Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Professor Phobos" data-source="post: 3989316" data-attributes="member: 18883">Look, dude, I like the Forge as much as the next guy, but you have to remember the Narrative/Simulation/Gamist tracks are meant to be continuums, not mutually exclusive paradigms. Most games will have a mixture of them except the absolutely razor-focused indie games. D&amp;D is not exclusively &quot;Gamist&quot; and even if it was, Gamism does not demand rigid restrictions on GM discretion.As far as I can tell, the &quot;GM is as rigidly bound by the rules as the players&quot; idea is recent, a quirk of 3.x's exceptional number of rules for things and how awesome Burning Empires is. No other game to my knowledge would establish a set of treasure and encounter tables that GMs were bound to obey. In fact, I somehow doubt the 3e DMG's don't have words like &quot;Suggestion&quot; and &quot;Guideline&quot; and &quot;Optional&quot; there. How is a GM supposed to build his world if he's rigidly bound to, say, the Demographics rules in the DMG? How could I make a wasteland of scattered settlements and ruined cities if I'm obligated to have a certain number of priests or a certain number of magic item stores per square mile?That's just silly. EDIT: And it's definitely not gamism, since Gamism in many ways harkens back to the beginning of the hobby, and I distinctly remember world building being encouraged, the DM's word being final, everything being subject to his alteration and discretion...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Professor Phobos, post: 3989316, member: 18883"] Look, dude, I like the Forge as much as the next guy, but you have to remember the Narrative/Simulation/Gamist tracks are meant to be [I]continuums[/I], not mutually exclusive paradigms. Most games will have a mixture of them except the absolutely razor-focused indie games. D&D is not exclusively "Gamist" and even if it was, Gamism does not demand rigid restrictions on GM discretion. As far as I can tell, the "GM is as rigidly bound by the rules as the players" idea is recent, a quirk of 3.x's exceptional number of rules for things and how awesome Burning Empires is. No other game to my knowledge would establish a set of treasure and encounter tables that GMs were [I]bound[/I] to obey. In fact, I somehow doubt the 3e DMG's don't have words like "Suggestion" and "Guideline" and "Optional" there. How is a GM supposed to build his world if he's rigidly bound to, say, the Demographics rules in the DMG? How could I make a wasteland of scattered settlements and ruined cities if I'm [I]obligated[/I] to have a certain number of priests or a certain number of magic item stores per square mile? That's just silly. EDIT: And it's definitely [I]not[/I] gamism, since Gamism in many ways harkens back to the beginning of the hobby, and I distinctly remember world building being encouraged, the DM's word being final, everything being subject to his alteration and discretion... [/QUOTE]

Verification