Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9472294" data-attributes="member: 42582">No. To illustrate the difference between the players being expected to know what is at stake and the players not being expected to know. In the latter case, I don't think worries about &quot;quantum ogres&quot; have any purchase, because the GM's decisions about what sort of opposition might be where is relevant only to the GM, and the GM's decisions about what sorts of situations to present. Those decisions are not providing any context for the players to make meaningful choices, if the players aren't even expected to know what is at stake.It's a very common way to run games. You may not like it. I don't. But it's not a mistake. It's not going to cause the game to fail, if the players are happy with it.But in my view a GM running that sort of game, who then worried about ENworld posters expressing consternation over &quot;quantum ogres&quot; and similar, would in my view be worried about nothing.I don't think this sort of generalisation is very helpful. For a start it assumes that sandbox and railroads are two poles that define the &quot;space&quot; of RPGing possibilities. And they're not. Just as one example, scene-framing-type play is neither a sandbox nor a railroad.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9472294, member: 42582"] No. To illustrate the difference between [I]the players being expected to know what is at stake[/I] and the players [I]not[/I] being expected to know. In the latter case, I don't think worries about "quantum ogres" have any purchase, because the GM's decisions about what sort of opposition might be where is relevant only to the GM, and the GM's decisions about what sorts of situations to present. Those decisions are not providing any context for the players to make meaningful choices, if the players aren't even expected to know what is at stake. It's a very common way to run games. You may not like it. I don't. But it's not a [I]mistake[/I]. It's not going to cause the game to fail, if the players are happy with it. But in my view a GM running that sort of game, who then worried about ENworld posters expressing consternation over "quantum ogres" and similar, would in my view be worried about nothing. I don't think this sort of generalisation is very helpful. For a start it assumes that [I]sandbox[/I] and [I]railroads[/I] are two poles that define the "space" of RPGing possibilities. And they're not. Just as one example, scene-framing-type play is neither a sandbox nor a railroad. [/QUOTE]

Verification