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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6309623" data-attributes="member: 3192">I don't consider what I'm doing as presenting Toyland either. But let's be clear so we can understand each other. You are interested in "exploring" (actually inventing on the spot) the game world. Whereas I am setting up a predefined game world (of tried-and-true rigorous game design) for the players to actually be able to discover and manipulate - much of which they have altered even before they discover its existence. Is that accurate?Either way is fine and can be functional game designs, but I think both really need to be told to players up front as to what's about to happen. IOW in the rules.That's a fair understanding, but I don't think it adequately gets where I'm coming from. You don't want to know if Luke Skywalker is corruptible before a game begins, a kind of definite yes or no state. In my game all elements change and are changeable. There can be no definite state about whether Luke actually is corruptible or not. He can be changed, but the game may also shift to keeping him from being corrupted. As a DM I'm very specifically NOT taking actions in the game so all those shifts are a result of the players' actions in the game. The last thing I want this to be is about me or me in the spotlight. The game stands on its own I only relay it. Back to Luke, this would be an Alignment system question. Can an NPC "fall" to another alignment? Yes. Even a deity can change. Can he be saved? Also yes. ...Okay, are there exceptions to "everything is alterable game content?" I can only think of Paladinhood, but that's the whole point of that rule. The Players wants to be in a situation where any screw up means never going back. That nothing they do in game can reclaim that loss of paladinhood. And so the rules exist as they do to provide that situation.</blockquote>

Verification