Search results

* D&D (Basic, 1e, 2e, 3.5e) * Pathfinder * Game of Thrones (d20) * Call of Cthulhu * Serenity * Marvel Superheroes (TSR edition) * Mechwarrior * Vampire: The Masquerade I might be missing a system in there from my 80s gaming days.

I wanted to reply in greater detail but alas by 5 year old is fighting me on bed time right now. Let me just say a few quick things before running off. For me, there's a difference between fumble and failure based on the way I use failure in my games. In games like D&D, there is no consequence...

My home-brew based off of Danger Patrol. Good question.

How did the herd get panicked? Was it a result of a failed roll or because "DM says so"? For me only the failed result of a roll would have led to that chain of events. Again, dice rolls? I'm not sure where you're getting all this planning from. When I'm talking about success or failure, I'm...

Correct. I don't play those systems anymore though. In the games I play, success and failure are determined simultaneously. Failures complicate the scene while success make it easier. I find them silly in the same way that I find critical hits silly. They don't particularly add any drama to...

Those seem to be the results of simply failing the check. When I think fumble, I think Wicket using the sling. Things get complicated on a failure and things get silly on a fumble, which is probably why I don't use fumbles anymore. I don't use critical success either, for similar reasons.

If we say "Warlord" we can get the whole thread moved.

Maybe, I'm not entire sure it can be divorced that easily, although I agree completely about the dueling anecdotes. For me though, the play experiences are the most valuable part (show don't tell). When we divorce the play antidotes from the discussion, we're left with examples that tend to...

I'm not sure we can discuss this without talking about systems, can we? Or at least reference to systems that either support or refute general play styles? Some systems just don't lend themselves well to particular approaches to gaming. If we want to focus only on Fail-Forward and D&D 3x, that's...

Unless what I want isn't provided by the game world. Then either the GM has to create it in response to my declaration or I don't get that option. If the GM creates it, then why bother creating the world to begin with instead of just creating things in response to the goals as they develop? If I...

Correct. Which is why I play my own system that focuses more specifically on what I want. If there was a system I found more accurate to my preference, I would be playing it. FATE is okay but it doesn't meet my needs, nor do other games like BW, Dungeon World, etc. They all have aspects I like...

This is where I have issue, not with you, but with the "PC concept." In a D&D sense (which I rarely play anymore), I wouldn't even have a concept in the works until level 5 or 6. I develop background during play not before play begins. I find it too restricting and want the freedom to develop...

Couple things 1) The symbol has no depth and can never have any depth unless the viewer chooses to relate it to their character's experiences. Otherwise it's the same as saying the sky is blue. Who cares, it's not interesting or relevant to the game. 2) Let's not confuse exposition with...

None of that means anything to me, even if it did, it wouldn't add anything to my investment in the game. For me it's mere color, no depth. Now if I decided as a player that my character will tap into his concept that he's out for revenge (for what I still haven't decided) and I decide that...

Yep. It's not even a bad thing. It's relaxing sometimes. But if I want to get invested in my PC, I want there to be little pre-authored elements (remove all those secret backstory elements that make my decision-making meaningless) and as little prep time as necessary (be responsive to my...

You are correct. It's even more difficult, when your playing style doesn't match your running style. You either need multiple groups or find a group that is the opposite of your tastes. Thus the struggle.

Or I've had some really good DMs in bad styles of play lol who knows. I'm fully aware of what they offer, as well as what they don't, which is why I play them and don't tend to run them.

I don't assume this, I "feel" this from my experience, which is why I used that word specifically in my post. I'm not stating fact, I'm stating my opinion and the way I feel about it, based on my experience that every time a portal comes up, it's the direction the game is heading. I've never had...

I like to call the sandbox approach the pinball style. The characters bounce around from one unconnected pre-authored point to another, hoping to get somewhere that doesn't exist, all the while trying to stay alive. It's fine, but I never feel I have any decision points to make that actually...

My conflict between the two styles revolves around this. Scene After searching the tower I find a teleportation portal but I don't know where it leads, nor was I searching to find it to begin with. Pre-Authored Game I feel I have to go through the portal even if I don't particularly want to...