Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8283815" data-attributes="member: 16814">Huh?  There's zero attempt by anyone I'm aware of in this thread to say Skilled Play is a better or more desireable thing than curation of story.  I think curation of story is the default today, but it's not "better."I also still haven't seen a single iota of work or example showing how skilled play eadily meshes with curation of story (or story imperative, if you wish), just reoeated claims it does.  Again, how do you align a desire for play outcomes to only be due to player moves and mechanical systems with a choice to change the gamestate because it would be more exciting in the moment?  No one has answered this question.Let's say my party has carefully navigated the dungeon while marshalling our resources well and discovered the secret room where we learned the BBEG's weakness and are now set to curbstomp him.  This outcome will be anti-climatic -- we're set to blow through it in a single round and the BBEG's gonna go out like a punk.  If the GM changes the encounter so that it's now a serious fight, with some neat twists, all because it will make it more exciting and climatic, these expectations are at odds! I don't think either approach is more betterer, thry are just different.  Personally, I'm in the curation camp for 5e -- I manage pacing and set things up to be exciting and fun as a GM.  I don't have as much fun running a dungeon for skilled play.  But I also don't think that makes my oreference better or that play agendas can't conflict.  Of course they do, that's why games can differentiate themselves -- by supporting these over those.</blockquote>

Verification