Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kobold Boots" data-source="post: 7754122" data-attributes="member: 92239">On cheating:- It is functionally impossible for the DM to cheat in a game with a Rule 0.- On rules that allow you to cheat.&nbsp; This is silly without context as if there is a rule that allows you to cheat, then there is no basis for cheating in the first place.&nbsp; No one can cheat in this circumstance without defining the context of the rule.&nbsp; I think [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] mentioned something like this already but I can see where [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION] is coming from provided there's context.Regardless, using the term &quot;cheat&quot; in any context that would &quot;allow someone to cheat&quot; is a bastardization of the English language.&nbsp; Technically, every time you get a feat, you get to do something that someone else can't so there's a difference between &quot;cheating&quot; and &quot;doing something special&quot;.&nbsp; Doing something special, should never be called &quot;cheating&quot; - On skilled play - I've grown differing opinions on this over the years.&nbsp; When I was younger I considered Gary's words as he was advocating for a style of play where people thought through their actions, build outs and equipment ahead of time and did smart things during game play that exhibited that kind of engagement.&nbsp; This was considered &quot;good&quot; play and as such XP was given.At some point &quot;skilled play&quot; turned into optimization which isn't the same thing as simply being smart about what you're doing.&nbsp; Optimized characters could still be played in such a way that skilled play under the original definition wasn't happening, but folks would still take down enemies and earn XP.&nbsp; This was also considered &quot;good play&quot;.Oversimplifying some more, at some point &quot;skilled play&quot; as a definition went away in favor of &quot;immersive&quot; or &quot;story first&quot; play.&nbsp; In this case XP were given for hours spent playing or hitting milestones instead of killing things.&nbsp; This is a function of political correctness as much as it is changing tastes.&nbsp; In a world where participation trophies exist (and I'm not saying that's a bad thing) the concept of &quot;skilled play&quot; vs. &quot;play&quot; is less important.The game Gary played and advocated for isn't the modern game; unless you and your table want it to be.&nbsp; Ultimately it doesn't matter but I don't see much reason in explaining differences or invoking what was, without understanding that it's not coming back into style for the mainstream.&nbsp; As popular as the game was in the 80s, that's a formula to kill the game in the 2020s.Enjoy what you will such that you harm none with vitriol.&nbsp; Forums ahoy.KB</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kobold Boots, post: 7754122, member: 92239"] On cheating: - It is functionally impossible for the DM to cheat in a game with a Rule 0. - On rules that allow you to cheat. This is silly without context as if there is a rule that allows you to cheat, then there is no basis for cheating in the first place. No one can cheat in this circumstance without defining the context of the rule. I think [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] mentioned something like this already but I can see where [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION] is coming from provided there's context. Regardless, using the term "cheat" in any context that would "allow someone to cheat" is a bastardization of the English language. Technically, every time you get a feat, you get to do something that someone else can't so there's a difference between "cheating" and "doing something special". Doing something special, should never be called "cheating" - On skilled play - I've grown differing opinions on this over the years. When I was younger I considered Gary's words as he was advocating for a style of play where people thought through their actions, build outs and equipment ahead of time and did smart things during game play that exhibited that kind of engagement. This was considered "good" play and as such XP was given. At some point "skilled play" turned into optimization which isn't the same thing as simply being smart about what you're doing. Optimized characters could still be played in such a way that skilled play under the original definition wasn't happening, but folks would still take down enemies and earn XP. This was also considered "good play". Oversimplifying some more, at some point "skilled play" as a definition went away in favor of "immersive" or "story first" play. In this case XP were given for hours spent playing or hitting milestones instead of killing things. This is a function of political correctness as much as it is changing tastes. In a world where participation trophies exist (and I'm not saying that's a bad thing) the concept of "skilled play" vs. "play" is less important. The game Gary played and advocated for isn't the modern game; unless you and your table want it to be. Ultimately it doesn't matter but I don't see much reason in explaining differences or invoking what was, without understanding that it's not coming back into style for the mainstream. As popular as the game was in the 80s, that's a formula to kill the game in the 2020s. Enjoy what you will such that you harm none with vitriol. Forums ahoy. KB [/QUOTE]

Verification