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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9619477" data-attributes="member: 42582">Again, who do you think doesn't?I mean, I know of examples of D&D play that don't worry about an internally consistent world: dungeon modules like Castle Amber, White Plume Mountain, Tomb of Horrors etc. The real "funhouse"/"deathtrap" ones. But no one in this thread is talking about that sort of RPGing, as best I can tell, not even you the OSR enthusiast.But even the G-modules and D-modules set out to present a broadly naturalistic world, albeit one full of giants' kingdoms and dark faeries underground pleasure-palaces.When it comes to what you call "fault", which to me seems closer to a difference of aesthetic opinion, I think you're looking in the wrong place. (At least if the "some GMs" are the ones you interact with on ENW. Maybe you're referring to other conversations that I'm not party to.) In this thread, for instance, [USER=6785785]@hawkeyefan[/USER] has made the point that (i) the GM builds the setting, presumably along lines that they think are interesting/worthwhile, and hence (ii) extrapolation of events and situations from setting is apt to put a lot of focus on things that have been chosen by the GM because they express what the GM is interested in. This is not a diagnosis of fault; but is a discussion about whose priorities are likely to be foregrounded in heavily setting-driven play.But the fact that the play is setting-driven (ie that a lot of what happens is decided by the GM extrapolating from their setting authorship) is different from the setting having an internal logic/consistency. My Prince Valiant play, for instance, is not setting-driven at all - the setting (of a romanticised dark ages/early-mediaeval Europe, North Africa and West Asia) is mere backdrop. But that doesn't stop the setting from being logical, nor does that mean that events lack setting fidelity.And this is quite different from saying the setting should be consistent/logical. It's a preference for various techniques of scene-framing and resolution. And as always when you post this, I wonder why you are trying to do this with D&D. I mean, I know your answer is because that's what your players want: but if you're compromising on your own goals, I don't know why you seem to keep insisting that D&D is a game that can achieve those goals.For my part, I had a similar preference to yours for a while, but 19 years intense experience of RM play persuaded me that those techniques aren't all they're cracked up to be.EDIT: This post, although it contains a few rhetorical flourishes, basically sums up my own experience:</blockquote>

Verification