Search results

And yet focusing 9n any one of those as your goal can loose you the match... so they aren't in and of themselves your goal. Only if the challenge leads to said goal, and even then it's not in pursuit of it.

so we are classifying anything that can be successful or fail as a goal... moreso that whatever that thing is, will also automatically be the goal of the PC's...well with that broad a definition I'm not sure a more nuanced discussion can even take place... everything is a goal... No none of...

So now it seems any minor desire is a goal? I don't agree with this, a momentary or fleeting desire isn't a goal in the sense of playing a game which is what we are talking about. I may desire a touchdown in any particular game of football I play but my goal remains wining the game... not...

So you're saying there will be challenges that the PC's may not successfully overcome but also do not result in a fail state of the PC's goals... is that a correct reading? Because if so, you are agreeing with what I claimed in my previous post which I honestly don't think is all that...

Some maybe, which I stated in my previous post but there is more than enough room for challenges that when failed aren't so binary that they must result in a fail state. Setbacks come to mind. Do you think the only challenges that can be engaging and fair must result in a failure state of the...

To set up engaging and fair challeges to the PC's pursuit of success that make the game more interesting. IMO sometimes deadlines can make a game interesting but othertimes not so much (especially when overused). I don't necessarily equate fear of death or even fear of general failure with...

Lol Riiight.

It's been cited as a problem in many editions of D&D Uhm...ok. Thanks.

you're assuming that just because the success/failure determiner is neutral... the game doesn't include other factors to create an outcome that still favors the GM defeating or foiling the PC's. Example: If I have unbalanced encounter guidelines but a neutral determiner the game can still push...

That was your claim not mine...

you're doing it wrong... when it's convenient for your narrative take exactly what was posted at face value and demandit of others... then when it's not convenient for your narrative choose to interpret what he posted and demand others interpret it as you do... :rolleyes:

And yet people literally buy a different version of D&D with different rules and cite the difficulty of 5e as a major reason if not The reason.

I asked how you would play a narrative game using the rules of 3e DnD are you claiming that's not a particular playstyle?

Hey, me too... but I'm also not going to claim my preference is how you reach higher emotional or spiritual whatever in a pretend game.

Yes he is talking about playstyle. He doesn't have too and no one I'd gong to make him... so again, what is your point... to shut down others voicing their oppinions while defending his? If you are adding rules... you need thos rules to facilitate said playstyle. Otherwise why add them?

Using the rules of D&D 3e can I play a game where players have narrative control over the emerging story? If so what rules facilitate that playstyle?

And? People are claiming he's being mis-characterized... so I say if so he should clarify (anyone can feel free to agree or disagree with that)....and yes, the entire post is about what he thinks... not sure your point here unless you think I don't realize it's all oppinions.... or maybe you...

Didn't say it wasn't fun but I dont think one can infer what does or doesn't makes a good rpg from a single (or even a few) sessions of play at a niche Con. Certainly not enough to denigrate other (probably more popular) playstyles.

Where did he clarify his reference to differing playstyles as slop?

I find the account from Gary Con interesting... I wonder how many PC's were in that party as going off everything I've read about Old School and principles of skilled play... 3 PC's in the party getting their heads chopped off would have been a definite telegraph that our party should retreat...