Search results

Or to attempt to make this super-pithy. *Play to find out is not agency. Deciding or directly influencing what happens next is agency."

Agreed. And I think if you're playing a game derived from a wargame/dungeon-solving background, where the goal of play is solve the dungeon and level up, then rules that limit your character's agency to complete that solve with expediency would be problematic for the play experience. Like, I...

It’s not a negative spin. It is what it is. Why would I put a negative spin on a play style that about 75% of my tables use?

Simple or not, the core is true. The rest is details.

Clear point of delineation between viewpoints, then. If the DM is the final arbiter, you’re playing the DM. That’s the point of the game.

I don’t have a solution because there isn’t a problem. GM arbitrated games work, and in the hands of a proficient GM, can work well. But let’s not obfuscate what it is. The GM is the final authority. A player’s plans are contingent on the GM agreeing they work. There’s no way to avoid that...

Can you imagine having your roleplay criticized by someone who doesn’t even know who Vincent Baker is?

But let’s never forget that “achieve via smart decisions” means “convincing the DM that was a smart decision.”

Everyone here is of course welcome to weight my opinion by whatever metric they deem fit, based on their opinion of my posting history.

“I can smell evil; it’s like a sixth sense. Actually, that would be one of the five…”

Yes, because there’s nothing self-centered about making me listen to your stakeless conversation with an NPC, lol.

But we always agree on pretty much everything! :)

I can also the point that this thread is about 4,000 posts too long and we should have moved on a long time ago. Emulating real life is often not desirable.

Vampire was in my top 3 favorite 4e classes, so 100% agree.

A good portion of what I know about RP I’ve learned from @pemerton. It’s a good club to be in!

I’m always here for you.

I know plenty of people like that. I respect their perspective, but stridently disagree with it. Much like how many people have said they like to play “to explore the setting”, I like to play to explore my character. And to do that, the character must occasionally surprise me in how they grow...

I’m not saying anything about 100% impartiality. I’m saying you think you’re being impartial, but you’re not.

For someone who’s been posting regularly on these forums for years? That’s absolutely demonstrating a lack of curiosity about the broader structure of the TTRPG hobby. Which is fine in the broader population, but is going to make me views any statements you make with some suspicion. Heck...

Yea, but that’s every designer (and pretty much everyone in the world!). Much like running a campaign setting, impartiality is an illusion.