Search results

I knew ENWorld was cool, but I didn't know that Facebook is that bad. I guess I could have assumed as much about Xwitter. Thanks for participating, and for helping me appreciate ENworld even more!

Players like rewards. That's cool. If they're rewarded by the GM, and not a deity-NPC, I would expect them to be for metagame stuff or sort of ideologically neutral things. So: putting in effort, focusing on backstory, adding helpful details. I don't want the GM rewarding only a certain type...

1. Hmm. I'm preparing for a semi-monthly campaign. If it hits 60 sessions, that's, what, two and a half years? Is the idea that too much play exhausts a game's options, so players might get bored without a cool, new thing to which to level up? My cleric never did learn Miracle . . . 2. Now...

I've heard this, but with a speed limit of C, why can't we tell which observer is actually moving? Time stopped for you; you're moving at the speed of light, and I'm not. Or maybe, the light of the universe is redshifted for me, so I'm not moving. But for you, it's red-shifted on one side and...

Which is why I said: with which you seemed to disagree. You can't pass through just one or the other. You have to pass through both. That's a good way to put it. The past isn't a place; it's a state of the same universe we're in now. To go to a previous state would require changing this...

I'm sure you can. But can you walk forward without any time passing? Which begs the "time travel" flip side: can you stand in one place, but go to the future/past? Ah. I was thinking of the double slit experiment, which shows that since it's equally probable that a photon goes through either...

...he says, 11 months later. Is it streaming? Where?

So, I skipped a few pages, but did we cover the angle about time being part of space, "spacetime," and therefore probably not separately navigable from space? Or the quantum worlds angle of: everything happens, but we only see what's probable? So time travel is just not very probable?

Funny, this is a very D&D thing (theme) to me, but I feel like it's missing from a lot of the "what is OSR" discussions I see. By the way, I think Zork was free-to-play in Call of Duty: Black Ops. So it's not too dusty.

Yuuuup. Put the players to work. I'd pull back from letting them put things directly in the story, but let their ideas become "yours." Steal from video games, too. Those tend to include more visual details. But the stealing should be happening when the improv breaks down. An essential tool...

Hmm. So you'll need ideas that account for demonic magic, adventuring as a viable career, world tainting, and a county run by vampires. How about the world blows up, and the PCs land on a tainted planet in a saucer-shaped globe of invulnerability, which includes red blankets that each PC uses...

Steal from rival kingdom: target on your back until the rival king is replaced by a lackey. Gift from the queen: oh, she'll never let you hear the end of that one. Favor for pirate captain: okay, the guy was old. But so was the ship. It won't hardly move, due to all the barnacles on the hull...

That sounds . . . circular ;) If OP is glad to not be using gold, great! But I'm agreeing: money is one way you navigate in-game problems. You can't throw XP at a problem to solve it, but GP work pretty well. PCs will easily get too much gold if you follow this weird rule that every creature...

I'd stick to the CRPG. Zork has a bit much permadeath for the tastes of today's discursive RPG market, doesn't it?

Does "better" include "more profitable?"

What's also cool is that we know first-hand what happens when high-tech/magic becomes commodified. People become wild and start roaming the streets in herds, staring downward into their trackers, claiming to "hunt Pokemon." So, it was paradise? Gotta have something for the working class to...

Assuming this is a question: I don't generally click my way into threads just to say "no." At least, I'm trying to cut back on it 🤓

The thread title is going to skew the results. I'd like to know what the title of the prior poll was.

I'm going to see it based solely on the tired millennial advertising technique of playing a moody version of a '90s classic song in the background in the hopes that I'll keep watching the trailer so I can hear just how the new version of the song plays out . . . predictable as it may be. Who...