Search results

That sounds like a fun concept, and based on the abstract, I would be on board with joining that game. "Undead apocalypse" is a great frame for a D&D game.

Since I have never done it (or at least, not in several decades), it can't be my problem, right? :) And the thinking of it also doesn't cause me any problems either; diagnosing the weaknesses in the approaches of others just makes my own play stronger. So don't worry about me, Bill; I'm in a...

Compromise should generally be possible. A fantasy species for D&D has three distinct layers; the mechanical layer, the aesthetic layer, and the setting fiction layer. The player needs to communicate with of those layers is their highest priority, and the DM needs to indicate which layer...

Even blood magic rituals can't compare to the Secret of the Ooze.

Would you like to know my deep secret? I don't actually like dragonborn. I have never had a dragonborn PC, and I virtually never use them when I'm GMing. Do you know impact that dislike has on my games when I GM, and a player wants to play a dragonborn? 0.0%. If your game has enough room...

I tend to ignore that use case because I would never join a game that has a 10+ year old setting that also has a ton of built-in restrictions. I have one DM that uses the same setting for all his games, but it's just a generic D&D type setting with a few custom gods that he uses for NPCs; he...

People who don't engage in either direction are problematic. Players and DMs both need to step up and explain their thought processes to make sure the fiction works; failure by either party to do so will destroy games.

Don't worry, I've spent quite a few posts this morning telling them exactly. :)

Honestly, a player who doesn't give any pushback at all about weird restrictions is a player I don't want. I want players who take an active interest in shaping the shared narrative (and by extension, the setting that is the frame of the narrative.) I want drivers, not passengers.

Exactly. I've been actively conciliatory on this board for decades now. I'm just taking a little break from couching all of my thoughts in digestible platitudes.

If we can make it a meme for all toddlers and people who write 200 page setting bibles, I'm all in.

Please don't run the same game for life. That's even worse. Run lots of games, in lots of systems. Make more friends and play with them too. Just always remember the center of the game is the table, not the setting notes. Kumbaya!

Man, you really have no idea how to run a game with minimal prep, do you? It's amazing how you simply assume that everything is random and unconnected.

Makes sense. I mean, why rewrite the Constitution when I can just say "L'etat, c'est moi!" Same principle can definitely apply to my DMing.

I mean, if the alternative is "Play a human fighter with nothing but the stuff in my pack", than I would play OSE or Cairn or Knave or any of the myriad OSR/NSR systems that make such an experience actually gamable and enjoyable.

Man, I wish I had the time to waste designing a setting that doesn't even have players yet.

Having better ideas doesn't make me better than you, not in some "how do we value other people" calculation. It just means I have better ideas.

That "rando" is one of your players. :)

Remember that it's New Years, and you shouldn't break your resolutions until at least the third week of January. Weird. That sounds like the general hook for tieflings, one of the most common races in modern D&D.

I have no particular idea what you and your players want outside of your posts here. I'll totally cop to "arrogant and presumptuous" though. :)