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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9025197" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Okay, then if I may, I will attempt to dodge semantics and state things plainly.The benefit of TTRPGs is that they let you do what you want. You aren't bound by what someone thought to program into a game. Mixing and matching elements you can choose to combine is one of the key draws of play. Giving players a reason to pursue this--to be creative, to mix things in unexpected ways, to try actions that weren't predicted in advance--is thus a very important goal when making such a game. Conversely, curtailing player creativity, whether by actually punishing unexpected combinations, or by only giving rewards to expected combinations, runs against that core proposal of letting players do what they want without it needing to be pre-established first.This is why I have always found these arguments baffling and frustrating--doubly so because they come from folks who (explicitly!) want the game to be more open-ended, to be more supportive (or to at least get out of the way of) spontaneous, creative player choices even if they don't conform to received wisdom.Enforcing archetypes is exactly the opposite of the creative impulse that gives TTRPGs their value. If I want a game that will punish (or at least deny incentive to) unexpected combinations, I can just go play a computer game. It's cheaper, and far easier to boot. No need to deal with schedules and finding a good group and all that nonsense. And cooperative stuff has become quite popular as well, such as Divinity: Original Sin 2.</blockquote>

Verification