Search results

No, of course not... that was obviously a bit of an exaggeration on my part. But you've very clearly binned me with narrativists in the sense that you do not believe or accept that my assessment of trad play is based on my own experiences with it, and my willingness to examine my own play and...

"If"? You've stated my preferences more often than I have in this thread. You've also dodged a lot of what I've had to say. One response I recall that stands out was "Well there's a lot there to unpack and I don't have the time now, so I'm just going to address this one thing..." and then...

That same loose hand is what can often make play less certain for the players. 5e was designed loosely so that GMs could plug the gaps. And while some folks see this as a strength because it gives them freedom to GM how they like, it also leads to uncertainty in play process and hides a lot of...

I mean… the fact that I actively run and play more trad oriented games as well as narrativist ones tends to be ignored because how could I possibly have the opinions I do if I still enjoy trad games. A lot of it comes down to peoples’ ideas about their identity and so a criticism of a game or...

It doesn’t really shed any light on it for me, no. I mean, I get that you want players to essentially always interact with the setting as the character… but I don’t know if that will always be the case, or that it particularly enhanced the session of play. In the transcript you shared, I...

As I said already, everyone will have opinions about what is plausible. The GM will have them, too. Then, the GM decides the plausible thing that happens. If you want to describe this in a way other than the GM deciding what’s plausible, be my guest. Except that the GM is responsible for...

On one hand, I would agree with you. But, like you, I’ve been fortunate enough that about 99% of my gaming is done with actual friends. So for me, it’s much easier to approach instances of dissatisfaction from one side or the other. Though there can also be challenges present with friends that...

Everyone may have an opinion on the plausibility of any development in play... but since the GM is the one deciding what the development will be, it would very much seem that they can determine what is plausible. Players may disagree... but that may or may not matter, depending on if the GM is...

I mean… Valkos was a badass, but still.

My pet peeve along these lines is the Training downtime action. This is true... but the player could always decide not to take the flashback. So although the GM sets the cost, the player decides to pay it or not. Yeah, it's a common misconception. Many Scores may revolve mostly or entirely...

That's typically been my experience is that once players kind of get settled with the game, they then enjoy the traumas because it shows that they've been through some stuff. It's more fun to play someone Haunted by their decisions, or Paranoid about their enemies.

Yes, you did. But @dave2008 had jumped in before you had, and I was explaining to him why I would ask someone to justify their opinion. I wanted him to realize I was doing so not because I have an issue with his opinion, but it was because you wanted me to justify mine.

Oh, absolutely... ultimately, that's the only justification anyone needs. But, in the context of why I asked @Micah Sweet is because he didn't offer anything other than to tell me that I was wrong to make a suggestion that it's not the best advice... which I would think we'd all agree is an...

I've seen it mentioned online in places. It's not something I've encountered a lot in actual play. Most players seem to want to avoid them since each one brings the character closer to death or retirement. My group just started a game a few weeks ago, and we played last night, and we had our...

What? How does what's plausible "exist outside the DM"? I mean... someone moving is perfectly plausible. What if the GM, as part of their living world process, had already determined that this person would leave town on such and such date? And then the PCs attempted their move after that...

Sure, but that's not really what I said. What you seem to be calling "drama" seems to be more conflict with personal stakes. That one game may focus on that and another may focus on external stakes... help the star-crossed lovers, rescue the princess, retrieve Whelm, Wave, and Blackrazor...

It's not about "some games I favor", Micah. It's about "this advice no longer really applies to many games". Because play has expanded beyond the challenge of a dungeon, which is something a neutral arbiter is useful for. Given that you've not offered any insight as to why you think it is...

Sure, why does anyone's opinion matter, Micah? I think it matters because I think "be a neutral arbiter" has remained common advice in the hobby, but is more relevant to specific games rather than the hobby in general. Do you have any thoughts on that topic other than that you wish I didn't...

I don't think that plausibility is THE priority in alternate history stories. There are plenty of alternate histories that would be very plausible that would be boring as hell to read/watch. They still need to be entertaining, and typically have dramatic concerns like any other form of fiction...

Sure, I get that... I was just explaining why it might seem difficult for someone to grasp that a GM would actively not consider fun. That was the question you asked of @Hussar , so I just figured I'd offer an answer because it seems obvious to me, even if I realize that the expectations of play...