Search results

(Emphasis mine) When you're saying such games are necessarily GM-directed, you seem to be agreeing with the point I just made -- if it's necessary to be that way, then clearly you believe that it is impossible for it to be otherwise. Some of us disagree that such games are necessarily...

It's covers pretty much the same ground as the Primer, albeit written in a way a lot of people find more approachable. I'm a big fan of the Primer (which was part of my introduction to OSR, after I'd pretty much ignored D&D in the 80s and 90s), but these days I'd direct a new player to the...

It seems pretty obvious to me that there are people in this conversation who believe it is literally impossible for a GM to provide players with sufficient information and to rule consistently enough for players to be able to make informed (edit: or meaningful) decisions and rely on the outcomes...

I stated that if the players only have four options in total for things they're able to do, that is insufficient. I'm not sure if your "previously" refers to me, but I certainly didn't say anything about rumours specifically. If the game has been going for any length of time there should...

This is correct. I do indeed look to run and design campaigns that I expect will be fun and not boring, and many of the design steps aren't done with a sense of impartiality (although some are). But, again, I will state I'm not interested in rehashing the entire discussion, especially since you...

Where are you getting this? My next sandbox will most likely be setting the 1e Forgotten Realms Savage Frontier. There are plenty of monsters in that area. A wilderness area beyond civilisation is a pretty standard setting for a fantasy, exploration sandbox. Dark Sun has all sorts of monsters...

I am not going all the way back to square one to rehash the previous hundred-or-so pages of arguments about whether or not it is possible to run a sandbox with the intent of doing so in an impartial manner. Suffice to say, in my experience, it is possible (with the proviso, as I mentioned, that...

The sort @Paul Farquhar is familiar with, apparently.

Please see the disclaimer I included at the end of my post in the (clearly misguided) hope it would prevent exactly this kind of quibble: If they did not exist, I would not generally add wargs into my campaign world on the basis a PC had a hatred of wargs because, in discussion with that...

Probably they didn't even consider that someone might actually ask if the sandboxes we're talking about are literally filled with sand, and misinterpreted the question on the assumption it wasn't some attempt at a petty semantic gotcha.

I would posit that, if your interpretation of other opinions requires that others believe or claim things self-evidently impossible (eg, everything in the world already exists and is fully fleshed out), then perhaps you need to consider that maybe you've interpreted it incorrectly. To make a...

Well, for the record, I disagree with anyone claiming that every single part of the entire world must be fleshed out in detail prior to play starting. I haven't seen anyone claiming that and, given that no one has a gameworld with millions of independently statted NPCs, updated daily for...

I don't understand what you're saying. Who is advocating a living world sandbox where the world consists of three or four adventure sites and nothing else?

And yet, despite my last post, here I am again. If there are literally only three four things the PCs can do, you don't have a sandbox by any definition I'm aware of. Certainly not the type that people like @Bedrockgames or @robertsconley are talking about.

Edit: You know, never mind. The discussion is going absolutely nowhere and there is no point in me perpetuating it.

Who claimed there aren't other ways to created the feeling of objectivity, that work for some people? Several have claimed there aren't other ways that work for them. I don't think anyone has claimed it's not possible (if you hunt for it, you might find an isolated comment here or there...

You quoted me before I added in my next line: "Are you suggesting that it's not possible to be in the driver's seat unless the imaginary world has already been realised in every respect to the same degree of fidelity as the real world?" It seems like you are, which is pretty silly bar, I think.

Can you be in the driver's seat in the real world when the only positions on the map are those placed there by the cartographer? Are you suggesting that it's not possible to be in the driver's seat unless the imaginary world has already been realised in every respect to the same degree of...

My comments related to my style. I did not reject any other style, or the objectivity of other styles, because I wasn't referring to other styles at all. However, I will happily state that there absolutely are styles that do not aim to have GMs determining outcomes purely based on an attempt to...

So, do you genuinely have a problem with anything I actually said in the post of mine you quoted? Or do you just have some problem with the word "objective", regardless the context it's used in? As others have chimed in, we're not using the word to say our games are objectively better than...