Search results

I mean, my settings theoretically have billions of NPCs that "exist" in the setting. But the only ones that matter are the ones that actually interact with the PCs.

You can do that, but if you want to integrate it with D&D Beyond (which I'm not a huge fan of, but lots of people like), you're going to run into some major difficulties. You're paying for the Beyond integration far more than you are just the content.

I can't speak as to what's in the D&D beyond, but in Valda's SoS, they had a sidebar explaining how to use the class with different ages of weapons, or "magic firearms" to be more of a wandslinger.

To me, they both reduce to "success, no conflict; failure, conflict". The framing you put around them could possibly be of interest for determining next steps, but is generally just for color.

That is not my reading of the examples at all.

But you're not pretending there are no guards. You simply narrate that there are guards, but your skill as a thief renders their presence as a trivial challenge to bypass. The idea that I feel underlies this discussion is "Why do we need to frame details that aren't relevant to the current...

If they aren't encountered in the fiction, the difference there seems immaterial to me. Which I guess is a major point of distinction in this thread.

A skilled thief encountering less wanderers feels entirely verisimilitudinous to me.

A desire to understand the greater world around us? Knowledge for its own sake? I mean, I know all 50 US state capitals despite the fact I've only been to like 15 states. And I don't normally need the auspices of other state governments. I know who the prime minister of Canada, and how their...

My only normative judgment is that the norm should be that people examine and approach games with the mindset of “I wonder how this game works” rather than “Does this game work the way I think it should.”

I work under the assumption that the amount of people who read threads is larger than the amount of posters. I’m more interested in making sure everyone understands the assumptions they’re making rather than “switching” them. Especially because the assumptions you use don’t have to be purely...

I just put a setting on my browser to flip the screen whenever I connect to an .au link. :)

Scenario:

I look at it this way. Saying "this technique works if you use Assumption A. This same technique fails if you Assumption B." is useful, objective information about game design. Saying "I can't enjoy Assumption A, I can only play games with Assumption B." is a preference. I couldn't care less...

To be honest, I'm just taking other people's word for it that Australia is real. :)

Obviously the first. The second is a pernicious myth that contributes to “hustle culture” and other societal ills.

Does that website not have…authority? :)

Yes, exactly. But that’s why you reference experts, they have access to the evidence to support the claims they’re making. But I’m not getting into the weeds on this, posting about logical fallacies is pretty much the “farting loudly” of online discussion.

I’ll do that, but 5e has added millions to the player base; obviously I can’t stop until I’m sure that every single one of them has been exposed to all the available modes of play first. It’s really a moral imperative at this point.

Wandering Inn is definitely not the right series if you want limited POVs. :). There has to have been over a hundred by now.