Search results

I can see the appeal of big ships, not only are they in the pirates genre, but hey make for bigger floorplans and we are talking about dungeon magazine. I would love a genuine re-imaging of the age of sail for D&D, I think there's a lot of potential there, despite the technology involved. I'm...

I agree the gun ports are a bit much, it's kinda like if an artist drew an adventurer with a powder horn strapped to his backpack.

Goblins is great! It's the best "D&D-ey" comic i've ever read. I suspect that there is some secret behind the dwarven 'paladin', the comic hints at this. I hope this is the case, because i'm mighty sick of comics, books and games having plot-points that boil down to "durr paladins suck!".

WEther they disagree or not, the other kinds of definintions people are tossing around would onyl help the GM to ignore that problem. But we are. We're tlaking about a parricular subset of that issue. There's a lot more to it than that, but at some point, the GM has to comunicate wiht their...

I guess i'm just giving you too much credit. There's no 'on the other hand' there, your 'logic' is not valid. There's nohting self-defeating about my position. It just doesn't mesh wiht your preconceptions. Or you're reaching for ways to criticise it. I'ver made numerous clarifications, and...

Well, consdering this is completly untrue I am not at all suprised to see you posting it, ebcause so far you've made no attemtp to read what i've been posting. Oh, of course, you're right, rather than that, every player should be held hostage by their GM- lied to, mislead about the nature of the...

I was being sarcastic. That said . . . You're still missing the point here. Just because one player isn't having fun with a game, doesn't mean the game is objectivly bad. This is the reality that you are willfully ignoring- fun is not objective. There are any number of situations in wich a...

I was being sarcastic. That said . . . You're still missing the point here. Just because one player isn't having fun with a game, doesn't mean the game is objectivly bad. This is the reality that you are willfully ignoring- fun is not objective. There are any number of situations in wich a...

Railroading is a removel of player choice and/or control, wich the player finds objectionable. Different players object to different kinds of restructions on their actions, wich is why so many people have different takes on what railroading is- they're all right, for them. I mention charm spells...

OH GOOD HEAVENS, WHAT A TERRIBLE THOUGHT! You're right, I can think of few more terifying notions than players with a sense of entitlement! A good GM recognises that preference is paramount, and sets as a priority the frank discussion of the same. That doesn't mean they have to pander to the...

Yes there is. Yes there is. No, it doesn't. You're making no effort to understand what i'm takling about, but that's ok, because at least 60% of those polled do not have that problem.

AS I've already said, linear or pre-determined play is not bad. Railroading is bad. I think it's absurd to define something as not useful simply because it's negative. The fact is, linear play becomes bad primarily due to player preference. Ignore that, and you ignore the issue. You want to...

Because we are already debating this on another thread, and because frankly I don't really think it's constructive to argue with you guys. It depends on player preference and the style of play the group has agreed to. Different groups want different kinds of choices to make in the game. Some...

That's the only measure that exists in any event. The opinons and preferences of the players and the GM. What else is there? Can you dip some conceptual litmus paper into the game? Do the 3.5 rules come wiht a chart to balance the prevalence of GM fiat against the party's average level? Of...

I get the feeling that some people are going to be active on this thread for a long time, and who knows, eventually they might even get the result they're after, but I think spreading the debate across two threads is only going to confuse things. I've done nothing of the sort, I simply refuse to...

I agree to nothing. I've given my position in brief here, and in depth there. If anyone wants a summary of my definition they can read my post, above.

My problem with the 'logic' arugment is that it's arbitary. Many, many bad GM's defend their bad GMing as utterly logical and consistant. But that doesn't make it fair, or make it fair to control the players. You tell me: are endless charm spells fair? Are they not railroading? They're logical...

I think you're reading my definition very harshly and I don't think it's a fair reading at all. "Reasonable" is in the eye of the beholder, GM's who railroad their players often think their efforts are reasonable, but that doesn't change the fact that their players are not enjoying the game...

It is quite right, even if you don't accept it. When a player says "this is railroading!" that is why they are saying it. Look, i'm not opposed to objective or universal terms when discussing roleplaying,. I've argued on their behalf on other forums. And I can think of may types of problem...

That's completly wrong. If you can not bring yourself to accept the fact that these issues are relative to prefernce, then you are not going to help anyone. You're just giving people excuses to ignore the real issues. Any control byt the GM has the oppurtunity to be abused. ANY control. Yes...