Search results

You're so right :)

The Big Model (current form of GNS) helped me to go from Vanilla Narrativism to "Pervy" Narrativism as my favorite playstyle, but also to accept Gamism for what it is (that's why I'm still here, I plan to play D&D 4E). It also helped me to get rid of some Purist-for-System Sim habits. What was...

Failure can be equivalent to : No XP/Treasure, but for that you have to find different ways of making the PCs survive a failed challenge. Or Vanilla narrativism ? :) Something like.. When the adventure #1 ends, the DM ask to the players to come up with the triggering event of adventure #2...

AP was for Adventure Path. But btw, Actions Points can support all the recognized playstyle (G/N/S), it depends on 1) how you get them, 2) what they can do. Giving "narration right" to a player to create a trashcan can also be found in the three playstyles. For example, in a gamist RPG...

Probably, but sadly, AP and gamist playstyle isn't a good match, too many DMs will throw away successes/failures that put the players out the planned path. BTW (Not for LostSoul) : When "enjoy the ride" is more important to a player than the weight of his successes/failures, that's a...

Why you feel the need to write down this as a bonus skill ? If it can help the character gain XP, it shouldn't get it for free, if it can't help, there is no reason to write it down.

By killing dragons in dungeons ?

Tass did more to shape Krynn than Elminster did to Toril ;)

It's tireless to remind people that nothing exist in the imagined universe until it is shared.

My point was that we don't need these "profession" skills in D&D, because the skill system purpose is limited to the resolution of challenging encounters. If a DM wants to decide if Dork has a sucessful farming year, he don't need to roll anything. BTW, even if I usually don't like detailed...

I don't like DL for the same reason I would not play in the Star Wars universe. You can't do better than the Heroes of the War of the Lance or Anakin/Luke. FR doesn't have such a strong "metaplot".

I have to admit that you can't do : Dork, Human, Male, Farmer + 12, Cobbler + 8. Question is, how many times do these skills will be used by a NPC to give help/hindrance to the PCs faced with a challenge ?

I guess it's pointless to say that you don't have to set a role to a NPC that is not meant to be a combat challenge ? I'm pretty sure the DMG will tell us : " You can make an NPC like this : Cornelius the Sage, Human, Male, History +19".

That depends on what is the goal of the game. Exploring what-if scenarios is a recognized one, but others (more interesting IMO) exist. For example, if as a player my goal is that the instance of play produces a story that could be found in WoTC novels these day, I won't do cheezy things like...

And that's a good answer.

And if you kill without making sure to suceed the quest, you are penalized (less XP). That is very nice.

At least, not using D&D, others RPG can deal with "weak characters" without resulting in deaths. And that is much more interesting than "free-form roleplaying".

Forgot the GNS terms if you don't like them, the important thing you describe here is the "what if"/open-ended playstyle of your players. You can force them to quit it by playing 4E where magic is much more codified than in 2E for instance, but IMHO a better solution would be to make them...

Yeah, it's much better to have hundreds of different threads arguing about rules details than simply saying I prefer G over S and vice-versa. The most important thing RPG theory does is to identify different answers to the "What an RPG game is about ?" GNS/BigModel may not be comprehensive, but...

I agree with : But I don't agree that the reason is : This seems like a Simulationist-by-habit "RPG are by definition open-ended like the real world". It is simply because D&D is about facing off challenges in great numbers with a wizard team member.