Search results

That would seem relatively unlikely. Romantasy, like the romance genre it developed from, is built around prioritizing the repetition of tropes over innovation. It's meant to be a comfort read, not a challenging one. That's not an indictment, very few people want to do nothing but challenge...

No one is particularly interested in what you do in your game, outside your players. This is primarily a discussion of technique and advice. You've simply offered up details of your campaign; these have become a useful test case for hypothetical discussions on these techniques.

Players who are playing in bad faith don't need to be deferred to in any colloborative sense, obviously. Players asking for raw power grabs with little sense of story connection are almost certainly acting in bad faith.

Hmm. So does that represent an evolution in thought over the past 15-20 years, with narrativism becoming more defined as a set of techniques and less as a concept animating game design? I definitely still feel like specific game designs foster narrativism techniques, and others dissuade them...

Same here. I have zero issues with your posts, even if I don’t always agree.

Don't intimidate me with a good time. :)

I will respond only to confirm that topic did crop up a few days (and hundreds of posts) ago.

Sure. But the difference here is I don't view myself as having special privileges to decide things about the game before it starts. And all those published materials contain information and concepts that are accessible to all of us as players. Therefore, I'm not making any modifications to...

It’s relatively trivial to generate arrays that are both highly diverse and relatively balanced. You generate the initial states with a random method, and then apply a control to put them in line. Like, roll 4d6k3 6 times. If the total sum of the values is >74, determine one stat randomly (d6...

Same. I know very little about Warhammer, but a quick google isn’t showing skaven as a PC option for Warhammer. I definitely view not facilitating a non-defined race as less problematic that excluding an existing race.

Not so much for 15/14/13/12/10/8. If the point buy method gives me 18/18/18/18/18/18, then I have some opinions on its balance. :)

I already explained that in the post you quoted. If the difference is still confusing, I lack the desire to provide more clarity then I already have.

If the table had a vote, that the GM agreed to, and then the GM walked away when they lost....yea, probably for the best.

"With only access to published information and/or a 1-2 sentence summary of the pitch, can a player come up with a concept and determine correctly if it would be invalid for the setting?" would be the closest thing I can think of to a litmus test.

Of course. When it comes to X-card type restrictions on uncomfortable topics, that obviously trumps the normal practices. If something makes myself or one of the other players uncomfortable, it's out, no questions asked.

If the GM does feel that way, I'd be happy to hear them state their case and defend it, as I have here. I'm fully comfortable that in the context of this thread, I am making a normative case, not attempting to do an objective characterization.

I mean, a lot of the discussion here is about what determines that tiebreaker. If Player wants X, and GM wants Not X, who has the stronger standing? I know my thoughts based on my priorities, but people have different priorities.

Strict curation is an action that is taken. Attraction to strict curation is a feeling, or aesthetic preference. There are good ways and bad ways to do curated settings. When the curation flows from a shared understanding of the setting (like a published setting, a known IP, or a...

Fair. I can't disagree with any of the points here.

My biases are absolutely towards light prep and more improv, for sure. Some of my arguments here are certainly derived from my general preference away from highly-developed prep for D&D and D&D-type games.