Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hella_Tellah" data-source="post: 4567339" data-attributes="member: 52669">Of course I can have narrative balance in a game.&nbsp; I do it every Wednesday.&nbsp; That's my job as a GM, to finesse the game so that everyone has an equal share of the story, so that everyone feels like a main character.&nbsp; I don't force the players to do anything; I give everyone an equal opportunity to shine.If there are four people at the table, and one person kills everything in the room, then the other three didn't get to play at all.&nbsp; That's disappointing for 3/4 of the people at the table.&nbsp; That's what I mean when I say &quot;balance&quot;--everyone gets to feel equally important to the story.Samwise Gamgee was categorically less powerful that Aragorn, Gandalf, and Legolas, but he was equally important to the story.&nbsp; If Aragorn solved all of the fellowship's problems single-handedly, no one else would be important in the story.&nbsp; Narrative balance means giving everyone a chance to contribute.You can keep saying that RPGs are simulation games, but that won't erase the word &quot;roleplaying&quot; from the front of the book.&nbsp; You seem to be going for some kind of proof by repetition here; all I'm saying is that there's more than one way to play D&amp;D.&nbsp; It can be a simulation, or a miniature combat game, or a storytelling exercise, or an improvisational theater exercise, or a hundred other things.&nbsp; Simulation is only one way to play.&nbsp; How does the game not &quot;support&quot; narrative play?&nbsp; I don't change any rules.&nbsp; I am playing it &quot;as written.&quot;&nbsp; Nowhere in the books does it say, &quot;It is wrong to play D&amp;D as though everyone at the table is improvising a play.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hella_Tellah, post: 4567339, member: 52669"] Of course I can have narrative balance in a game. I do it every Wednesday. That's my job as a GM, to finesse the game so that everyone has an equal share of the story, so that everyone feels like a main character. I don't force the players to do anything; I give everyone an equal opportunity to shine. If there are four people at the table, and one person kills everything in the room, then the other three didn't get to play at all. That's disappointing for 3/4 of the people at the table. That's what I mean when I say "balance"--everyone gets to feel equally important to the story. Samwise Gamgee was categorically less powerful that Aragorn, Gandalf, and Legolas, but he was equally important to the story. If Aragorn solved all of the fellowship's problems single-handedly, no one else would be important in the story. Narrative balance means giving everyone a chance to contribute. You can keep saying that RPGs are simulation games, but that won't erase the word "roleplaying" from the front of the book. You seem to be going for some kind of proof by repetition here; all I'm saying is that there's more than one way to play D&D. It can be a simulation, or a miniature combat game, or a storytelling exercise, or an improvisational theater exercise, or a hundred other things. Simulation is only one way to play. How does the game not "support" narrative play? I don't change any rules. I am playing it "as written." Nowhere in the books does it say, "It is wrong to play D&D as though everyone at the table is improvising a play." [/QUOTE]

Verification