Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cyberen" data-source="post: 6448723" data-attributes="member: 69074">Hmmmm. No need to call names here.Pemerton, and the Forge, and myself, we say that, from an IRL point of view, that the content generated during a RPG is co-authored by the players and the DM. This point can't really be denied.The point being discussed by Mark CMG is about this content being generated by the characters (&quot;trad RPGs&quot;) or not (&quot;storygames&quot;). Several posters here, including myself, say this point is moot, as several rules already present in AD&amp;D show that Gygax was quite aware the game had to cater for the players (and not only their characters) and that there is no functional difference between &quot;acting through character to use an arbitrary magical ability giving my character control of the setting&quot; and &quot;acting through character to ask providence to give me control of the setting&quot;. Of course, this is veiled edition warring, as the various editions of the game don't give the same advice to the DM, and only 4e made the jump of explicitly functionning on a outcome-based paradigm. Also, I think there is great fun to be had by allowing more control to the players, and I think this trace back to some magical items goodness such as Nolzur Pigments and Rings of 3 wishes. If you find them fun, why don't you incorporate more of these effects (in a limited way, more Prestidigitation than Wish) into the game ?I have also said that PC generation doesn't fall in the scope of &quot;role playing&quot; (role defining, maybe), so D&amp;D is not, since day 1, only about playing a role, but also about players giving an impetus to the game they are going to play, by chosing a flavourful role (note that AD&amp;D has flavourful classes, compared to OD&amp;D). I think it covers the corner case of the Paladin raised by Hussar in a satisfactory manner, as I believe all the subclasses (Druid, Ranger, Illusionist, Assassin) and even the main classes, especially Clerics, Thieves and Monks, bring a lot of baggage with them that could be brought up during play by the DM or the player.But, addressing the OP, I have a question for you Majoru : how as a DM do you handle looking for secret doors ? Do you allow the players to roll without describing their actions ? Do you fudge the results ?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cyberen, post: 6448723, member: 69074"] Hmmmm. No need to call names here. Pemerton, and the Forge, and myself, we say that, from an IRL point of view, that the content generated during a RPG is co-authored by the players and the DM. This point can't really be denied. The point being discussed by Mark CMG is about this content being generated by the characters ("trad RPGs") or not ("storygames"). Several posters here, including myself, say this point is moot, as several rules already present in AD&D show that Gygax was quite aware the game had to cater for the players (and not only their characters) and that there is no functional difference between "acting through character to use an arbitrary magical ability giving my character control of the setting" and "acting through character to ask providence to give me control of the setting". Of course, this is veiled edition warring, as the various editions of the game don't give the same advice to the DM, and only 4e made the jump of explicitly functionning on a outcome-based paradigm. Also, I think there is great fun to be had by allowing more control to the players, and I think this trace back to some magical items goodness such as Nolzur Pigments and Rings of 3 wishes. If you find them fun, why don't you incorporate more of these effects (in a limited way, more Prestidigitation than Wish) into the game ? I have also said that PC generation doesn't fall in the scope of "role playing" (role defining, maybe), so D&D is not, since day 1, only about playing a role, but also about players giving an impetus to the game they are going to play, by chosing a flavourful role (note that AD&D has flavourful classes, compared to OD&D). I think it covers the corner case of the Paladin raised by Hussar in a satisfactory manner, as I believe all the subclasses (Druid, Ranger, Illusionist, Assassin) and even the main classes, especially Clerics, Thieves and Monks, bring a lot of baggage with them that could be brought up during play by the DM or the player. But, addressing the OP, I have a question for you Majoru : how as a DM do you handle looking for secret doors ? Do you allow the players to roll without describing their actions ? Do you fudge the results ? [/QUOTE]

Verification