Search results

Yeah, even then, you have to be aware of the entire group. Now, I have young kids, and so if they joined us to play, my players would be far more willing to indulge this type of play. But otherwise? It’s easy to get a more compelling game that just avoids the monster as puzzle trope. See I’ve...

Even then… it’s a pretty crappy defense since the player is the person who made the character.

Well it's not about "the story"... we're playing a game, after all... one which many people often cite things like "as long as you're having fun, you're not doing it wrong" and so on. I therefore will actually try to present things to my players that I expect will be fun or interesting or...

My experiences as both player and GM have been very different than that. I find that there can often be such discrepancies in understanding the shared fiction of the game. And yes, asking questions is part of the process of clarifying. But I would say so is sharing as much information as...

There's also a difference between not worrying as much about the divide between player and character knowledge (which is what I was talking about) and telling them everything (something you've now introduced to the discussion). What I'm trying to describe is to not make everything a puzzle. I...

Because like I said, the GM will never be able to provide the amount of information that would be available to the character. For the character, there is no cypher through which the world is filtered. So, for me and others, a small breach in the character/player gap is far less problematic than...

Mmmkay.

For me, I think the abundance of information of information makes me feel as informed as my character would be. It’s not necessarily about a one for one tradeoff of information. Like I realize I may be privy to something as a player that my character would not be. But I also realize that no...

Max, go back and read what I was responding to. You can click on the name in the quoted bit to go back to the previous post. Then do it again. This will give you the context you meed to actually accurately comment on what I was talking about. In relation to the thief/cook example, @Lanefan had...

For you it may be. But I’m not asking you to adopt this method for your game. I’m explaining the way these games work because you asked me. It’s like if I tried to explain soccer to you and you asked where are the players sticks, and when I explained there are no sticks, you say well then this...

Okay. I’ll make sure to quote this in the future when you complain that people are inconsistent with their definitions! Any metric the poster in question values! I’m not sure I understand the example offered by @AnotherGuy … but I also didn’t read all the back and forth between you two that...

Well, no… the quotes were around the “metagame”… a concept that makes no sense for those games. It’s all part of the game. Insert a bit about reading to respond here if you like.

Yes. I had not recalled the example, and so reread it when it was linked by @AlViking … and there it was, clearly stated. Not sure why there’s any doubt…

It’s part of it, yes. But I also find that you just don’t need to worry all that much about separating what the players know from what the characters know. And in the few cases where maybe that does matter, I’ll play the card many others like to play… trust, Just trust your players not to be...

It’s very clearly stated that the guard heard the singing and came to see what was going on,

I don’t know. “Unconnected” seems pretty clear. And I would say all the consequences are clearly connected to the actions. Well, maybe if you follow the discussion along from previous posts the context is clearer? I don’t know how you'd read my comment and not see that it was about games where...

So what did your post have to do with what I said? I was asked how I handle a situation in this post from @Lanefan: The context of this question was about how I handle it in games where the GM makes no rolls for NPCs. Games like Blades in the Dark, Stonetop, and Spire. It was a question...

No… again, I don’t care if you like it or not. But the way in which you describe it… the reasons you give for not liking it, contain errors or misconceptions. This is what I was reaponding to: Fail forward isn’t like what you called OTAs. They don’t happen just because nothing’s happened in...

I think it is less a focus of play, for sure. Like, I cannot ever see play of a narrativist game devolving into a series of standard practices… play won’t i volve everyone poking everything with 10’ poles and following door protocols and the like. Which isnot something I miss at all! But that...

So?