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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 9634079" data-attributes="member: 7025508">Well, I can't, because despite several request no one is willing to quote the full rules context in which Aetherial Premonitions operates. But assuming something similar than most narrativist games, there is possibility of rolling some sort of "bad stuff happens" on the camp event roll, and then the GM makes up the bad stuff in question.I think you're blind to the crazy amount of GM input the narrative games constantly ask for. And unlike in the trad approach, the GM is not bound by the myth for that input.That, BTW is one of the things that creates "the writer's room" and takes it out of the character perspective. And this is the sort negative (were one it to consider such) alongside the slowing down of the gameplay, where the GM processes being open and negotiable creates.I don't really agree. There are six recommended levels of DCs in D&D 5e (and sure, they could use more examples for what those mean,) but there is only one axis as opposed of several axis BitD operates on.But that is really not where the GM power in BitD comes mainly from. It comes from loose myth, and the system system constantly asking for significant GM input. In such game the GM is constantly inventing new fluff and introducing complications on a whim. There is constant and massive avenue of GM fiat going on, and to me it is utterly wild that proponents of the style do not see it. Again, it is not bad thing, but it is super ironic to me that you think it is the trad aficionados who are blind to the amount of GM input in their games.I partially agree with you here. D&D as written is much more open and has muddy principles and guidelines. But I am not talking about just about D&D here, I am talking about gaming style that comes with its own axioms. Like D&D as written is fine with fudging and illusionism, but the objective sim style we've been talking about here would nevertheless eschew such practices.</blockquote>

Verification