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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pros and Cons of going mainstream
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 6127115" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>To the extent that this is good advice, why does it not also apply to the players?</p><p></p><p>To give an example from my own game: one of the players in my 4e game plays an invoker/wizard who has take the Expert Ritualist feat which gives a +2 bonus to skill checks involved in peforming rituals. Now, what counts as a ritual? My guess is that when that feat was authored, the writer had in mind only rituals as defined mechanically with the 4e PC build and action resolution system. However, my player interprets "ritual" to mean any deployment of his skills to generate a magical effect, such as closing a portal or sealing a breach. Given that the feat is hardly overpowered, and the player spending more time having his PC do that sort of thing seems to make for a fun game, I (as GM) haven't raised any queries about the player's interpretation of that feat.</p><p></p><p>Is this bad GMing? Or decadent RPGing?</p><p></p><p>The whole idea that getting the players more involved in the game - in story, in mechanics - is a sign of degradation I find odd, myself. If someone can indicate a particular conflict of interest, that's another matter - but GM's can have conflicts of interest too, and how RPG rules balance such things is an interesting and tricky matter. There's certainly no general principle that all authority over story and resolution should be given to the GM.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6127115, member: 42582"] To the extent that this is good advice, why does it not also apply to the players? To give an example from my own game: one of the players in my 4e game plays an invoker/wizard who has take the Expert Ritualist feat which gives a +2 bonus to skill checks involved in peforming rituals. Now, what counts as a ritual? My guess is that when that feat was authored, the writer had in mind only rituals as defined mechanically with the 4e PC build and action resolution system. However, my player interprets "ritual" to mean any deployment of his skills to generate a magical effect, such as closing a portal or sealing a breach. Given that the feat is hardly overpowered, and the player spending more time having his PC do that sort of thing seems to make for a fun game, I (as GM) haven't raised any queries about the player's interpretation of that feat. Is this bad GMing? Or decadent RPGing? The whole idea that getting the players more involved in the game - in story, in mechanics - is a sign of degradation I find odd, myself. If someone can indicate a particular conflict of interest, that's another matter - but GM's can have conflicts of interest too, and how RPG rules balance such things is an interesting and tricky matter. There's certainly no general principle that all authority over story and resolution should be given to the GM. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pros and Cons of going mainstream
Top