Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 9617311">People are talking about trying to stay true to the world, to events in the campaign, to actions the PCs or NPCs have taken. They are saying it isn't happening in a vacuum and GMs are applying different sets of principles to achieve different kinds of play styles. You can try to be objective as a GM. That is a principle. It doesn't mean it is a physics simulation though or that it will be perfectly achieved. It is about what your goal is. If your goal is to make the world feel objectively real, you are going to try to make your decisions based on things like real cause and effect. People have addressed this numerous times in these conversations. Saying 'but NPCs aren't real' or the 'but the setting isn't a real place' and pointing out it occurring in imagination, is kind of a straw man. Now if you don't like it, fair enough. The point people are making is there are more objective ways, and less objective ways to help resolve something like the Alarm situation. And it is more objective if the GM is relying on context, details that have been pinned down (either openly or behind the scenes in his notes). That is a sharp contrast to a GM who just makes something happen because they think it would be cool (and nothing wrong with that either, but it is a different style of GMing)</blockquote>