Search results

The Law uses so many words differently thank normal English that it is almost an entirely different language.

That is not agency. And that is the problem nowadays because the word has been corrupted. Freedom has been corrupted in the same way. You have the agency if you can attempt things that you will to do. It does not guarantee any outcome.

No. In a game, you do have to work to have the kind of agency we have now but it is not about knowledge or ability to change the narrative. Monte does a good job explaining the two different forms of agency. I'd call the former just "agency" but the latter is narrative agency. The reason is...

I think most of the good from cantrips could be illustrated by a single spell. You cast the spell and for 24 hours you get these special abilities which are low key but worthwhile. You can with concentration produce a flame the burns from your finger, you can also produce a pure light that...

All the PCs that ignored formation in my games died. Formation in D&D was fundamental at 1e. When they essentially went to the "run into the room and get surrounded" strategy in later editions I shook my head. Fighters and Clerics protecting the Magic User was fundamental to the game. At...

You are using agency in a way that is unnatural when it comes to the way most of us are using it. I have 100% agency in the real world by the definition I use. I do not know everything or every scenario. Knowing more doesn't increase my agency at all.

Monte is dead on in his descriptions. I want 0 of the narrative control in players hands but I am for 100% player control in the game.

For me, I probably want a simplified but not too simplified version of 3e D&D but the playstyle, no-magic mart, no easy item creation, monsters, treasures, of 1e D&D. I want the hit points to be lower except maybe at 1st level. I don't want countless feats either and I always want a player to...

If you want winter wars, you could put yourself in a Roman technological era where some empire can field troops far from home because they have a fairly sophisticated bureaucracy. I would say it would be hard to justify a medieval feudal army staying in the field through winter let alone...

I'd say get rid of cantrips all together but hey I'm pretty old school.

I probably balance it out though maybe in my groups there is a tiny bit more roleplay. If it is a new NPC, then we tend to roleplay it. If it is a long time npc "friend" of the group, it's okay to say "I'm going to ask Jim about that old keep that suddenly appeared a month ago out of nowhere."

I tend to run a fairly rich world and at times I include or exclude some races. I tend to have players who care about creating a character that fits in that world and is part of it. People who show up and immediately say they want to play and X,Y,Z multi-class A,B,C are typically poor fits for...

It is a judgment call but it's a DM judgment call. We all have different players. Your way fits for you so go for it. My way fits for me so I will continue as I have done.

I tend to give the benefit of the doubt until I can't. I think it's best to start with a new DM from a position of trust. Oh I'm sure both are bad for my style of game. I was just pointing out both happen. The question is "Will the number on the dice provide more information than the...

Oh they can hear the rolls and be tense without any difficulty. In D&D if I rolled a natural 20 and nothing happened they'd infer something from that roll.

Yes but the guy stalking the person may have been stalking him for some time. I needed to check more than one time. Also, if there is a chance to notice a secret door and failure means you don't notice that is an issue. Sometimes failure means nothing happens that you notice.

I don't think I'm sacrificing all that much to be here discussing game design theory with people who play D&D but sure at times we make sacrifices. Sure. I would think that would be obvious. I guess I'm mystified you bothered to comment on that fact. Did I seem to imply otherwise?

I guess I like it as it is in the earlier editions of D&D though it should be a limited resource and have costs. I'm driven by what I think would organically develop more than game design.

I'm not sure I understand your point here. If you read my post in context, I was explaining why I interact more with D&D people than with people who play others games on this board. My response is there are more D&D people and thus generic discussions involve more of those people. It's why...

I find this kind of interesting and a good explanation for why you play as you do. I never had any trouble running the sort of game you describe and I knew the answers. I do a lot of upfront work. One constraint of course is the sandbox but it's not tiny.