Search results

It's just common sense. If a player can't do something in the rules because the DM has made a setting decision, the player has less agency. Full stop. In a standard 5e game, I can make a PC that is a tiefling. If the DM says his sandbox game only has 4 races (human, elf, orc, and...

It's being framed that way because that's what matters, certainly from my personal perspective, where trad play is just one option among many. Is a trad sandbox higher player agency than a trad adventure module? Absolutely. But there's a ceiling to the amount of authority possible to be...

That's why I said "some of us". There are obviously multiple axes of distinction. "Casual" vs "intense" is but one.

Sure. Which is we should also assume that for conversations on forums, the audience has self-selected to be less “casual” and more intense.

Amazing how we can have 6,000 posts and not cover everything! :)

I think a pretty core distinction between some of us is the assumption that we’re looking for play this is less “casual/hangout” (although that’s OK at times) and instead play is done with more intentionality.

I’ve done that as well, although it was a while ago. It’s why I’m a stickler now for how not running games that are more “high-concept” and have a starting rationale for PC cooperation.

Challenging. Maybe as 2-color pairs or 3-colors to capture some of the complexity. It's an interesting exercise.

Kind of a joke-class, but definitely playable. https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-MxWTgY2klVUnHpH22uH

I'll continue to use the definition I think is most accurate, thanks. People can adapt or they're going to get railroaded.

Particularly important to how I normally play is that when "Prove it" occurs, and they don't, that's not a fail state. That's just an opportunity for the character to grow and change.

I mean, I'd say any RPG that isn't either solo or 1 GM - 1 player should have either explicit or implicit assumptions that the player characters are going to have some rationale to work together. I know that some tables do the "you roll your character up by yourself, and you all meet for the...

You say all these things like they're bad. :)

I mean, a multiversal focus does implicitly support DM's making their own worlds, as long as they have some tangential connection to the broader multiverse. Toril can always be "Prime-616", as it were, but each table can have their own "Prime-XXXXX".

For sure. Apathetic to play, or "just showing up to roll dice and be there" players are a very large contingent, and also work much better with stronger DM authority. One of my tables right now has 9 players (not counting me as DM), all of whom are fairly casual, and I wouldn't even consider...

AI being inconsistent doesn't mean the AI is wrong. It means the term is used inconsistently. Although I don't think the usage is inconsistent, it's more of a case where there's a more broad reading and a more specific reading of the term. Language evolves because a person or persons makes a...

I mean, games where players have a higher level of authority are going to be more vulnerable to players who act in bad faith. If mitigating players with negative tendencies is a concern, than I would agree that games with higher levels of DM authority are almost certainly better suited. I...

I think a sticking point for Dragon Quest is "which game do you induct?" There are a few games in the current hall that are placeholders for franchises, like Mario Kart, Madden, and Zelda. But there are other famous franchises where a game further into the series in honored over, or besides...