Search results

That's true. And the web location line (which is usually visible all the time with most browsers) doesn't mention what subforum its in; you'd have to scroll up to the top and look at the internal location line.

I'm sometimes amazed that people will assume a post placed in this subforum still bakes in D&D assumptions in its question, but I suppose given the bias of this forum toward D&D as a whole that's kind of inevitable.

I think the problem is, to some extent, concept splay over time; rpg elves have a number of sources (Tolkein, Nordic alfar, Celtic sidhe) and often have visual and conceptual identities that sprawl across them. As such the visual and conceptual basis of them actually absorbs a lot of ground...

Actually, there's often a bigger reason for that: players who have learned that at least any living attachments may well be used against them.

No, my answer indicated what some of them think is evidence of those things. It in no way said that was actually the case. You asked why they considered that a good advertising statement. That's why. However, unless your question was rhetorical (and it wasn't self-evidently so) your...

When you're talking about it--as that poster appears to be--in the context of what the players are doing and why--of course it is. Otherwise you're just projecting your wants on other people and being annoyed they're not supplying what you want. And my suggestion is "If you want other people...

Except I wasn't clear from your first post what the actual premise was. At first I was trying to figure out if you meant whether a GM should have a map themself. Again, that was far from clear to me or I'd likely not gotten into the thread in the first place. Until post #109 I would not have...

Over and above any general feeling about maps, that seems to limit the kind of structures you can use there, and of course its of no use outside. To be clear, I'm not arguing against having a map at all; I'm arguing whether its necessary to make players duplicate the map the GM has already...

I'm sorry, I think I either missed or forgot context for what you're talking about here.

Again, I disagree. If you think both of those are required to be "exploration", then you're going to have to supply a word for a game that only uses the first as I've run. I don't think you get it. That's absolutely true but it doesn't mean its relevant in play. You can just assume once...

Well, the simple answer to that for at least some people is that they like the set dressing and stat bonus. They don't need another reason. (And of course not every game ever does bother with races and heritages, or at least make a big deal out of them. D&D historically has, but that's as...

No, but since I'm usually talking about what I think gamers as a group think (and when I'm not, I try to make that clear), you're going to see me do this every time, and if its annoying, that's as it is.

Though that still assumes the map element is important. It deals with the "is this a player skill or character skill?" question, but it doesn't handle the cases where the question is whether the process is important and interesting at all. As I said, I can run an exploration game where mapping...

I'd say they're even moreso. Far as that goes, I'd question how deep most people's play of elves even gets to the Tolkein elves; its just a certain broad-stroke concept of "elf" they've absorbd from multiple sources (including Tolkein, so there's some of that there, but its not the only thing).

I think you're making a categorical error here. Let me explain why. Both Middle Earth and the Witcher's setting has a previous existance that would have been absorbed by people in a fashion where lore and setting is more critical as a primary element of the experience before hitting it in a...

IME, with most players that's liable to just cause them to gravitate toward clerics unlikely to run into that, and if they do anyway they'll (probably somewhat legitimately) wonder if the fix is in rather than it being a legitimate setting decision (i.e. did the GM know the particular cleric...

And the latter phrase is the part I was trying to get you to clarify. Note "exploration" and "mapping" do not automatically go together. Mapping failure as a player game element doesn't have to be present in an exploration game. I've run all kinds of exploration games in the past where there...

The simple answer to that is "No, it appears something odd happened along the way." Being coy there only matters if you consider mapping itself part of the gameplay loop. I have two answers to this. 1. In many cases, I just don't care. Since the players getting lost or disoriented isn't an...

Bluntly? Inform the mechanics in some fashion. Nothing else will matter to some of them, and even for those who it can matter to, on the whole if it doesn't impact the mechanics, its prone to losing. That's the point, here. As I've noted before, some people are here just to fight things...

The problem, again, is the ambiguity of "mapping" here. I think the GM having a map is part of that, but I don't see why the players doing so manually rather than just being assumed to have have a pretty good idea as the GM reveals it has to be important.