Crimson Longinus
Legend
I don't really mind learning new terminology. Granted, sometimes there is an issue with the terminology being dumb.
When discussing it here, natural language kinda has to be used or you lose a lot of people in the conversation like you all do when you post and just use the jargon.
Yeah, that part above is the problem. I don't want to assume that my PC is at the top of their field.
And we were talking about agendas. If a term is habitually used by proponents of a given style, when they apply it to all styles it is reasonable to suspect an agenda might be at play.
I'm sure they'd rather that the GM simply didn't tell them information their PC wouldn't necessarily know.
I'd be cool with that, especially as "bounded accuracy" doesn't actually appear as a term in the actual 5e books.
No, of course not. But I'd certainly enjoy talking about them more if said discussions weren't rife with exclusive jargon.
There does seem to come a time for many folks when they just lose interest in starting over with new terminology and a whole new way of looking at games. For some the juice isn't worth the squeeze.
And absolutely, different magical traditions would be fantastic, but it adds a level of complexity that apparently only a third-party developer could add to the game. We can't confuse all those people that the Champion Fighter was written for, now can we? /sarcasm
No you!
I was much younger when I learned D&D. I know D&D. I don't have the desire to learn jargon for game X, different jargon for game y, and yet more jargon for game z. Not going to do it when natural language fixes everything.
Sure. I tried to learn that Dragonlance RPG that used cards instead of dice to make characters and play the game. It was structured very differently than D&D. I just couldn't find anyone to play it with.
Learning jargon is a lot like work, and I play RPGs to relax. I just don't want to do it.
Practically speaking, using jargon here on a forum is just asking for trouble. Sure the folks who have played that game will understand you, but the rest of us aren't unless you explain it in natural language anyway, so you might as well just post it originally in natural language.
What's silly is calling someone's preferred way to play it silly.
Here's the thing, while you can't get rid of the influence 100%, you can do a lot to minimize it. That sort of influence is also not a dichotomy but falls on a scale. Just because I can't get rid of every smidge of influence doesn't make it okay for me to embrace it heart and soul.
I would read them. All the jargon in these games has to be explained somewhere in natural language. I'd just read that and learn it.
When discussing it here, natural language kinda has to be used or you lose a lot of people in the conversation like you all do when you post and just use the jargon.
You are correct.
Unfortunately, not everyone is all that worried about whether they include others in the conversation.
Not that I've experienced.Natural language can be just as problematic as jargon. Also, once a book explains to a reader what a term means, then after that, there should be no issue with the term.
So learning new rules would be fine, it’s just the jargon that’s an issue?
That's an unrealistic expectation. You use the phrase on a regular basis, so you know it well. Expecting someone to remember it from months before in some other thread when they haven't used it since is.........................................optimistic.Once explained, people should then be able to use the phrase going forward.
Like scene-framing… is there really any confusion about what it means by anyone who’s been involved in this discussion? It’s been explained, examples have been provided.
I don't recall anyone criticizing your decision to share information with your players. You can do what you want in your game. That's between you and your players.And no one hesitated to criticize my decision to share information with players. Which is fine… I expect that my opinions I share on these boards will be subject to criticism. I think others should expect the same.
It's a playstyle/preference thing. It's not simply a case of accepting or rejecting narration.Yes, in this case, by simply accepting the GM’s narration, it could have been avoided altogether.
Now, this is something about which opinions will vary, so it’s probably best to discuss it and find some consensus going forward. Expecting the GM to cater to everyone and any compromise being 100% on them isn’t really a reasonable expectation.
When discussing jargon from minor RPGs? Fairly often. It's not as if most of us will remember it when we don't use it on a regular basis. Bringing it back up weeks or months later isn't going to go over well if you don't re-explain.I mean, this is an RPG site. There are tons of jargon terms, and the folks complaining about jargon heaps of jargon themselves.
Oof, yeah, hit points are bloated in 5e, but not that bad!I have to assume you mean 2d8 hit points here; as 2d8 hit dice would put those guards far beyond humble.
Not that I've experienced.
That's an unrealistic expectation. You use the phrase on a regular basis, so you know it well. Expecting someone to remember it from months before in some other thread when they haven't used it since is.........................................optimistic.
I don't recall anyone criticizing your decision to share information with your players. You can do what you want in your game. That's between you and your players.
It's a playstyle/preference thing. It's not simply a case of accepting or rejecting narration.
When discussing jargon from minor RPGs? Fairly often. It's not as if most of us will remember it when we don't use it on a regular basis. Bringing it back up weeks or months later isn't going to go over well if you don't re-explain.
I've seen some attempts at level-0 play. Generally you have no class abilities to speak of, can't wear armor, and can only use "peasant weapons".