Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8696993" data-attributes="member: 7026617">I suspect most of the people in this thread (I'm very carefully not saying "all"--I know better) would be able to do that face to face.  Regarding the latter, see my response at the end of this.Its absolutely related.Well, again, some of the people objecting in this thread would have no problem with that as long as they knew you were doing it.And most of the time most people aren't going to care about that.  Its all about framing in most cases.Okay, now let me do my brief spiel about "scar tissue".This is a term I picked up from my wife.  She refers to it as the baggage everybody--and I mean everybody--carries forward from prior experiences in their life.  Sometimes its minor, sometimes its not, and sometimes its, from lack of a better term, "localized".Gamers are  very prone to having scar tissue.  Gamers who participate in lots of gaming discussions even more so.  And gamers with apparently minor populace tastes, more yet.This is because the topic at hand is not the only thing being responded to.  The last four, 20 or 100 times they've been in a related discussion is also right here, right now.  That's just how people work.  So when you see hyperbole, its in response to all the arguments they've ever had on this subject; its only about you to the degree that you're in the general category of people who've acted in the past like Illusionism is the Only Right Way to Play, and anyone who doesn't like it is a giant killjoy, and are perfectly happy to throw their own hyperbole around on it.  I've seen at least 2-3 examples in this thread of it, and its far from the most extreme I've seen on this.[I occasionally think a general thread about the effect of "scar tissue" on problems in RPG groups would be worth starting, but I'm never sold it'd not turn into a trainwreck, and I participate in enough of those I don't need to start my own.]Well, its defensible that at least some fudging is illusionism, when you do it acting like the actual result of the die roll is being honored.  Its just on a very limited scale.  I just try to limit my comments about what is or isn't in 5e because I'm neither a 5e player nor GM, I just read it enough to figure out its not my cuppa.Uhm, no.  Consider why he, himself, calls it an invisible railroad.  Its the deliberate concealment that is as much or more an issue than the railroad. (though there are absolutely people who don't like that too.)It--depends.  Is he making things up to steer things in a certain direction?  Or is he just improving off what's currently happening?  I think in terms of railroading at least, they're pretty different.Again, I think the "nefariousness" is the idea you can steer people where you want and they won't know.  If they do know, then the "invisible" part doesn't apply.  Some people still aren't going to like it because they're going to question if their decisions actually mean anything (and that turns very much on what the GM is doing with that improvisation), but at the very least there's no bones about what's going on.</blockquote>

Verification