Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5984110" data-attributes="member: 6668292"><p>Slightly, yes. That's why I brought it up. I find that the system should give as much solid support to the players as possible, and -at least for my group- the GM should then say "and this is how the game is different." This means that players are empowered in nearly everything, though they lose some power when the GM changes how something works every so often (though this leaves nearly everything else there to empower them).</p><p></p><p>It admittedly wouldn't work for every group, but the dynamic works well for mine. I can say "here's the insanity mechanics for using magic" and the players are still massively empowered by the rest of the rules.</p><p></p><p>Social contract. I think that a good GM generally won't do this in a way that won't work with long term players (because if he does, the players with which this isn't a fit will leave his group). Additionally, poor GMs who abuse this rule are more likely to be poor in other areas, from my experience (Rule 0 abuse from the GM is commonly found with GMPCs or railroad plots, from my experience).</p><p></p><p>Basically, empower the player as much as possible, and give the GM control enough to change the world to suit his creative needs, fix holes in the rules when "common sense" (as it applies to the social contract) makes sense, and the like. Does that answer your question sufficiently? As always, play what you like <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 5984110, member: 6668292"] Slightly, yes. That's why I brought it up. I find that the system should give as much solid support to the players as possible, and -at least for my group- the GM should then say "and this is how the game is different." This means that players are empowered in nearly everything, though they lose some power when the GM changes how something works every so often (though this leaves nearly everything else there to empower them). It admittedly wouldn't work for every group, but the dynamic works well for mine. I can say "here's the insanity mechanics for using magic" and the players are still massively empowered by the rest of the rules. Social contract. I think that a good GM generally won't do this in a way that won't work with long term players (because if he does, the players with which this isn't a fit will leave his group). Additionally, poor GMs who abuse this rule are more likely to be poor in other areas, from my experience (Rule 0 abuse from the GM is commonly found with GMPCs or railroad plots, from my experience). Basically, empower the player as much as possible, and give the GM control enough to change the world to suit his creative needs, fix holes in the rules when "common sense" (as it applies to the social contract) makes sense, and the like. Does that answer your question sufficiently? As always, play what you like :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition
Top