Search results

Everyone may have an opinion on the plausibility of any development in play... but since the GM is the one deciding what the development will be, it would very much seem that they can determine what is plausible. Players may disagree... but that may or may not matter, depending on if the GM is...

I mean… Valkos was a badass, but still.

My pet peeve along these lines is the Training downtime action. This is true... but the player could always decide not to take the flashback. So although the GM sets the cost, the player decides to pay it or not. Yeah, it's a common misconception. Many Scores may revolve mostly or entirely...

That's typically been my experience is that once players kind of get settled with the game, they then enjoy the traumas because it shows that they've been through some stuff. It's more fun to play someone Haunted by their decisions, or Paranoid about their enemies.

Yes, you did. But @dave2008 had jumped in before you had, and I was explaining to him why I would ask someone to justify their opinion. I wanted him to realize I was doing so not because I have an issue with his opinion, but it was because you wanted me to justify mine.

Oh, absolutely... ultimately, that's the only justification anyone needs. But, in the context of why I asked @Micah Sweet is because he didn't offer anything other than to tell me that I was wrong to make a suggestion that it's not the best advice... which I would think we'd all agree is an...

I've seen it mentioned online in places. It's not something I've encountered a lot in actual play. Most players seem to want to avoid them since each one brings the character closer to death or retirement. My group just started a game a few weeks ago, and we played last night, and we had our...

What? How does what's plausible "exist outside the DM"? I mean... someone moving is perfectly plausible. What if the GM, as part of their living world process, had already determined that this person would leave town on such and such date? And then the PCs attempted their move after that...

Sure, but that's not really what I said. What you seem to be calling "drama" seems to be more conflict with personal stakes. That one game may focus on that and another may focus on external stakes... help the star-crossed lovers, rescue the princess, retrieve Whelm, Wave, and Blackrazor...

It's not about "some games I favor", Micah. It's about "this advice no longer really applies to many games". Because play has expanded beyond the challenge of a dungeon, which is something a neutral arbiter is useful for. Given that you've not offered any insight as to why you think it is...

Sure, why does anyone's opinion matter, Micah? I think it matters because I think "be a neutral arbiter" has remained common advice in the hobby, but is more relevant to specific games rather than the hobby in general. Do you have any thoughts on that topic other than that you wish I didn't...

I don't think that plausibility is THE priority in alternate history stories. There are plenty of alternate histories that would be very plausible that would be boring as hell to read/watch. They still need to be entertaining, and typically have dramatic concerns like any other form of fiction...

Sure, I get that... I was just explaining why it might seem difficult for someone to grasp that a GM would actively not consider fun. That was the question you asked of @Hussar , so I just figured I'd offer an answer because it seems obvious to me, even if I realize that the expectations of play...

Is this checked per hex? Or by travel time? If an encounter is indicated, how is the encounter then determined? So this is essentially a set encounter? I mean, I suppose that if the party delayed it may have changed the nature of the encounter... perhaps they'd have come across the aftermath...

It does seem odd to advocate against choosing fun when playing a game. I know that’s not exactly what anyone has said, but there’s an element here of “why would you not choose the fun thing?”

I looked it over. A lot of it is perfectly clear, but there are some areas that I’m not sure what happened. I’ve quoted those below. This is vague. What is the process for rolling for encounters? What are the chances an encounter will happen? What encounters may happen? So this was a...

I’ll just quote an earlier post of yours where you said it. Did I misread this post in some way? Well, regardless of how fantastic a setting may be, there are still going to be some elements that are at least somewhat grounded, meaning they should work similarly to how we expect them to. If...

What are the factors that go into this decision? When do we go to dice? When do we just pick? Or pick multiple outcomes? For example, @robertsconley has said that verisimilitude is his highest priority. @Bedrockgames has said his is character agency. These different priorities may play a part...

I don’t disagree with this at all. It’s one of the things I’ve been pointing out. Sure, but how is plausibility of different events compared? Certainly there’d be some obvious answers when two possibilities are compared. But there are also going to be some that are equally plausible, or close...

Is there an RPG where that’s not the case? I think most RPGs and most GMs are going to try and maintain plausibility. Unless perhaps if the setting is meant to be absurd… something like Alice in Wonderland or similar. When we consider that, this idea of plausibility seems less important...