D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[AnotherGuy]

Yeah I'm going to step away from this convo... apparently my questions have in some way offended you (Or you've just decided to take a hostile tone) so since I was asking mostly out of curiosity, I'm good on going further with this line of discussion. Have a nice day.

Edit: Also you might consider the fact that the experience you had with your friends isn't a universal one with the game for all who play it and ponder why that is.

I bring up an aspect of the game which I desired but which was largely absent in its 50 year history and how some other games prioritize that and you reply referencing force directly and indirectly multiple times.

If someone were discussing how D&D doesn't cater for low level magic play but some other games do would you be telling them how D&D was a collaborative styled game and they need to take their players' preferences into account.

Can you really not see how your post came across?

 

[Campbell]

Just curious: how many trad games spend page count talking about, "level of myth", "scene-framing" or "reward cycles"?

What are you getting at here Micah?

The post were responding to was meant to respond to questions about where the personal part of the game comes in and answered that it comes from the overall approach, the way we do our game setup, the way we approach situation/scene framing. That the mechanics sit on top of the craft, reinforce it, support it. I'm more than happy to discuss how we do this with anyone who cares. Emotional vulnerability in roleplaying (both in genre enforcing games like Vampire and in Narrativist games) is a personal interest of mine.

Here I was speaking to Narrativism.

Scene framing or at least setting is addressed in most 2d20 games, L5R 5e, most iterations of Vampire, etc.
Most games don't talk about reward cycles - they just offer them and how to propel play using the reward cycle on offer.
Level of myth is mostly a term used in online discussions. Games just tell you how prep should look for them. I used it primarily to address differences between games.

Are you trying to say I should not talk about these things?

 

[Thomas Shey]

Sorry, I should have been clearer: Using in-game fiction.

Can you enlarge a bit on how that relates to my question?

(Also, just to make it clear what I'm talking about, when I talk about social skills able to "impose a Condition" I'm referring to things where if you've succeeded in the necessary process it creates a mechanical modifier of some stripe on the target character either as a direct effect or relating to specific actions the character might or might not do. So trying to enrage the target wouldn't compel them to do anything in specific, but they'd either get a bonus attacking the person taunting them or get a penalty attacking anyone else. An attempt to intimidate wouldn't compel someone to cooperate, but would apply penalties to things you'd do interacting with the character if you didn't).

 

[Thomas Shey]

We're 50 years in...

That may mean some people end up wanting different things out of the game than 50 years ago, but it doesn't mean no one isn't still there playing it as a microscale wargame. People want what they want.

That's fair. I'm sure there were other games but unfortunately I wasn't exposed to them. D&D, Rolemaster, VtM, Fate and a handful of others. I only got a copy of Pendragon in the last few years.

Well, you were exposed to what you were, but I just have to note none of the three systems I mentioned were particularly obscure.

I'm not sure Pendragon goes in quite the same bucket, since its Passions are more-or-less mandatory and far reaching; its more like a very broad version of the kind of game I mentioned to Micah that, because of what its focused on, has some of those baked in right from the start bridging across to some of what you see in PbtA games. Its always been more than a bit controversial for that reason.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Just curious: how many trad games spend page count talking about, "level of myth", "scene-framing" or "reward cycles"?

I've seen a number I'd call that that spend some time on at least the latter two. They're pretty basic concepts of GMing in many cases after all. ("Level of myth" is a particular term-of-art for some sorts of Forge derived games but the other two can be used to describe process that lands pretty commonly in Trad games, and taking some time to describe how to do it (in the former) and what it incentivizes (in the latter) isn't always considered wasted space.)

 

[Imaro]

I bring up an aspect of the game which I desired but which was largely absent in its 50 year history and how some other games prioritize that and you reply referencing force directly and indirectly multiple times.

If someone were discussing how D&D doesn't cater for low level magic play but some other games do would you be telling them how D&D was a collaborative styled game and they need to take their players' preferences into account.

Can you really not see how your post came across?

Uhm... but older editions of D&D did/do cater to low magic play. I'm not sure what you're expecting here, it's a forum... you posted and I commented my thoughts... to which I received alot of unnecessary snark and hostility I feel like because I dared to question your take. Well if you don't want any dissenting oppinions why post here on a public forum?

EDIT : You know what, nevermind I withdraw my question, don't want to get pulled into a back and forth here.

 

[Faolyn]

Not just that. They're fond of making absolute statements both before and after telling others off for making such statements.

I know for a fact @Faolyn has criticized previous posts for (allegedly) treating personal preference as objective fact, for failing to explicitly specify that a personal opinion is personal and not a universal fact.

But this just loops back around to "rules for thee, not for me" and is part of why I have mostly checked out of the thread.

Here: you can add this to my previous post: "I believe that."

I'm not saying my personal preference is an objective fact. I failed to include a few words in my post.

 

[hawkeyefan]

BS. The players have the agency to, among loads of other things, do nothing.

That their doing nothing leads to a mighty dull game doesn't deny their ownership of that agency.

Thank you for addressing that very serious post in the serious manner it seriously deserved!

 

[Faolyn]

Can you enlarge a bit on how that relates to my question?

(Also, just to make it clear what I'm talking about, when I talk about social skills able to "impose a Condition" I'm referring to things where if you've succeeded in the necessary process it creates a mechanical modifier of some stripe on the target character either as a direct effect or relating to specific actions the character might or might not do. So trying to enrage the target wouldn't compel them to do anything in specific, but they'd either get a bonus attacking the person taunting them or get a penalty attacking anyone else. An attempt to intimidate wouldn't compel someone to cooperate, but would apply penalties to things you'd do interacting with the character if you didn't).

Yes, as long as whatever caused the condition was within the actual fiction, I would (likely) consider it to be OK. If it's due to GM fiat, then I wouldn't be OK with it.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Yes, based on your assumptions, that follows. But you're in a conversation with people who don’t share those assumptions. So the real question is: do you want to keep pressing for agreement, or do you want to advance the discussion by exploring why people like @Bedrockgames, myself, and others approach things differently and still run fun, successful campaigns? Just as you do with your own approach.

I would ask you to go back and look at the exchange again and see who is pressing who.