Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 5724139" data-attributes="member: 48965">I'm in no better or worse position than you were... when you decided to tell me (incorrectly I might add) what the thread was about in your earlier post.   Uhm... ok and if someone poses that question to me I will answer it... just as others have in this thread.    In and of itself it is very much a reason, for some, not to want to deal with giving players narrative control. You see you haven't addressed the point except to again hand wave it away in some... "it'll all work out..." vaguery. The fact of that matter is that it doesn't always work out. There are threads on other boards as well as posts in this thread about shared narrative play not working out for some groups... now whether that is because they don't enjoy the playstyle, didn't have a rules structure in place to deal with it or it just didn't work itself out... claiming it'll all work itself out in the end is proven false by the problems people have posted and listed in this thread and others.    It seems more like you are playing semantic games than anything else here. Compels determine how many FP's one gets... thus they are a limiter on one's narrative control (i.e. Fate Points) in the game... compels can either increase or not increase one's FP's (thus setting a liimit). Good compels will allow one more opportunities to gain FP's and thus have the ability to exert more narrative control. Bad compels do the opposite which is exactly what I said earlier. So it's not fun a person with bad compels is screwing themselves out of (though that may be a seocndary effect), it is narrative control and effectiveness... again like I said earlier.  For someone who doesn't want narrative control... having bad compels would not in any wya diminish their fun, and might actually enhance it as they have no reason to end up in bad situations except as chance ordains it.  So compels determine a players upper limit of narrative control opportunities(FP's). You're agreeing with everythig I said but trying to word it differently so that it appears different when it isn't.    You're right... I should have said "some players" or "IMO, most players". As to taking a specific example, let's keep it generic and look at the OP's example... The simple example given speaks to my point. The PC didn't try to narratively change the situation to make it harder for himself... or even really more interesting... he made it easier on himself. Where there was no shortcut... now there is, how is this not advocating for his or her goals as opposed to what would make a more intersting story or even more challenging gameplay, like you claim players are apt to do? See compels balance this out... they make it so that in order to make things narratively easy for yourself... as some players are inclined to do with this type of power... you also must place yourself in those dangerous, interesting and more challenging situations. Without that balancer some players will always create a shortcut to the answer.</blockquote>

Verification