Search results

Schrodinger's Playstyle.

Mod Note: It is almost like you are trying to summon red text! Folks, if you cannot be respectful, go find another thread in which you might be able to keep your cool.

To be honest, "How fantastical is it?" isn't a question I ever worry about, in my gaming or in my reading. In the game, I care more about the quality of the players and GM than the world. In my game books, I care less about how fantastical the choices are and far more about the rest of the...

Mod Note: Everyone in the thread ought to take a double-check on their rhetoric as they continue. If you get insulting, or heated, you're likely going to find yourself involuntarily cooling off, which pretty much none of you like. Keep your cool. Double check that continuing a confrontation...

Mod note: And, if you had kept cool about it, you could have kept the moral high ground. But, no, you couldn't just let it be, you had to be insulting. Maybe you shouldn't be too proud of that. In any case, it has earned you a warning point, and a trip out of this thread.

Same answer - I typically am looking to fill gaps. I am actually pretty easy to please. And unlike some, my creativity blossoms when presented with restrictions. So my first questions are about what spaces in the roster haven't been filled yet, and then figure out a version of that which would...

I do not go to Wikipedia for legal definitions and practices.

I am less interested in Wikipedia definitions, and more interested in actual practice.

Mod note: If you are going to insult and abuse folks who disagree with you, we can just close the thread.

Mod Note" I am pretty sure nobody in this thread wants to be mocked with emojis, either. So, if you are so concerned with what people in the thread want, then don't do that, either.

It can be. At a given table, agency ought to be about the forms of agency those players care about. Yeah, well, I haven't agreed with the OP myself. Assertion in an OP does not equate to truth. Inviolable rules may be an excellent way to achieve agency for many people. I, personally, have...

"Honest, officer! Those meeples aren't mine! A friend must have left the bag of them in my trunk after PAX Unplugged!"

Again, in the classic railroad, the GM has one particular end that they drive you to. Railroading is linear. Walking where you want, and doing whatever you want, and coming to nobody knows what end, within a populated space is not a railroad. We can argue over whether looking out the...

Maybe. But it is the classic sandbox, regardless. The GM provides the sand in the box. The agency is in what to do with the sand.

It is not that randomness is constraining - making the choice anything but the player's own is constraining. It follows that having one player choose is constraining on all other players, which starts sounding like the only pure case would be solo play....

It is thematically appropriate, sure. But entirely unnecessary to run the adventure. I can understand why they chose not to include entirely tangential information in the adventure.

Ah, but whose minds, and whose perspective? Sarcasm (and satire) generally don't provide this function to people who don't already agree with the central premise. They function more as ways of rallying like-minded people than providing perspective to people on the whole. There was a time...

Because nothing fails to make a point like sarcasm.

Duties and tariffs aren't the same thing - are we sure that applies to tariffs?

Mod note: The political commentary wore thin the moment you engaged in it. Don't do it people.