Search results

So, why are you arguing with me? You agree with me. The setting has no "internal logic" separated from the creator. We agree.

Oh, absolutely. My Forgotten Realms doesn't have a Shadowfell, for example. At least, if I wanted to continue from the material from previous campaigns. It also has a dead Tarrasque. And, it has a returned Zargon. None of which is remotely like anyone else's Forgotten Realms. Is all the...

This. This is what I mean, but, phrased much more clearly. Thank you.

That is such a low bar that it's meaningless. All plausible means is that it is believably possible. In a fantasy world, there's pretty much nothing that isn't plausible. And, why would you think that every Dm/GM out there isn't setting the same bar? Do you think that people who play pass...

And I certainly understand what you are saying. However, I reject it. The events flow from whatever the Dm thinks will be interesting in play. This notion of the world having any sort of independence from the DM is ludicrous. A creation that is created, adjudicated, and adjusted by a single...

Thank you for that. That's pretty much the only point I was making.

Which is mostly smoke and mirrors. It's funny how "most plausible" and "most fun for my players" will overlap so very, very often. Almost as if "most plausible" really isn't the criteria here but rather, "I want to run a good game that my players will enjoy" as the most credible criteria for...

Oh, no. I read it the first time. I just didn't respond. Mostly because what I snipped is contradicted by this, which is to me, the most telling part: In other words, you are not doing anything specifically different from what any good DM does. You are choosing results based on what the...

I’m “hostile” if that’s the right word because it’s contradictory. We have lots of examples of putting interesting and fun first. But apparently we’re also supposed to buy into this notion of plausibility as well? Its the notion that this is somehow special to sandboxing that I’m rejecting.

Totally agree. Every good DM should do this. I am "underestimating" it because I don't believe it actually exists. I think that it's people trying to pretend that their process is somehow "different" from how everyone else does it.

You're right, this has nothing to do with the players. This is about how the DM decides what is "plausible" and how the DM chooses. Like you say straight up, you will do your best to make those choices interesting and engaging. All good DM's will do that. But, that's contrary to the idea...

See, here's my question. That's a plausible result. Sure. But, why a 5 way civil war? An equally plausible result is minor skirmishes as the 5 way groups shuffle for position that results in a stalemate that lasts for years. In other words, nothing really changes in the setting. But, that...

I dunno. Reapearedly challenging someone because you have an incomplete understanding of that thing is not really saying much other than one’s lack of knowledge.

No I’m saying that “plausible” is only from your perspective. And that the things you find plausible and the things you think will be fun at the table are more often than not the same. Your choice has nothing to do with anything being actually plausible. The list of plausible in any given...

I suspect that the overlap of “plausible” and “fun” are pretty close to perfect circles.

Hrm. The Rani does nothing for me unfortunately. I had drifted away from Doctor Who in the Sylvester McCoy era. I don’t recall ever seeing these episodes. This had a lot less impact on me. But “grandfather”? That hit right in the feels.

Ummm. Disney has zero to do with Star Trek. As in nothing. We get it. You don’t like the new Doctor Who. Cool. That’s all you need to say. But claiming that you do t like it because of made up reasons is going to get push back.

See my above response, but, just to point out - what logic? Where does this logic come from? Oh, right, it's his chain of logic. Whic his based entirely own his own biases and whatnot. Again, there is no objectivity here. Look, to be frank, I have very little dog in this race. From what...

But, I guarantee that if you had two plausible outcomes, one of which you think the players will enjoy playing out and one that they wouldn't enjoy, or you think will be boring or not personally interesting to play through, virtually every single time, you will choose the former and not the...

But that's the point that you keep trying to ignore. It is YOU who are choosing between the plausible outcomes. It is YOU who defines "plausible". The world doesn't define that. There is absolutely nothing in your setting that defines what is plausible or not. Every single decision point is...