Search results

Isn't that circular? "Provided the GM never does anything wrong, the GM never does anything wrong."

Would it, really? Like seriously, would it? Because ships get blown off course all the time, and the destination could very easily be a place known for treacherous waters or the like. After all, all of that is within the DM's notes which can be rewritten if the players haven't encountered it...

As requested: Note, Kromanjon, I am not trying to re-litigate this with you. I am only quoting the post because Bedrockgames asked for the place where that was said.

And if the DM tells you, "What barmaid?", what would you say? You've been one of the folks quite ready to trash anything that you think looks like players "inventing" things in the world. Which means there's nothing in it unles you gave the sign-off first.

Post #1809. You likely have a different number of posts per page than I do (20 on my end).

I have never asserted that DW, or BitD, or any PbtA or FitD game is somehow uniquely special or the only thing capable of some particular result. Not once. I have said that I find that the degree of sandbox-y play experience you can get out of D&D is slightly lower (but still very much a...

Several people spoke of various things--"realism", plausibility, consistency, etc.--as limitations on GM action. I don't know if anyone used that specific phrasing, but there were repeated assertions that there were limits of some kind, and those limits were genuinely external to the GM. That's...

Certainly. I have very specifically mentioned GMs who think what they are doing is good or right or necessary or expected, even if it isn't. I could go back and dig up examples if you like, but I suspect you don't care that much. That said, I think you're missing a third option: players that...

Is it spoken aloud? Or is it all soft-touch implication, presumed details, and unstated expectations? Because illusionism is fully compatible--by its own lights, I mean--with a social contract where the players merely have the unsaid expectation that their choices matter. The GM is giving them...

My point was to ask, "Okay, so the players made that decision. What happens to prevent you from doing <blah blah blah>?" where <blah blah blah> is what you described here. When the GM controls both all possible information that goes into player decision-making, and all possible results that are...

We had a thread where I made exactly this argument. It was repeatedly rejected or ignored. You may peruse that thread if you like. Or this one, from around the same time, talking about a parallel thing. Or this much, much older thread. There are a number of DMs out there who think they can...

As far as I'm concerned, yes. It may be story background creation, but it is still story creation. You're creating the story of the world, in which a variety of other stories may occur. Often, the "breaks" in said story-of-the-world are artificial, lines drawn by people because they want clear...

By putting the goblin there, you have just broken the past context and rewritten things to include goblins, even though there objectively weren't any before and if the players could see your notes, they'd know that. Hence, by doing this, you have just proven that context and setting are not in...

I should think it obvious that the answer is "no", but this thread has made clear that unless I spill a thousand words on every single thing that ought to be easily understood, I'll be ignored. (Of course, most will still ignore it because then I've said too much, but better that than getting...

Nope! Wrong. Incorrect. My point isn't that this is anything like what the world is. I am asking--I have been asking, for quite some time now--for the alleged constraints/limitations/fnord that you and others have repeatedly asserted are the thing that mean the GM's choices are not driven by...

I am unclear as to why a long-form campaign is incompatible with illusionism.

The claim was that, because players have choices, GMs functionally have no power at all--"all that power is worth naught." Which is patently ridiculous when GMs, literally for decades, have practiced invisible railroading, where the players THINK they're making decisions and driving the plot...

Well, in my case, it's because I ask about what things are removed from that power. Context? Context is determined by the GM. Things that the GM doesn't consider relevant context won't be included in the decision. Things they do, will. Hence, what counts as "context" in the first place is...

Okay. What do you call it, then, when the DM...does that? When they engage in illusionism--making it seem as though the players are the ones running the show, when actually it's just the DM? Because that's a thing. People have talked about it on here extensively. I can dig up at least one...

Is it, though? Is it? Because this (as has been the case so many times in this thread) ignores the possibility of the invisible railroad.