Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Failing Forward
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 6810242" data-attributes="member: 6698278"><p>First let me say that Fail Forward at it's most limited form is just a tiny step in the direction of the style of play I'm trying to avoid. I realize that a restrained use of said approach would not necessarily ruin my game. </p><p></p><p></p><p>While I can see the desire to flesh out minor details, I'm generally not desirous off adding significant background. To me that is creating the world on the fly which is something I want to avoid. To each his own though. Not condemning your approach.</p><p></p><p></p><p>To the degree that a detailed backstory could be developed I would want it developed. Now I realize that this is never a case of 0% or 100%. It's not the end of the world to add a minor detail that fits the existing story. I just dislike wholesale reinvention/addition on the fly.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I struggle for the right word to use here. Perhaps deepness is not the best. I know it when I see it. For me, worlds done adhoc and on the fly come across as shallow. They seem to lack what I see as depth. I realize complexity wise it can be achieved different ways. I just find myself bored and wanting the game to be over once I realize the DM is ad hoc'ing it. And to date I've not met one that could really fool me.</p><p></p><p></p><p>This is a good point. I am very Gygaxian in my viewpoint. My players are very much about planning up front to make the actual battle easy. They sometimes succeed and it gives them a great deal of satisfaction at having played the game "well" or "skillfully" when they do. Of course, things don't always go according to plan because their enemies are playing to win as well. As DM, I try very hard to play the monsters very accurately. My job is to provide a working simulation of a world that my players can then be their characters. I work very hard to not be biased or to use "metagame" knowledge that the monsters would not have. I often write down close order action drills for my monsters based on careful thought about what they would actually know versus what I know as DM. So winning is not MY objective. MY objective is to provide a consistent world that follows set rules and contains interesting puzzles and challenge to be overcome. My players sole goal is to win.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It is a perhaps a failure of communication. I'm not sure how to solve that problem. I'm not against a DM allow for realistic possibilities. If the adventure involved a mountain trek though I'd have developed a table with various possible outcomes in advance. I never choose something to make the story interesting. I am a neutral as DM.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Emerikol, post: 6810242, member: 6698278"] First let me say that Fail Forward at it's most limited form is just a tiny step in the direction of the style of play I'm trying to avoid. I realize that a restrained use of said approach would not necessarily ruin my game. While I can see the desire to flesh out minor details, I'm generally not desirous off adding significant background. To me that is creating the world on the fly which is something I want to avoid. To each his own though. Not condemning your approach. To the degree that a detailed backstory could be developed I would want it developed. Now I realize that this is never a case of 0% or 100%. It's not the end of the world to add a minor detail that fits the existing story. I just dislike wholesale reinvention/addition on the fly. I struggle for the right word to use here. Perhaps deepness is not the best. I know it when I see it. For me, worlds done adhoc and on the fly come across as shallow. They seem to lack what I see as depth. I realize complexity wise it can be achieved different ways. I just find myself bored and wanting the game to be over once I realize the DM is ad hoc'ing it. And to date I've not met one that could really fool me. This is a good point. I am very Gygaxian in my viewpoint. My players are very much about planning up front to make the actual battle easy. They sometimes succeed and it gives them a great deal of satisfaction at having played the game "well" or "skillfully" when they do. Of course, things don't always go according to plan because their enemies are playing to win as well. As DM, I try very hard to play the monsters very accurately. My job is to provide a working simulation of a world that my players can then be their characters. I work very hard to not be biased or to use "metagame" knowledge that the monsters would not have. I often write down close order action drills for my monsters based on careful thought about what they would actually know versus what I know as DM. So winning is not MY objective. MY objective is to provide a consistent world that follows set rules and contains interesting puzzles and challenge to be overcome. My players sole goal is to win. It is a perhaps a failure of communication. I'm not sure how to solve that problem. I'm not against a DM allow for realistic possibilities. If the adventure involved a mountain trek though I'd have developed a table with various possible outcomes in advance. I never choose something to make the story interesting. I am a neutral as DM. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Failing Forward
Top