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="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9624396" data-attributes="member: 6785785">I'm not tackling it as if you are speaking of the thing existing in the real world. I know you don't believe that. But I think that by labeling one method real and the other not, combined with your continued bringing up of the experiential quality of play, you are indeed implying that other approaches lack the application of cause and effect and consistency. I mean, if one method is not real, then what does that mean? From what I can tell, you think that it means players won't engage with the mystery as if it can be solved, and as if the outcome will have no impact on play. That they won't feel immersed in their characters or the situation within the game. That the facts are mutable and inconsistent. That's certainly how it comes across. If you don't mean those things, then I'm not sure what it is you're trying to say. To me, this kind of connects to the idea of simulation as it's typically used in RPGs. Where things the GM has decided are considered truths and then extrapolations from those truths are considered to have a will of their own. That they exist beyond the mind of the GM rather than being the product of the GM's choices. The idea of a "real mystery" is similar to me... it's a bunch of decisions made by the Gm prior to play, and then extrapolated on during play. It's a perfectly fine way to play... and I want to make it clear that I do plenty of this myself... but the timing of my decisions doesn't really make them more real. If I use my decisions as a starting point and then extrapolate from there, I'm not really simulating anything.</blockquote>

Verification