Recent content by Umbran

We are, in the end, a news site. And, more importantly, silence = tacit assent. If we didn't allow discussion, that would support ignorance of the issues, which amounts to allowing support for Bledsaw. By having discussion, folks can make informed choices.

Not everyone is aware of the moral issues.

And that is the point. Things happen. If they are going to happen, the question is how much one is willing to embrace Things Happening. Games or tables that use Fail Forward or Success at a Cost techniques, or that generate Complications (using generic terms - each game can have different names...

Oh, no! Someone used an older name for a technique! The HORROR!

Indeed. We can take that further, to make the point more clear. The kitchen, which was explicitly placed in the scenario, requires a cook. And cooking fuel. And food. But the map probably forgot to include cordwood, or what exactly is in the pantry. So, we have setting elements we know should...

That isn't a point of contention. Nobody thinks you actually secretly want to do it. The points of contention seem to be whether the stated reasons for not liking the technique are: 1) based on the realities of the technique, instead of false impressions/strawmen. 2) self/internally...

The earliest examples i recall didn't actually have characters succed - failing forward was failing, but with an obvious sign of what other course was available - You fail to open the lock, but notice an open 3rd story window. Also, cases when the goal was multi-faceted: A fail forward on, "I...

The Dunning-Kruger Uncertainty Principle.

"Fail backward" would be, "not only did you not succeed, but now things are worse than if you hadn't tried at all." You want a disincentive to trying things? You got one right there.

With the qualifier that there is no objective "makes sense", yes. The lengthy discussion of a single example has largely overridden the fact that there are nigh infinite other scenarios to choose. Don't like the cook? Make it some other complication.

So media would tell us. But then, media tells us that if someone is using a silencer, a gunshot won't wake someone in the next room, or sleeping next to the target... There was a time when lockpicking became a bit of a hobby, you could buy kits, and boxes covered in locks to practice on. I...

For acute lethal radiation exposure in the real world, typically you have minutes to hours. The victim is typically dead in 3 days, depending on treatment availability.

So, it is important to remember what fail forward was designed to prevent - stalling during a session of play. There are GMs who say, "the players have to find another way," but haven't actually designed other ways into their scenario, or who say "no" when players suggest alternatives, or who...

If you can wrap them up from a hospital bed, sure. Lethal radiation exposure doesn't leave you walking around fine until you drop dead. It gives you radiation sickness that keeps getting worse until you die.

So, there are two questions: 1) Are there fewer physical game books, overall? 2) Are game lines smaller? As we have seen in the replies, these are not the same question. I think that, in general, yes, game lines are smaller. I don't know if there are fewer overall books, though. As has...