Search results

I'd need more specifics to be sure. If they had no relationship to the PCs, then I wouldn't care for it. If it was the tradition in the PCs village or the location was something located in their town, that seems ok. In pemerton's example, correct.

Yeah, this is true as @pemerton presented them. In that case the PC 'expressed a hope that they were a map', and the player then rolled to see if that hope was realized or not. I think both (A) and (B) are generally true. I was riffing off that example to show how I would feel if the example...

I agree that there is a benefit to this. Especially for the players. But for those benefits to be fully realized, the GM has to have details defined. This allows them to introduce clues and hints of what is out there. This mirrors what actually occurred--there were areas off the edge of the map...

Players are easy. Good players are hard to find. I've moved a few times in the past decade, and each time it takes 3-6 months of regular play in public settings to find people I want to recruit to a long-form campaign. You need people who have similar interests, whose goals mesh well, who...

This is a great example. For the record, I see this as above board, and this isn't the kind of thing that would break immersion for me. The actions directly relate to the history of the PC and so it is appropriate (imo) for the player to have some narrative control. What I dislike is the player...

If you assume players are perfectly interchangeable widgits then sure it is a trivial cost. They aren't.

Nor is saying "sorry Dave, no Tieflings" free, because Dave is your buddy and you want to have players for your game.

The runes example, notably, was not. You can cast almost anything as a memory. But the key element for me was not whether or not it is a memory. It has to do with the level of distance from the character. Remembering their village is one thing. Remembering that they overheard the prime...

You'll note my post did not say "memories".

Interestingly, I can't stand the isekai vibe as a player. I don't like it because it doesn't feel grounded, it doesn't feel like a lived-in world, in the way I want. Because that sort of thing doesn't happen in the real world. But I view the fixed world approach as the right way to address it...

"Sorry Dave, you've put a lot of work into this setting but it's not what I'm feeling right now. I'll catch you for the next campaign"

As a player, I want the DM to have that power first and foremost because I do not want it. If I have the power to construct the world, the tension between PC and player becomes more pronounced and it harms the feeling of immersion. See here. --- I didn't think it was dismissing the opposite...

I have not read the defenses of absolute power to mean that the DM must have everything determined in advance. Just that they can.

There is a difference between "the traditional GM must have everything determined" and "the traditional GM can limit choices in character creation based on the world they have created".

Hmm? There is nothing wrong in the abstract about changing the world to accommodate player ideas. I've run fun games with more collaborative world building in the past. But it isn't what I prefer these days.

Yeah, I'd also be fine with that. The character's family, a small village, some minor cultural elements, seem all good to me, because they don't affect anything major about the world. New species, cultures, or political organizations are different though. Tieflings, for example, imply something...

This is what I look for in a game. I'd much prefer this to the DM changing their setting to accommodate me. This sounds delightful and like it would lead to a game with high player agency.

This thread is from 10 years ago. The soul knife was not available when it was written.

I would prefer for the DM to determine the species and cultures and major political organizations prior to play. I don't think those should be added by the players.

Does it matter that so many of us who favor this style want to play in these games as well? I want the GM to define political entities and demographic groups. As a player I'm insisting on someone else having this authority.