously? A minor genre author who wasn't good enough to actually publish a novel and is virtually unheard of outside of genre circles is "literary"? CONAN qualifies as literature? So, until you actually define what you mean by literary, there's no point in this discussion. hawkeyefan or uzirath only "engage with the theme of the thread" because they apparently agree with you. Granted, I have no idea what they are agreeing to, since apparently, literary encompasses everything from Dickens or Melville to pulp fiction writers, so, umm... yeah? I'll stick to the one definition that Bedrockgames seems to be consistently using - literary=high art stuff like Shakespeare or whatnot. Which, fair enough, if that's our definition, certainly RPGing is not a literary endeavour. pemerton, when you can actually clearly write what you are on about in an unambiguous way that uses clear English, I'll engage with you. Until then, it's goalposts on rollerskates and I've got far too little patience to bother anymore.

Tuesday, 14th May, 2019

  • 11:19 AM - Sadras mentioned hawkeyefan in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 5
    See, this is interesting to me (and one of the reasons I brought up gaming as a corollary or coincidental reference-point if you'd like). I've enjoyed the ramped-up pacing. /snip Coming back full circle to my initial statement, my gaming preferences follows suit; economy of time and action with a ceaseless deluge of hard choices + an onslaught of conflict as it snowballs then crescendos into climax and denouement...no "wasted" motion. Ramped up pacing with logical sense thrown in sure...but this was senseless. I also disagree with @hawkeyefan with his (and I'm going to say it) apologist view of the scorpion use. Again this goes back to what feels 'more real' For instance Episode 4 scene Instead of having Bronn complete the Tyrion sidestory (I will pay you double), they should have tasked him with assassinating the Dragon Queen after the NK debacle. In that moment Missandei dies saving Daenerys taking the deadly bolt. Then we would not have that unnecessary Euron/Missandei moment and her silly execution but the grief would still be real. Revised Episode 5 Remove dragon getting killed by Euron, rather have the dragon wounded in the battle by one of the scorpions, as it crashlands alive in KL. It makes the scorpions seem useful/effective but not supermagical and doesn't have to nullify them from one episode to the next. Jon, who was riding said dragon falls into the water before the beast crashlands into the city. The Bells Ring, but the scorpions on the walls have already taken aim at the wounded dragon writhing and lashi...

Monday, 6th May, 2019

  • 10:44 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Maxperson, as far as I know there are no rules in 5e for clothes becoming dirty or sweaty. Does that mean you think a GM who narrates a failed physical manoeuvre in a swamp as "You fall into the mud, making your clothes filthy" is breaking the rules? Or a GM who narrates a failed CHA check to influence a NPC, in circumstances where the PC has been in the wilds for a long time without bathing, as the NPC walking away making a comment about These reeking travellers? There are many ways that humans can degrade their clothes, their weapons, their pets, their companions (where are D&D's rules for putting a frog in someone's bed?) that D&D's rules don't model. That doesn't mean those things aren't part of the gameworld. It doesn't stop both players and GM's invoking them when the mood strikes, either as mere colour (like hawkeyefan's player who has a cold and so plays his/her PC as having a cold) or as part of the narration of failure (as per my examples above, or as per the suggestion that AbdulAlhazred and I made way upthread that a missed attack might be narrated as the weapon having become dulled) or even as mattering to resolution (maybe after falling in the mud, the GM imposes disadvantage on CHA checks to befriend strangers until the PC gets clean clothes). The 5e Basic PDF has whetstones on its equipment list. It also has price lists for different qualities of clothing, food, drink and accommodation, even though there are no mechanics governing social class and status. There is an abacus on the list, although no rule that forbids a player using a calculator or pen-and-paper to do maths for his/her PC. All these things are clearly there to help establish these various elements of the fiction. The fact that there is no mechanic that necessarily invokes them is entirely beside the point. EDIT: A lot ...

Tuesday, 30th April, 2019

  • 04:03 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...o. When you pick the gear in advance and know what that gear is, you will often not have exactly what you need for a given situation. When you pick the gear in advance and don't set what that gear is, allowing you to just pick whatever is perfect for you to use in a given situation you encounter later, you will have exactly what you need far more often than you would in real life. It's less realistic than knowing what gear you are picking before you get to a situation. How often can you restock on slots, and what happens to the objects you've created with the slots you've already used?These claims are completely unsubstantiated. In a typical BitD session, what is the ratio of decision situations that make gear salient to number of gear slots available? I don't know the answer to this question, because I've neither read the rules for the game nor played it. Given the question that you ask, I'm pretty sure you don't know the answer either. So you have no idea how often in (say) hawkeyefan's game the players choose to forgo choices to establish gear because they're saving slots for later. Which is to say, you don't know what the frequency is of occasions when these characters don't have exactly what they need. Furthermore, you haven't proferred any such frequecy of occasions as being "realistic" for experienced criminals in the real world. So whatever the "realistic" frequency may be, which itself seems to me pretty much just conjecture or taste, you don't know whether or not anyone's BitD gameplay has the same frequency, a greater one or a lesser one! Also, as your question shows, you have no idea what the rules are for use of gear, re-use of gear, expenditure of gear, etc. So you have no idea how often BitD players make creative choices involving already-established gear rather than expend unspent slots on establishing new gear. So your claim about how often creative thinking might take place is also completely unsubstantiated. A system that I am experienced w...

Monday, 29th April, 2019

  • 11:20 AM - Sadras mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    But, it's kinda not. The gear mechanic is very tightly tied into all the other mechanics such that, while it may appear super loose, it generates many hard choices as well and isn't nearly as loose in play as it looks in isolation. When @hawkeyefan first mentioned the mechanic I pretty much realised how it could be used in a game and given your above post, this confirms it. It is an excellent mechanic! Hard choices and integration can be incorporated in both gamist and more authentic mechanics. But, that aside, your objection isn't one of "realism" but rather play focus. You may prefer the detailed planning and gearing and detailed encumberance, but in the fiction generated in play there's no realism difference. This is an argument about where we prefer to spend our game time. Planning beforehand ticks more realism/authenticity boxes. Play focus does not enter the conversation, it is a completely separate issue in this instance. In the same vain one could have weapon slots so when you face undead, you can replace a weapon slot with an appropriate weapon that does significant damage to undead (i.e. bludgeoning). Is this more authentic to you? I find the more you deviate from how things occur in RL, the more you tend t...

Sunday, 28th April, 2019

  • 02:11 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    When pemerton writes that adding a table for weapon deterioration does nothing to increase his sense of realism, I am inclined to take him at his word. Generally I agree with the thrust of your posts, but just wanted to come in on this given I was mentioned: I accept the proposition that weapons can deteriorate through use. I think there are a range of ways of introducing this into the fiction: mere background colour, as hawkeyefan suggested; as narrated consequence of failure in a system that permits that (Prince Valiant would be an example; so would Burning Wheel; so, I believe though not from experience but from posts in this thread, would be BitD); via a GM-side complication mechanic (which is how Cortex+ Heroic handles it); and via a randomisation mechanic annexed to the attack roll resolution process, which is what Maxperson seems to have in mind. Any of these might contribute to a sense of realism, depending on details of implementation. I think the lattermost is also often liable to detract from it, if (i) it generates implausible frequencies (too many to be taken seriously; or so convoluted an unlikely that it never comes up, thus not engendering the realistic/authentic experience that was looked for in the first place), or (ii) it creates an implausible contrast with other salient features of play (eg why do our weapons always break but our pitons and armour never do?).

Saturday, 27th April, 2019

  • 03:48 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    In reality, we plan what to take before the trip/adventure, hard choices have to be made at planning level <snip> Much of this is circumvented via the BitD system which allocates slots based on when it is required. <snip> the mechanic is less like how it happens in real. I would love to go overseas and not pack anything except a luggage bag with x slots and a generic weightIn some previous threads I've been criticsed for suggesting that other posters conflate the ficiton and the real world - but it's hard to see what else might be going on in this post! The characters in BitD do not pack luggage bags with X slots and generic weights. They plan, and make hard choices. But in the real world, we author all that at a certain point in time, being in possession of certain information. There is nothing unrealistic about the resulting fiction. And as hawkeyefan says, it's not obvious that the decision process for the player is very different from that for the character: the player's knowledge of situation X that triggers a decision that the character packed item Y corresponds to the skilled character's decision, in anticipation of situation X, to pack item Y. The first D&D mechanic that I thought of that is the same as this is from Oriental Adventures, mid-1980s. The yakuza class has an ability to have contacts (a certain number per level). The player does not need to decide who the contact is until s/he wants to have his/her PC meet that contact. This is not new game tech.

Friday, 26th April, 2019

  • 11:49 AM - Sadras mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...k at D&D solely and said the next edition of D&D will either have an AC mechanic (as it does now) or every attack will be considered successful, no die roll required. If you have to compare those two scenarios - is one more realistic/authentic than the other or do you feel that still comes down to preferences: those that wish to role dice and those that don't. Personally I feel at this point it cannot be just preferences and that there is a case for insert preferred buzzword, either wearing armour protects your character in some way, however abstract, or it is just cosmetic. SYNOPSIS My conversation starter was AC vs No AC which is more real. @Aldarc suggested its preferences as you cannot measure what is more real between AC vs Absorption mechanic. Mostly dealt with above. @Ovinomancer said he would measure more realism at the fiction level not via processes and described a 'GM decides' game which inputs realistic results via GM narration. Have to give this more thought. @hawkeyefan is ok with the terminology more realism except when measuring system vs system, a little similar to Aldarc as he follows the line of preferences which I understand, but probably no surprise to him, I disagree with the BitD example he used - it is TOTALLY gamist and we probably won't agree. In this specific instance I would probably side with Max. @AbdulAlhazred returns to the semantic debate and prefers the term more authentic giving his reasons for the use of either term as he views it. I may not agree entirely, but my interest does not lie in the semantic debate. I'm ok with the term more authentic as I've said many times, I was using the more realism term as a shorthand for a great many things. @pemerton reiterates everyone else's point in his first two replies (which is where I am). Where I feel I need to point out, the mechanics giving rise to more realism were always acknowledged as very abstract in design and overly simplistic. i.e. If we fall from a distance in RL we ta...

Thursday, 25th April, 2019

  • 04:27 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...comes of a fight with deadly weapons. 5e, for example, has detailed, combat specific rules, yet generates none of these things. Which is the more "realistic"? You seem to be focused on game processes being the way to introduce "realism". I disagree this is appropriate. There's a dufference between process and resultant fictions. "Realism," to me, can only be judged at the fiction, not the process. However, all of your arguments so far about adding "realism" have been about adding additional processes. I'm pointing out that process is not required for "realism." Sadras, Ovinomancer here is saying to you much the same things as I said to Maxperson upthread. I didn't mention BitD, as I don't play that game - I mentioned Prince Valiant, Cortex+ Heroic and BW as games that permit these various things through a mixture of processes (especially important in BW) and GM narration of consequences - which is my guess as to how it is handled in BitD. (If that guess is wrong then hawkeyefan or Ovinomancer can correct me.) Isn't the shorthand for this realism. Will you be happy with more authentic? more immersive? more RL illusionary? more dramatic? I mean looking for a better description/buzz-word is just playing silly buggers...It's not just playing silly buggers - the fact that you think it is means that maybe you've missed AbdulAlhazred's point. That point was the following: one effect of the AD&D DMG disease system may be that a PC, on some occasion of play, suffers a disease which debilitates him/her for a little while. And that may increase the player's sense of the authenticity of the fiction, the setting, the play experience. But that doesn't mean that the system is a remotely realistic one, nor even that this episode of disease contraction was realistic. Good RPG design, I think, has to be concscious of the fact that it's systems are not world models but rather devices for producing particular experiences among participants in a game. If you want...

Monday, 22nd April, 2019

  • 02:36 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    So first, his imagination seems stronger, not weaker. He is able to imagine all of those other things that your style doesn't take into account.What things? Lanefan plays an AD&D variant. The elements in his game are ones that I'm very familiar with. The mechanics are also ones that I'm very familiar with (AD&D plus a hp/wound variant, a spell memorisation variant similar to 5e, and I think some critical hit/fumble variants). What are you suggesting his game contains that hawkeyefan's or mine or any other poster on this thread's lacks? Second, those who have used the playstyle have demonstrated that they don't care about the inconsistency he is talking about. It's not their place to tell him that his concern isn't warranted, when the reason they don't see it is that they don't care about the consistency he cares about. What are you talking about? My actual play posts on these boards count in the dozens. Where are the inconsistencies in the fiction? This is the bottom line, for me: if you want to make it a competition, I'll put the depth and richness of my gameworlds up against your or Lanefan any day of the week. If you're not interested in that competition, then instead of making false claims about other people's fictions - eg in that case that it must be riddled with inconsistency - start thinking, instead, about the reasons why they're making their claims. For instance, Lanefan has made it clear that he thinks it is an inconsistency if a surpri...

Sunday, 21st April, 2019

  • 04:15 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    So, you are asserting that literally any implementation of this in some form, unspecified, is 'more realistic' than ignoring it? This is an absolute statement, eh? I won't even bother to address the absurdity of all this, its readily apparent to all. Max, your positions simply make no sense at this point. There isn't even a point in discussing it, as there is nothing here to discuss.This is where I think Maxperson has some assumption in mind as to what an implementation would look like, but isn't articulating it because it hasn't occurred to him that there are other implementations possible in different modes of RPGing. I'm assuming he's thinking of some form of "critical failure" which imposes a penalty to hit and/or damage. How it would work in a non-D&D system I assume simply hasn't been thought about. That it could be introduced into the fiction without any mechancial change (as hawkeyefan suggested; and as you and I have both suggested by narrating a "miss" as the result of a dulled edge) seems not to have been thought about either. That there is a difference between introducing a new mechancial subsystem and making something a part of the fiction also doesn't seem to have been thought about. I attribute this to the making of assumptions about how RPG systems must be.
  • 03:01 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...losophy.This is irrelevant to whether or not something is more or less realistic.No it's not. Reality is characterised by unpredictable and unanticipated events. GM decision - more-or-less by definition - can't produce those. That's one reason it produces outcomes in the fiction that are not particularly like real life. Generalising the point: GM decisions are, more-or-less by definition, made for reasons. Thus they create a fiction that reflects one person's priorities for a shared fiction. This is not a characteristic of real life! Are you really arguing that if I add becoming nicked and dull in combat with the need to sharpen the edge and work out the nicks, and rusting if not cared for properly, that my addition does not more closely match how longswords work in the real world?What do you mean by adding becoming nicked and dulled in combat? Do you mean adding that as a mechanical state? As a way of narrating why an attack roll fails? As background colour in the manner that hawkeyefan describe upthread? And what does this example have to do with GM decides as a method of resolution? In Prince Valiant, I can narrate a dulled weapon (reducing its adds in combat) as an outcome of a loss in combat. In BW, there are various rules for equipment degradation as well as the possibility of narrating this as a consequence of failure. In Cortex+ Heroic I could impose a Dulled Blade complication on a PC as a consequence of a successful reaction by a NPC. There are any number of methods that can produce such outcomes in a RPG which allows for it. You've given no reason to think that GM decides is the one that will produce the most realistic distribution/occurrence of such events. in D&D there is no such dulling or assumed care. Longswords simply never nick or get dull in D&D. <snip> Swords break in real life. If I now add breakage to combat in my game, it's more realistic than the game that doesn't have it, but does have assumed care of minor damage. Sword brea...

Friday, 29th March, 2019

  • 12:58 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...who declares hostile actions against another PC, but who ameliorates the degree of hostility compared to what s/he might do against a NPC, is trying to remain true to the character (along the line of actor stance) but has "massaged" the character's motivations/deciions by having regard to the practical demands of group play at the table (author stance). Another example which is frequently mentioned by posters on these boards is building a PC who has a reason/motivation to go "adventuring" with the other PCs. This reduces the likelihood that the plaeyr will find him-/herself torn between chosing something that would make sense for the character, and choosing something that works for the game at the table. The troll example - in which the player knows what is required, but has to pretend that the player does not - is an instance (in my view) of the frustration I mentioned very much coming to the surface. A quite different way to ameliorate the frustration from the one mentioned by hawkeyefan (that is, of coming up with a clever way of bringing the non-hosing action declaration back into consistency with the PC's mental states) is to use ad hoc adjduciation by the GM, or systematic system changes, to render the staeks of the encounter less of a hosing for the player (eg think about how in The Empire Strikes Back the "troll" captures Luke rather than killing him). I woudn't expect a game in which hawkeyefan's approach counts as "cheating", by giving the player an "unfair advantage" in the encounter, to consider this alternative pathway. But it's one that eg RQ suggests, by having combat outcomes that are less binary than D&D's, and by making capture and ransom a more significant part of the game. Another frequent oddity (and perhaps more oddity than frustration) of the sort I'm talking about is the contrast between the shock/fear that many characters might be expected to feel when confronted by horrible monsters, and the lack of such feelings at the table as the players p...

Tuesday, 26th March, 2019

  • 10:10 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    You are using Pawn stance incorrectly, and I pointed out that I agree with the Forge's position that you are using it incorrectly.Nonsense. Pawn stance is a variation of author stance. Both involve a player determining a character's choice/action by reference to the player's real-world priorities. In author stance, there is a second step also, of retroactively imputing a motive to the character to explain the choice/action. The main example provided in this thread has been given by hawkeyefan: the player determines that the character chooses to attack the troll with fire because the player knows that trolls are vulnerable to fire (on it's own, this would be pawn stance) and attributes a motivation to the character, namely, "Uncle Elmo told me once that only fire can kill a troll!" (with that second step, we have author stance in the strict sense). I didn't quote and reply to the following part of your earlier post, because it is wrong and hence a needless distraction: the Author using personal knowledge to determine character decisions based on that person's priorities is making his PC a pawn. <snip> That's what Pawn stance is. It's having the PC act without a reason in the game to act in the way that it does. I mean, you can define "pawn stance" however you like, but I'm using it as Ron Edwards does. Edwards makes no reference to "personal knowledge". He refers to a "real person's priorities". Nor does he make any reference to "without a reason in the gam...

Saturday, 23rd March, 2019

  • 08:50 AM - Sadras mentioned hawkeyefan 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 oth...

Thursday, 21st March, 2019

  • 12:14 PM - Ovinomancer mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    Hit points are for the player. The PC doesn't know what hit points are, or how many he has. So if the PC acts on knowledge the player has(hit points), and that the PC doesn't have(hit points), then that is metagaming.I'm going to treat this as an honest response. Hitpoints are not metagane, they are abstract. They are a way to summarize fir the player a huge wealth of in fiction information available to the character. As such, while the player knows how many hitpoints his character has left, the character knows how tired/bruised/motivated/blessed they are. The player says hitpoints but the character translates this into fictional terms. Going back to hawkeyefan's fighter taking a hit from a gnoll because he has enough hitpoints. In fiction the fighter doesn't just stand there and take a clean hit, they make a risky move to feint past the gnoll, but overexert themselves a bit and now knows that next time they may not be fast enough. Or some other fiction. Doesn't matter, as the point is that hitpoints abstract the fighter's current fictional state, they don't metagame it. If you are using a game mechanic (hitpoints) to make decisions within the scope of the game (combat and the resource management subgame), then you are just playing the game, not metagaming. Hitpoints aren't explicitly understood by the characters, sure, but the fiction that is abstracted into hitpoints for the players is.
  • 09:25 AM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...t comes out in the module that the assassins use wagons to get their supplies in from civilization - and on hearing this the players quite rightly ask me "Well, why didn't we see any wagon tracks in the dirt, all the way along the road? Things might have been different if we had!". The meta-game answer, which I openly told the players, was that the wagons hadn't yet been written into the module at the time and so I couldn't read ahead and factor them in. They were understanding, if a bit annoyed, and on we went; but it stuck with me as something both as player and DM to watch out for and never to repeat. * - at one point about halfway through I told my friend he'd better do some serious writing that coming week, as the previous session had played to within 9 words (!) of where he'd left off writing!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 shouldn't be too hard to reconcile it with what's gone before. To reiterate a point made by AbdulAlhazred upthread, the established fiction of most RPG campaigns is pretty thin, meaning that the reconciliation task is not normally going to be that demanding.

Wednesday, 20th March, 2019

  • 02:15 PM - pemerton mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...lem for play the way a player using his or her knowledge of Trolls would be <snip> I've only heard complaints about the conceit fo the party being together being a problem from players who are particularly focused on seeing and experiencing everything as their character without any outside forces shaping them. But that is an unusually strict view of meta gaming and kind of sketches the meaning of what Max Person is even talking about In this thread, Maxperson has repeatedly talked about a "focus on seeeing and experience everything as his character". That's his basis for criticising metagaming. But now you're saying that some departures from this, like the paty conceit, aren't really metagaming because Maxperson doesn't mind it. (I'm not sure why Maxperson's view counts for more than Lanefan's, who has said that he minds it.) Your defence of Maxperson makes it obvious that there is no objective notion of metagaming, let alone cheating, at work here. Maxperson may not like how hawkeyefan's imagined player handles the troll case, via the story of the uncle; but there is no objective concept of metagaming that explains how what hawkeyefan is suggesting is wrong, whereas the party conceit is completley unproblematic. There's nothing here besides table preferences.
  • 11:22 AM - Ovinomancer mentioned hawkeyefan in post A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
    ...ol if you do, and then I do understand why you would not get old geezer's point. I don't have a lot of experience in that arena myself with those sorts of pure narrative games.Hitpoints aren't metagame at all, they are abstract. abstractions are required for the game to function, or you'd spend vastly more time simulating a single sword swing than most sessions last. Further, actually playing the game can't be metagaming so thinking about or using hitpoints is just playing the game. RPGs have developed this weird idea that metagaming is anything outside the fictional mental state of the character. This is useless as a concept because it presupposes a one-true-way of playing and also moves actually playing the game into the metagame. Metagaming, by definition, is thinking outside the game, not playing it or using abstract mechanics. Metagaming is making sure the party covers all roles, or that someone plays a cleric, or how modern chemistry works. Not hitpoints. I disagreed when hawkeyefan said something similar upthread, but things had moved past that by the time I could respond.


Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 86 123456789101151 ... LastLast

Friday, 24th May, 2019

  • 05:36 PM - Imaro quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Well it's different for everyone, I would think. Would you agree that it's a scale? Personally, I like to use evocative description when it's called for. Usually at the start of a new scene....I'll deliver a few lines to try and set the scene. If there's a particular mood I'm going for, I'll try and tailor what I'm saying to reinforce that mood. But this isn't something I always do. Sometimes, I'll just go with basic description in order to make sure things are clear. Sometimes, I don't want to convey a specific mood right away. It really varies a lot for me. I'm also in no way against leaning on visual media when it helps. Describing whatever creature @Hussar mentioned a few pages ago as the bug at the end of Men in Black works for me. I usually provide an actor in association with my important NPCs to help my players picture what I'm going for. To my mind, that's not a literary technique by any reasonable stretch....it facilitates understanding at the table to say "the captain of the guar...
  • 05:11 PM - Maxperson quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Who's advocated for such limited description? No one. Bedrockgames says that he prefers conversational language rather than trying to create evocative, literary minded narration. I don't think that means that description is absent....do you? When people have a conversation, are they somehow incapable of describing things? Must you make a strong effort to evoke mood and theme in order to simply describe a room? None of that is required for the content to be literary. Conversational dialogue(simply being a conversation) is a literary technique. What he does is literary, as is what I do, and what you do, and what pemerton does, and... There's a scale when it comes to the literary quality. For some GMs, they want to hit the high end of the scale. Others may be at the low end. Most are likely somewhere in between. If someone says that this is not their main focus when it comes to RPGs, that doesn't mean that they can't still be well within what is acceptable on that scale. I agree. The ...
  • 03:57 PM - Imaro quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    "Poorly" is where I get confused. Who wants poor delivery by the GM? People have said that the quality of the GM's delivery is not the most important thing to them....but that doesn't mean they want or expect crap delivery. As an advocate of quality narration, and use of evocative language and/or literary techniques to strengthen your game, does that mean that you expect your content to be bland and meaningless? I don't think anyone is denying that good GMing, or roleplaying in general, is the result of many factors. I think we all know this. However, among those many factors, we each place importance or focus on some more than others. In pemerton's case, he considers the fictional situation to be of primary importance....he wants the players to feel pressure to act based on the content. I don't think this is an attempt on his part to simplify RPGing so much as it's just him stating his preference. No more than if I said the most important part of a car is an engine it doesn't mean th...
  • 03:55 PM - Imaro quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Who's advocated for such limited description? No one. Bedrockgames says that he prefers conversational language rather than trying to create evocative, literary minded narration. I don't think that means that description is absent....do you? When people have a conversation, are they somehow incapable of describing things? Must you make a strong effort to evoke mood and theme in order to simply describe a room? No one here has said they don't describe things. There's a scale when it comes to the literary quality. For some GMs, they want to hit the high end of the scale. Others may be at the low end. Most are likely somewhere in between. If someone says that this is not their main focus when it comes to RPGs, that doesn't mean that they can't still be well within what is acceptable on that scale. Would you agree with this? so where is the line? At what point do you cross from regular description/presentation/performance into whatever it is pemerton is talking about?
  • 11:12 AM - Hussar quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Hussar I donít necessarily agree with pemerton. I simply understand what he is saying. I think RPGs can contain literary quality. They can important and meaningful...although itís usually only so for a handful of people. But thatís not really the point. Letís say a new GM came to you for advice, and said ďgimme the ONE THING that I need to know about GMing a gameĒ what would you offer? Always narrate with a mind toward evocative language? Always try to put the playersí characters into interesting situations where meaningful decisions are needed? Always have pizza? What would you tell this new GM? Just to continue on my last post. An interesting situation delivered poorly will result in a bad game as the session stumbles along at a glacial pace because the GM fails to communicate the situation to the players. OTOH a poorly thought out situation where the players have no stake in the outcome probably wonít be saved by good presentation. So at the end of the day, you...
  • 07:40 AM - Maxperson quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    So you consider everything written or spoken to be literature, but here you indicate concern about the quality of the description given by the GM. Concern in that I assume the DM doesn't want to give boring descriptions and drive away his players. I don't actually sit and think about using this word over that one, but neither do I say, "You see a room." and leave it at that. If so, do you assume that if major focus is not given to this element, then the game will be bland and unenjoyable? Does literary quality have to be the primary focus in order for a game to be playable to you? I've already answered that. It's not a major focus, but it can't be non-existent, either. Giving better descriptions than, "You see a room." is the standard of game play. At least in every RPG I've ever played in. Not everyone was equal in their ability to describe things, but they all made the attempt to at least tell the players what the PCs are looking at. If it is, would you then assume that the...

Thursday, 23rd May, 2019

  • 11:46 PM - Hussar quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Although I wasnít entirely sure about the point made in the OP, hereís pemertonís follow up post on page 2, which to me, made his point very clear. I think this post makes it pretty clear. I know that the choice of the word ďcoreĒ threw some people off, but the actual point is clear. Considering we're 50ish pages down this rabbit hole and you have multiple posters obviously not understanding the point, including myself, I'd argue that it wasn't quite as clear as maybe you think. As I said, if the OP had simply stated, "Is RPGing high art", then this thread would be 2 posts long. As it is, it was a total waste of time and energy because everyone kept flailing around trying to figure out just what the hell the OP actually meant. Which, if we're going to apply this to gaming advice, could be stated as thus: "Just because you understand your own words doesn't mean that you are actually communicating what you think you are communicating. Listen to the responses you are getting a...

Tuesday, 21st May, 2019

  • 03:07 AM - pemerton quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    It's not about long winded or flowery language, per se, it's more about the craft of the narration being the primary concern. Is it more important that I as GM convey the situation clearly to the players, or is it more meaningful that I do so in a way that attempts to evoke a certain emotion or tone or mood? this most definitely was not what the main disagreement has been aboutIt is very close to it. The notion of the craft of the narration is as good as any other way of putting it. For my part, the limitaion in what hawkeyefan says is the emphasis on clearly conveying the situation. I think this is important, but not sufficient. As per the OP, What matters to me is that the players feel the significance of the situations the GM describes - that they feel the pull to action, and the threats of inaction. This requires not only conveying a situation, but conveying a situation that will draw in the players. In this thread I've also referred to that as the invitation to respond. This is a false dichotomy since nothing about literary quality necessitates lack of clarity. <snip> Why, inherently, would you have to sacrifice one to get the other(s)?Upthread, I already posted why crafted narration and conveying a situation that draws in the players might come into conflict. The first benefits from preparation (and the resulting opportunity to test, edit, etc). Whereas the second - like conversation, which has been my reiterated comparitor - benefits from spontaneous engagement within the back-and-fort...

Monday, 20th May, 2019

  • 06:46 PM - Imaro quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Sure. I don't think the OP or most following posts are saying that the presentation doesn't matter at all, just that it's secondary to the actual content. I don't see presentation as being wholly absent, though. I absolutely use presentation to evoke mood and so on. Others likely use more, and some other folks likely less, but I do use it. I'd agree with your recent post that an interesting scenario can be rendered uninteresting due to poor presentation. But I don't think that an uninteresting scenario can be made to be interesting due to presentation. So for me, what's most important is the content. I think if you say something isn't core you are saying it can be removed and is not necessary for play. EDIT: Which is to say if the original discussion had been framed around what was more/most important as opposed to what is core there would have probably been less push back.
  • 06:03 PM - Bedrockgames quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Generally speaking, we don't hold folks to literary standards when speaking to each other in that capacity. I don't think that's the same as saying presentation can't matter, but I don't think it's what is most important. And again this is key. The reason books as a medium have a higher standard than talking face to face, or at least one important reason, is the writer only has one shot to convey what he or she means, because a novel is a one-way form of communication (you can't ask the author for clarification while you are reading unless you have them there). Roleplaying games are a totally different medium, based on people interacting and conversing. You don't need strong literary style descriptions (or descriptions that adhere to good writing style advice) because it is so easy to ask the GM 'when you say big; how big exactly is it?. Half the fun is asking questions like that (for me at least). Sure the GM may just say 'there are 13 kobolds on the hill'. And that might not impress someone ...
  • 06:02 PM - Imaro quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    I don't think that's the same as saying presentation can't matter, but I don't think it's what is most important. All most/all of us on the other side are saying is that it matters... Just because something is a core aspect of something doesn't mean it's the most important aspect of something. Headlights in modern times are a core component of a car... I wouldn't say they are the most important though.
  • 05:45 PM - Bedrockgames quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Has something like this really never happened to you in a game? In such cases, perhaps clear and concise language would be preferable to evocative language? More than that, I think the questioning the GM about details like that is part of the game. This is why having a human mind there is superior to a video game. Asking questions is part of getting the GM to hammer down the details. Those kinds of details are often not thought of in advance. I try to think of everything I can about places and characters before hand. But if the setting is to feel like a real place, nothing you put on a page is going to be able to capture the endless possibliities of a real place. So you need that questioning and back and forth to help the GM breath life into it. And that isn't about the words the GM uses. It is about the questions the players ask, the content the GM provides, etc. Words can be important, but in this case they are also very superficial. What the GM intends is much more important than how the GM...
  • 04:27 PM - Imaro quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    But that's just it....there's a range that is being discussed. Where exactly each person's preference falls in that range is going to vary. And that's fine. I provided actual literary examples of authors who are known to provide highly rendered prose, and others who use a minimalist approach. Both are literary in that sense. Applying the term as broadly as that is ignoring the original point that was being made. It's not about long winded or flowery language, per se, it's more about the craft of the narration being the primary concern. Is it more important that I as GM convey the situation clearly to the players, or is it more meaningful that I do so in a way that attempts to evoke a certain emotion or tone or mood? I think it's clear that actual communication is more important than evocative description. I don't even know how this can be argued, unless you insist that anything the GM says is literary. 1. this most definitely was not what the main disagreement has been about... no o...
  • 03:47 PM - Imaro quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    I donít think that RPGs are without literary merit. I donít think they cannot contain literary quality. But the insistence that they must contain a certain level of quality in that regard is absurd. I would say the insistence that the level of quality (even if it's just hitting the bare minimum to grab players interest) doesn't matter and is not core to the game is absurd. And I'd say evidence of this is the hoops being jumped through to narrow the definition of "literary quality" to only encompass long- winded or "flowery" description when it actually encompasses much more..

Saturday, 18th May, 2019

  • 04:32 PM - Imaro quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Take the dungeon shared by @Hussar a few pages ago. On its own, itís a bare bones approach to an adventure. But Iím sure I could take that map and key and tuen it into something fun at the table. Sure, Iíd embellish and add to it during play....mostly based on what my players seem to find interesting. This is another point I feel is being glossed over... If you are embellishing it yourself, adding description, writing up a description, etc... then it still seems to reason that the presentation and the quality of said presentation is core (and if it's not why bother creating it??). Otherwise one could just read off the bullet points since they are the most succinct and easiest way to relay the content. IMO this is like claiming content isn't core because you create your own. Doesn't matter who creates it for the game, it's a core part of playing the game. @Bedrockgames I'm curious as to how you play (since I could be assuming that most DM's don't just read off a bullet point) Do you simply r...

Friday, 17th May, 2019

  • 12:41 AM - pemerton quoted hawkeyefan in post Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?
    Let's say that for whatever reason you know going in that tonight's session, where you're playing a well-developed character you're familiar with and enjoy playing, is highly likely to consist of nothing but in-character roleplaying and interactions with other PCs (and maybe NPCs) with no story progress likely to be made and maybe little if any reference to the story at all, and little if any chance of combat (unless the PCs decide to throw down vs each other for some reason). It's not a bookkeeping session, though. Maybe you've decided to play out in detail some discussions the PCs have while on a long ship voyage. On a scale of 1 (dread) to 10 (bursting) how enthusiastic would you be when looking forward to the session. Maybe a 3. I want there always to be some forward momentum. I donít mind the occasional dip into in character discussions. In my experience, those usually remain story focused, though. An entire session spent having a conversation that has little to no impact on the ga...

Thursday, 16th May, 2019

  • 08:32 AM - Sadras quoted hawkeyefan in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 5
    Oh it's all certainly subjective. Each of us will have our own way of viewing it. I think for me, something ringing false would be more about the content. It would have to seem more contradictory than someone hitting a dragon with ballistae one day, and then missing the next, when different conditions apply in each case. As I said, I think the first scene could have been constructed a bit more clearly. But to me, the issue is in the presentation more than the content. It isn't bad CGI or poorly depicted props - they introduced content, i.e. the scorpion with its deadly accuracy, range and force and how quickly they are able to load. But anyways I doubt we will change each other's minds on this. Okay. I don't think I tend to view things that way. I mean, I like all kinds of things, and consider myself a fan of them. But I don't know if I identify with them so strongly that it messes with my perception of who I am if I don't like something. That seems bizarre to me. It is more about we have in...

Wednesday, 15th May, 2019

  • 01:26 PM - Sadras quoted hawkeyefan in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 5
    I'm not sure, really. I'd have to see it to know it. But I think it would be something that was very concretely contradictory rather than just poorly presented. Even this (bolded section) can be subjective - one can but refer to the plethora of online arguments regarding the Dragon Queen and her descent into Madness. That's fine. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion. I expect I even share some of your opinions about the show. But may I ask, if the show has let you down so much, why do you still watch? This might help explain why I still watch it. Particularly the quote from Jester David. I try to temper my expectations with the realities of production of a show on this scale, and with trying to complete the story in the amount of episodes that remain. I'd have preferred a few more episodes so that things don't feel so rushed, but that was not to be. We can guess as to why, but likely our guesses will fall far short of the complexity that goes into a film production of this scope. "J...
  • 04:42 AM - Zardnaar quoted hawkeyefan in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 5
    Sure dragons make sense in the fictional context. And so would weapons designed to combat dragons. Especially when those weapons are designed by a mad scientist capable of creating flesh golems and with the full resources of the crown in a world where extraordinary materials exist. As I said it was the execution of everything. Personally I would have had Dany steamroll Cersei a the end of season 7, and have season 8 focus on the Night King who over runs the North and makes it to Kings Landing.
  • 03:41 AM - Zardnaar quoted hawkeyefan in post GAME OF THRONES SEASON 8--Final Run-- Part 5
    Let me ask you....is it more implausible than the dragon? Dragons make sense in the context of their world. Dragons aren't invincible, see season 6 iirc but it's jarring to see one shot down and then in the next episode they can't hit one to literally save their lives. More of a pacing issue, problem they have had since season 7.


Page 1 of 86 123456789101151 ... LastLast

hawkeyefan's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites