Search results

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.

"Attraction to strict curation is a GMing weakness" is what I said, which is subtly different. And yes, if your impulse is to take a setting and chop out a bunch of races to make things simpler or cleaner, I think following that impulse hampers your game and your players.

I would agree with that, which is why it's certainly fortunate I do all of those recommendations. There is an enormous amount of rhetorical space between comparing two things and finding one better, and actively denigrating something. Saying "I don't like X" is a statement of a mindset, not...

They did, actually. Using recognizable D&D names like Mephistopheles made them feel more of a connection to the game. It's pretty central to my GMing philosophy that I'm playing with a group of players I trust. You can't collaborate with people who don't play in a trustworthy fashion. I...

That is true, that is something we do differently. I'm assuming you feel your way of communication is better? :)

It matters to me. And I've already explained why I think it should matter to "Generic GM reading this thread." And again, different experiences. More than half the people I play with have spent considerable time in the GM chair. A bunch of us are familiar with quite a few settings.

There are a ton of players who want games where they don't have authorship responsibilities. I won't deny that. I'm glad you found a player group correlated to your interests.