NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9640258" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Sure, if you ignore all the points of input the player had into making it. The players chose the Score. The players chose the Approach to the Score. The players chose the Detail of the Approach. The players brought up looking for a trap. Without all of those decisions, the GM wouldn't even be at this point of play where there's a chest they're thinking of breaking into. Now... imagine a more traditional approach. The GM has decided what the goal of play is (solve the mystery, beat the adventure, etc.), the GM has prepped the location for play, the GM has determined the ways to proceed through the location. They have set the obstacles. They have determined if there is a trap there. All the player input amounts to is to determine what predetermined thing the GM will tell them about. This is why I've been arguing since the beginning of the thread that it's not GM Fiat that is a problem in and of itself (as much as any of this may be a problem for a group), but rather the layers of GM Fiat. It's not about eliminating GM decision making... it's about introducing other methods into the mix so that it's not all GM decision making. I don't see why a list of principles... of things that are meant to guide you in areas of judgment... would ever be frowned upon in a game text. The idea that it's unnecessary is an odd one to me. Looking at D&D 5e, I think it could do with a lot of that. Especially since it seems to support so many various approaches to play. They should include principles for all of them. Well, I personally would have preferred a lot of different advice than what I got from my early days in the hobby. Not to have to trial and error things for years until this stuff all started becoming more widely discussed as the internet came along. Well, when I GM these kinds of games, I want them to be about what the players are interested in. Hence why I might introduce a trap in a Score that's about infiltrating a location and stealing a treasure. Because the players are the ones who decided to infiltrate the place to get the treasure. The "best not mention traps" angle is kind of silly, though, no? I mean... there are going to be obstacles. If it's not a trap, it'll be something else. And here's the thing... just as there are GM Principles, there are also player principles. What you're describing sounds to me like something that violates several of them. <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Embrace the Scoundrel's Life</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Go Into Danger, Fall in Love With Trouble</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Don't Be a Weasel</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Take Responsibility</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Don't Talk Yourself Out of Fun</li> </ul>Your one true way doesn't appeal to me. I'm glad there are other methods for RPGs to allow us both to enjoy games.</blockquote>

Verification