Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Libramarian" data-source="post: 6065198" data-attributes="member: 6688858">This is awesome <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> That's one of the best Conan stories. There's also the scene in that story where Conan is talking about Crom and the other Hyperborean gods and Conan says &quot;Let teachers and priests and philosophers brood over questions of&nbsp; reality and illusion. I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no&nbsp; less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content.&quot; I love that. That's a pretty sophisticated wraparound response to relativism. It's too bad some people today can't even get into a story like this because it has some parts that are racially insensitive (or rather, racially over-sensitive...).&nbsp;[MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION]Thanks for the in-depth response. But yeah, that would be way too much pre-game prep for me and my players. They would just give me a blank look and wouldn't want to do it, and I think even for me as DM I wouldn't want to do that just because I'd like to be more surprised about where the game is going to go than that. We have a pretty low level of genre-consciousness during play, and I think I like that. I kind of want to be a fly on the wall during one of your games to see what the resulting play is like.A question for you if you don't mind -- imagine playing 4e without doing any of that pre-game. The players make their characters in a basically gamist way, just trying to build a strong playing piece. They have some vague, sort of daydreams about their character concept and what they want to do in the game but they don't really verbalize any of this. The DM runs a sandbox-y adventure with some random encounters and a dungeoncrawl. Do you think 4e is worse at this than earlier editions? If not, how much of the anti-4e sentiment does that explain?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Libramarian, post: 6065198, member: 6688858"] This is awesome :D That's one of the best Conan stories. There's also the scene in that story where Conan is talking about Crom and the other Hyperborean gods and Conan says "Let teachers and priests and philosophers brood over questions of reality and illusion. I know this: if life is illusion, then I am no less an illusion, and being thus, the illusion is real to me. I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content." I love that. That's a pretty sophisticated wraparound response to relativism. It's too bad some people today can't even get into a story like this because it has some parts that are racially insensitive (or rather, racially over-sensitive...). [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] Thanks for the in-depth response. But yeah, that would be way too much pre-game prep for me and my players. They would just give me a blank look and wouldn't want to do it, and I think even for me as DM I wouldn't want to do that just because I'd like to be more surprised about where the game is going to go than that. We have a pretty low level of genre-consciousness during play, and I think I like that. I kind of want to be a fly on the wall during one of your games to see what the resulting play is like. A question for you if you don't mind -- imagine playing 4e without doing any of that pre-game. The players make their characters in a basically gamist way, just trying to build a strong playing piece. They have some vague, sort of daydreams about their character concept and what they want to do in the game but they don't really verbalize any of this. The DM runs a sandbox-y adventure with some random encounters and a dungeoncrawl. Do you think 4e is worse at this than earlier editions? If not, how much of the anti-4e sentiment does that explain? [/QUOTE]

Verification