What's on your mind?
+ Log in or register to post
Results 21 to 23 of 23
Wednesday, 25th April, 2012, 12:47 AM #21
Cutpurse (Lvl 5)
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
- The Blood Plains of Stovokor
- Read 0 Reviews
ø Ignore DalkonCledwin
okay it seems that Mawgli accidentally deleted part of my last post. and I am unsure if I remember enough of it to reconstruct what I had said in it. So I am just going to ignore that post for now and let everyone continue this discussion for now. Suffice to say that I am in agreement that the deities we have currently listed in the wiki should really be fleshed out more fully since they are the primary deities that people are likely to look at when deciding which deities they want their characters to worship. Additionally I also think that stricter rules should be put in place for the decision process when a player decides that they want to make a unique deity that is not currently on the list.Fae'shiel Aeros, Level 5 || Tonris, Level 6
- EN World
- has no influence
- on advertisings
- that are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Wednesday, 25th April, 2012, 01:32 AM #22
Cutpurse (Lvl 5)
I think you hit on what for me is a salient point by referencing the impact the rotation of GMs/gaming groups principle to LPF has for these aspects of the game. I find it to be the ultimate double-edged sword of LPF. I love large scale, immersive effect that playing with different characters and different GMs in different settings brings. On the other hand, I find the inconsistency to be very frustrating: certain GMs have very strong expectations from their players and their characters which are not shared by anyone else, and yet they nevertheless impose those criteria on players who wind up in their games. I find this to be insensitive to the communal nature of LPF.
Anyway, I'll avoid slipping into an out-and-out rant. What I mean to say in response to your point, mfloyd, is that I feel as though an issue such as adhering to the tenets of one's faith is one of those things that falls by the wayside in the transitive, communal context of LPF. Personally, I don't think this fact is worth fighting, since I feel it could lead to potentially straight-jacketing GMs to an unwarranted degree. Not that you were suggesting we should do this; that's just why I'd be against an LPF-wide decree requiring a stricter enforcement of these sorts of aspects of the game.
Hopefully that strikes people as being constructive.
Thursday, 26th April, 2012, 03:46 PM #23
Waghalter (Lvl 7)
I respectfully disagree with you, @Qik . While, I think a good GM tailors his style to the wants of the players rather than the other way around, I value creative freedom more highly than consistency. I know that these aren't mutually exclusive, but if I had to sacrifice one, it would be consistency.
With respect, I think you're coming very close to Geek Social Fallacy #4, especially given your use of the word 'transitive.' LPF is a large enough group that there will necessarily be disagreements in playstyle. This kind of thing happens, and a player can always politely decline an invitation if a GM isn't working out for him, for whatever reason.