Search results

I'm always very confused about objections to houseruling and tinkering on the basis that things might not work out. So you change something and it doesn't work they way you wanted or causes some unexpected issue. What are those consequences? A mild disruption to a game of make-believe? So you...

Indeed. Or the bandits have become emboldened and completely disrupted trade, or taken over a town or who knows. The PCs not interacting with features can have implications and consequences, just as interacting can. And maybe those consequences will affect them, or maybe they won't.

Some of this stuff seems to come back to @AbdulAlhazred's assumption that if the GM creates something, they'll make sure the players encounter it, but that is simply not the case if the GM is actually following the principles we're talking about. Plenty of stuff I've put work into simply gets...

So, why exactly are we assuming that the bandits are most common, other than it's convenient for the argument you're making? I'll let that pass. Let's assume the bandits are the most common. This means the PCs would almost certainly be aware that bandits are common. And yes, having established...

Same here. I usually have some idea what to expect prior to the session but that's only because I know the players plans ahead of time -- and I still don't know whether or not they'll stick to the plan, or what the outcome of those plans will be before it happens. As best I can tell, this is...

I will say, prior to this thread, I did assume (without having actually put much thought into it) that all the narrativist stuff was based around story-telling, but I've been convinced that's not necessarily the case. It probably has more in common with story-telling than I generally want in...

I don't have a big problem with the term as a generic descriptor with no more inherent meaning than DM or GM or whatever. I don't use it myself, and I wouldn't say I like it, but I don't generally read too much into it and I don't object to others using it. However, we're not just talking about...

I certainly have the power to take more direct control over the game. What some people are trying to explain to you is they choose not to use that power. Which really means, @Hussar not only knows he's right, he also believes that everyone secretly agrees with him.. You're not trying to "drill...

Some of us disagree that it's storytelling in any meaningful sense. We're not engaging in literary criticism here, so the fact that it might fall into a niche set of storytelling doesn't matter. The distinction is important to some of us. But the thing is, you're not just saying that story is a...

Is this a serious question? I stated that emergent play is important to me. You have claimed that the style of play I prefer gives the GM all the power and that So you are stating that, given the one thing you believe leads to another, that the style of play I participate in does not and...

@EzekielRaiden you might have missed it, but I said earlier I am not going to engage with you further. This being the case, there is no point in you quoting me and asking questions.

As opposed to hanging out inside, gossiping and plotting. I believe "boffer" refers specifically to the padded weapons.

And we're lucky you're here to let huge swathes of people in the hobby know they're wrong. All you're doing is overtly attacking the way other people play because you don't understand it, and then complaining that you don't like the way the people you're attacking defend themselves.

I missed that. So @Hussar is opposed to the entire notion of emergent play and also the widespread phrase, "create situations not plots". Anyone is welcome to disagree with those things and question their value as advice, but it's not at all constructive to assume that it's a settled point that...

You spend a lot of time telling other people what they really think. Personally, I don't call anyone at that table a storyteller, because I don't view the purpose of play to be to create a story. I don't believe this is in any way unique to more traditional sandbox players than anyone else. If...

So, using that logic, and feeling that the game is better with fewer constraints on players, you now understand why placing fewer constraints on the GM benefits the game?

This, exactly. To which I'll also I add, I don't think that it's mystifying. It might not be a process laid down in clear and formal terms, but neither is it some esoteric ritual. It's just a matter of making calls that are consistent and feel right; that's pretty much it.

But the kind of prep we're talking about here isn't, "These bandits will be attacking this caravan when the PCs arrive on scene." It is instead, "This is a caravan route, and there are bandits that prey on some of the caravans." One of the most likely way this will actually impact play is via a...

I also haven't seen the Incredibles and don't know the context of its use in that movie. However, I can assure you that the phrase was not invented by the Incredibles and the context it was used in in that movie does not carry any special weight. There is no reason to expect anyone else using...