Search results

Yeah, we got tired of King George and fired him. We're doing fine thx ;)

Well, this is your contention. OTOH I contend that any conflict situation, any place where an issue can be in doubt and the outcome has fictional significance, then adjudication is recommended, and mechanics are helpful. At least from my PoV one of the main attributes of Narrativist systems is...

Well, I've actually seen this sort of thing be highly contentious, even to the point of exploding a couple of games.

Well, I'm not super fond of a lot of what I read about the DW2 design either. Honestly I don't think it addresses the issues I had with the original, but goes far in some other direction entirely. Conditions might be OK, but what I really want is for the game to act as a crucible for shaping...

This is silly. I mean, by all means play a game which focuses on what you want it to. I'm pretty sure something along these lines might happen in Monster Hearts. I don't think it would be typical of BW, unless we're dealing with a PC with some unusual beliefs. My response was to question why you...

I think you probably know the answer to that. A game in which we endlessly diced for every low-probability event would obviously be unplayable. We'd be rolling d1000000 all day to see if you suddenly died of a blood clot too. Narrativist systems focus on the questions which are important to...

Not so much of a comment on you, because I have not really had much discussion with you. But, many many posters then go on to assert that such a setup is part of a more realistic sort of play. I personally just find that it feels inauthentic and very artificial, gamist really. Also, games like...

But I expect you see how entirely arbitrary the division is between what you are accepting and not accepting, right? You seem (here I'm guessing a bit based on common reactions I've seen) entirely comfortable with the idea you don't have total control over, say, making an effective sword stroke...

Honestly, stepping back from any of the usual debating points, the difference seems to me to be in the content and intent of the adjudication. Taking Dungeon World as the easiest to look at, what is the difference in GMing DW vs GMing B/X D&D (as a fairly elemental example of classic/trad...

It would be funny, except you are talking about a person with an extremely high set of standards for his role play, and who really does it with excellence. I strongly doubt many people here could hold a candle to @Manbearcat there. Great RP!

It was the ability to have open-ended play, which was enabled by GM (the term at the time was Referee) authority over resolution. Rules were only used to allow the ref to disclaim decisions by using dice, or to inject randomness. They also allowed a type of tension in play. But critically only...

They're also what people like Baker are talking about.

I find this characterization tellingly off. I have no end of tales of trad play consisting of GMs repeatedly imposing elements into play clearly designed to confirm it to their preferences. This is almost a universal of trad play IME. The general pattern being GMs wanting to avoid having to...

Just wanted to reemphasize this! How we use things, what they're for, and why we do what we do is what is important.

No it doesn't. Listen, I played the original game, a fair amount. It was almost totally pawn stance exploit what is on your sheet. We still put names, notes about allies, pictures, etc. on the sheet. I think @pemerton pretty much has it right. Character sheets were resources, maybe also...

A And I find the terms on which you want to limit the discussion to be as ideological and limited (and limiting) as you attribute Baker's or @pemerton 's of being. It doesn't seem like a terribly useful basis for discussion. This is largely why I find it best to hew as close as possible to...

There's nothing wrong with some exposition and interaction with low stakes. Narrativist games even directly invoke this sort of play. Stonetop literally has a move which describes it. So does TB2e IIRC. However, at a certain point it starts to detract from play, and IME that usually happens...

Not sure I understand the last sentence very well. We all definitely agree on NPCs having depth of personality.

I think, in my judgement at least, this is not a coherent position. Context is everything. Sure, players may choose between options, but they're limited to reacting to a largely predetermined set of situations. Beyond that, I honestly don't believe in the existence of GM objectivity/neutrality...

Fair enough, and honestly I don't know that I think you specifically are someone that gives off an especially ideological vibe. You're saying a lot of things that, tbh, got currency in a certain dark time around here that many of us still remember well.