A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life

[pemerton]

[MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION] - I think I remember that now but had forgotten - sorry for dragging you into it given that backstory.

 

[Sadras]

I'll just be "that guy" and say it, but I don't care about what D&D does. I don't need D&D to be all and end all of RPG experiences. I don't use a D&D as a metric for what I am looking for in a game.

I found this to be a strange response since my post was not intended to be hostile or dismissive of other games, styles or ideas. I predominantly tackled the realism issue as I understand it, but initially commented on the flexibility of D&D to cater to a larger degree of playstyle as some posts back it seemed as if the use/need of encumbrance and the general accounting of minutiae in the game was being questioned.

 

[S'mon]

To characterise S'mon as my "follower" is ridiculous! Without being mawkish and without wanting to exaggerate the intimacy that is possible on a message board (we've never met in person), I would characterise S'mon as a friend.

Aye!

 

[Ovinomancer]

I found this to be a strange response since my post was not intended to be hostile or dismissive of other games, styles or ideas. I predominantly tackled the realism issue as I understand it, but initially commented on the flexibility of D&D to cater to a larger degree of playstyle as some posts back it seemed as if the use/need of encumbrance and the general accounting of minutiae in the game was being questioned.

D&D really doesn't, though. Plot points do allow a bit of slop in the core GM centered play of 5e, but it doesn't really move the needle much: it's still a strongly GM centered game. D&D allows a lot of playstyles within the tent, but not outside of it.

 

[Sadras]

D&D really doesn't, though. Plot points do allow a bit of slop in the core GM centered play of 5e, but it doesn't really move the needle much: it's still a strongly GM centered game. D&D allows a lot of playstyles within the tent, but not outside of it.

Okay and given my zero-experience with 50/50 authored games or even player-centric games I can accept that, since you and others have played in both tents and have a better understanding of it, but my initial post was not dismissive of Aldarc's preferences hence my surprise by his response.

 

[S'mon]

* - which also means I specifically don't subscribe to the Gygax-DMG notion of a day passing in the game world for each day that passes between sessions - in fact I've always seen this as one of his dumber ideas.

Works great in the context of multiple PC groups within the same campaign - the context he assumed.

 

[Sadras]

This is why I don't really take seriously that you object to pejorative descriptions of playstyles you personally don't care for. Your objection to pejorative descriptions only seems to be activitated by someone (especially me) explaing a dislike for GM-decides as a resolution system.

Funny enough on this issue, even though I strongly do not agree with Pemerton's characterisation of that certain playstyle as MMI and am on that side with Bedrockgames, I would defend Pemerton the freedom in using this obviously inflammatory word.

Damn my ideals!

 

[Bedrockgames]

In this thread you commended The Alexandrian's blog about "dissocated mechanics". Which characterises 4e as not really an RPG, but a skirmish game punctuated by moments of free-form roleplaying. In case anyone doesn't believe me, here's the quote:

There is a meaningful difference between an RPG and a wargame. And that meaningful difference doesn’t actually go away just because you happen to give names to the miniatures you’re playing the wargame with and improv dramatically interesting stories that take place between your tactical skirmishes.​

This is why I don't really take seriously that you object to pejorative descriptions of playstyles you personally don't care for. Your objection to pejorative descriptions only seems to be activitated by someone (especially me) explaing a dislike for GM-decides as a resolution system.

I also said I thought a better term could be used. And I think the pejorative nature of the term has led to some of its excesses over the years.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Funny enough on this issue, even though I strongly do not agree with Pemerton's characterisation of that certain playstyle as MMI and am on that side with Bedrockgames, I would defend Pemerton the freedom in using this obviously inflammatory word.

Damn my ideals!

He can use what words he wants. It isn't like I am hitting the report button or anything. But if he uses inflammatory language on me, surely I can reciprocate?

 

[S'mon]

[MENTION=85555]Bedrockgames[/MENTION], I think that you are looking for far more offense than is intended with pemerton, and you should probably learn to chill out, because your "counteroffenses" are often unnecessarily disproportionate to what was said, conveyed, or intended.

I'm sure there is truth in this, but I didn't like the OP either - and I'm definitely not inclined to be prejudiced against Pemerton or in favour of Brendan. So I think it's fair to say the OP is pretty abrasive!

I like 4e rather a lot, and I value discussion that helps me understand how to make it work. But I like the opposite, OSR-style approach too and for some reason that's the one I'm more inclined to feel I need to defend against detractors. I think I understand why people don't grok 4e, because initially I didn't either. Whereas when people don't grok immersionist world-sim old-school play I kinda want to shake them and yell "WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?!?!"