Search results

No, the fiction and the rules work together. They inform each other. That there’s a structure in place doesn’t interfere with the fiction. Most fiction has a structure of some sort. It constrains the GM in ways… but constraints often promote creativity. They also help to serve as a structure...

Well, it’s not “my” description. Nor do I think it necessarily does either of the things you say it does. Anything else? Anything more objective?

Sure there is. The arbitrary threshold is whatever the GM decides. I’m also not sure how “clever approaches the GM hadn’t thought of don’t mean anything”… that’s a key element. The GM offers some primary skills, but secondary skills are also allowed. I mean… do people really think that players...

The main difference I see is that with the skill challenge, the number of successes and failures are set and known ahead of time. The players are aware of the success or failure conditions. The method you’re describing keeps that hidden from them. And that seems very important. You describe...

I saw this news and was excited. The comic is pretty much essential reading for people into RPGs, so I’m really glad to see them revisit the world and its concepts. One thing to clarify… there is already a Quickstart available. The new one being referenced will be done in comic format, and will...

Do you mean like describing them literally as “alternatives”? Like in the title of the thread. Good grief. Imagined ones. It’s amazing how easy it seems for many to simply deny the input of those with experience in favor of their own … imagined concerns. What you’re describing doesn’t...

Sure, but does anyone of us longtime folks not have a sense of what @Lanefan appreciates in play? Does anyone not understand what he means by campaign? Yes, someone new to the conversation would not know this... but I think @Lanefan would happily explain his preference. That's not...

Yes, that's true... I don't think anyone would tend to view the use of campaign one way or another as insulting. I think we'd probably all benefit collectively if we stopped looking to be offended all the time. If you think that people accepting someone's slightly different use of a word is...

Who said I didn’t accept your definition? I understand it and I accept that’s how many people view the concept and use the term. As I said, I am not demanding that people adopt my use of the term. I’m just explaining it so that it’s understood. Then, going forward we shouldn’t have any...

Well, no, I think intent always matters. And context matters, too. Again… I’m not trying to change anyone else’s use of the word railroad. All I’ve done is explain my thoughts on it, and why I don’t see a meaningful difference between railroad and linear. No one has to adopt my usage. But if...

Yes, I’ve described active force by the GM as feeling railroady. That’s more in line with the general usage, I believe. But again… any negative connotation I’ve presented in that way has been specific to me and my preferences. You guys are all approaching this from an objective standpoint… and...

I mean… just let the player play a half-orc. It’s not like Krynn is really defined by the absence of orcs. They still had goblins and similar creatures. (And, some of the broader stories had orcs, too, and the setting didn’t fall apart). I don’t know about that. If I know I can’t make any...

Not really. I haven’t really called anyone else’s game anything, have I? I’ve described my feelings about games that I’m in. I haven’t said “your game is a railroad because of X” or anything like that. I’ve said that, for me, the distinction between linear and railroad is one that doesn’t...

What courtesy? That you can want D&D to be more to your liking? Go ahead! How can I not afford you that courtesy? That's why I've made an effort to explain my thoughts on the matter and why I view it the way I do. That's literally communication. Yeah, that's generally the distinction people...

You’ve missed my point. You’re asserting that railroading is bad. Always and objectively bad. Yet there are people who play that way and enjoy it just fine. You’re insisting that a word that can be used to describe their game must be negative, and that insistence has implications… namely...

Yeah, absolutely. People are saying that railroading is solely the GM's fault... I think that's a really simple way of looking at it. As with most things in an RPG, it's a combo of the GM, the players, and the system. Like you said, some players really want to be led around. They don't want to...

But you don't care that there are people who happily play and run railroad type games and you're classifying their fun as offensive? Don't you think that's worse? Don't you think that's a flawed way to look at it? As for my use, I've explained how I use the term and I've explained some of my...

Well, I'm kind of looking at what the word alter means. As I explained, and which you seem to agree with per the below, it means something different than establishing something. When something is first introduced to play, that's when it's established. I don't think it's being altered...

Yes, absolutely. They are interchangeable to me. I am not describing anyone's games other than ones I've been in. If I'm playing an adventure path, it's not meaningfully different experience to me than a railroad. It's gonna be A followed by B which leads to C and then on to D and so on...

I suppose that’s what makes it linear? But again, a linear game that a player cooperates with and plays along will essentially have the same experience that the railroad would provide. This is why I don’t see that huge a distinction. Another reason is that I’ve experienced reasonable requests...