Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 8224927" data-attributes="member: 6698278">I agree with the aphorism that "Whatever the DM says goes and if he says enough bad stuff (word changed to protect the innocent), the players go too".  That does not change the truth of my assertion in any way.You point was that something changeable was not established fiction despite me saying that by my rule I would not change what I had established even if the players didn't know about it.   You said this because "in theory" I could change it.  Well very much so, I can "in theory" change anything.  I consider all of my approaches good faith gaming.  When I don't change the world under my characters feet I consider that good faith gaming.  If I suddenly cause one of my villains to suddenly change his spellbook to a different spell, I consider that bad faith whether the PCs are aware of his spell book or not.We aren't going to agree on this and I don't think you've made your point.  We can agree to disagree as I don't think we are making progress on this particular point.We've debated this ad infinitum.  I don't think you are even capable of comprehending OR you are so blind to the other side you can't allow yourself to see the truth.  We've debated this enough though and I don't want to go down that rabbit hole.  Again we just need to agree to disagree.I have repeatedly said that if your game is fun for you and your players are having fun then you are doing it right FOR YOU.  I have said that from the beginning.  Obviously we know that even a prepped game has a time when the DM has to roleplay and NPC and answer questions (hopefully based on well laid out background) off the cuff.  Still the answers are based upon not exactly written down.   I minimize these situations as best I can but I cannot detail every brain cell.   I do develop enough of a story background though that the answers often spring to mind based upon what I know of that NPC.  So I don't make it up as a way of advancing some game agenda.  (See the video above for examples)Well for many situations you cannot.  I'm not drawing any conclusions beyond gaming.  The enjoyment of a game is a very subjective thing.   No matter how popular a game is there are people who don't like it and some games while not widely popular have a very fanatically devoted following.  That is the beauty of a marketplace.  I think the d20 OGL for allowing a lot of the things we all like.  I absolutely do not want to convert everyone to one style of gaming.  I will speak in defense of my style if I believe it is misrepresented or attacked unfairly.You keep saying this yet I've never disputed it.   It is possible for all three of these things to be true.  Some people like apples and oranges, some people like apples only, and others like oranges only.  But all of this is just because you've decreed it.  I've explained above.  Also you quoted me many times across several posts and not every response was directed at you.  So realize I have others besides yourself that I answer on occasion.For you this is true.  For me this is not true.  No.  The story of the characters is the sessions.   I think my analogy of the book though fits.  You are arguing that the only fiction in a book is what you have read.  I am arguing that the rest of the book is still part of the fiction.You can repeat this one billion times and you still won't be right.  So don't bother further restating the same argument in different forms.  No point.  Let's agree to disagree.   You are basing your beliefs on campaign norms and social rules.  Me too.  Mine are different.It is actually.  It's not about houseruling.  It's about making in game judgments about what happened and NOT being bound by rule 1.3.2.5 when you as DM deem it does not work for him.   In my campaign the game rules that the players read and that the characters understand as the basic physics of the world are the prevailing opinions of that world's society.  So they are mostly accurate from experience.  If a player says, this situation doesn't comport with the rules I know, I always answer "Are you going to believe your own eyes or what some scholars in musty libraries wrote about years before?"Now practically I follow the rules of course almost always.  I'm just saying what rule 0 means.  It's a good rule.  If the DM is really working to have a fun game there won't be an issue.  And if he is not then no amount of rules is going to save him.</blockquote>

Verification