Recent content by Enrahim

Nitpic: FATE is definitely not an easy example. Rather the opposite. From Invoking & Compelling Aspects • Fate Core I cannot off the bat give a good comment comment on your other examples. Too long since I read them. But I cannot remember either ironsworn nor 3:16 striking me as doing anything...

Would the lines and veils safety tool adress your concern? It sound to me like you might have a line at character behaving in a way you don't envision yourself?

Yes, added an edit before you posted, but after you grabbed the quote: Assuming a healthy group setting.

But you have that veto power. (Edit - assuming a healthy group setting) When I made my own game way back, I introduced a somewhat convoluted in-game veto system. This was intended as a fail safe. Problem was that during playtest people were actively pushing the fiction in unhealthy directions...

Reading this made me think: Maybe the core RPG experience indeed is very robust to methodology? Thinking back on my experiences with games as diverse as Munchausen, Universalis, Fiasco or Gloomhaven they have all had something essential in common with my experience playing trad RPGs like CoC...

I sort of agree. Just want to point out that a lot of grief has been over thinking there might more than one distinct activities underlying RPGs. While two groups might be playing things that look completely different, there are likely lots of groups playing something that is clearly very...

One of the main argument I have seen against this is that it is immersion breaking. The DM analogy do not work on this. Another with regard to "good faith" is that for a DM this is much more clearly defined, as they are supposed to be neutral. A player are having special responsibilities...

Absolutely. Which promts me again to reiterate: There was no (intended) generalisation in my post. Hawkeyefan asked a spesific question. I answered that spesific question.

I think you missed the context. This was purely about a particular kind of possible intepretation of a pharse sequence from monsterhearts: "But being their advocate doesn’t mean it’s your job to keep them safe. It’s not. It’s your job to make their life not boring." I further up acknowledged...

Right :) Edit: would you?

Fair question. Yes I read the rule text before, but on revisit noticed I didn't properly read the context you quoted it into. Your excelent answer to SableWyvern just after this post covered what I was getting at as well.

Interesting. So what you are saying is that when it come to the actual crux of the matter, "make the players' characters' life not boring" is actually a shortening for "make sure you are only making the players' characters' life not boring in certain ways. Avoid other ways of doing so."? Not...

Not sure at what level to answer this question so I try with the high abstract approach to one of my major concerns first. One of the major things I like with TTRPGs is seeing how players use the freedom of the media to come up with surprising and clever approaches to situations. The problem is...

Now you have more info on what I meant to say, and hence you can from now on go by what I actually meant to say. Miscommunication happens all the time. I am not particularly gifted with words. I will be more careful with the word "perfectly" in the future, as I seemingly do not know how to...

I think my main problem come down to this constellation of sentences. "But being their advocate doesn’t mean it’s your job to keep them safe. It’s not. It’s your job to make their life not boring." In one way I cannot say straight out that I disagree. I think I could manage to construe a meaning...