Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="overgeeked" data-source="post: 8961924" data-attributes="member: 86653">As a player, I'm good with no rules on up to medium-crunch games. 5E is near the upper edge of the crunch I'm willing to deal with. Though my tolerance for that level of crunch is almost gone. I'm good with heavy role playing or RPG as board game. I prefer sandboxes, though I'm fine with linear adventures, but I have absolutely zero tolerance for railroading of any kind. It's anathema to RPGs as far as I'm concerned. If the referee needs to negate player choices to push a predefined story, they should go write a novel. I prefer one-shots or shorter campaigns, or if a longer campaign for there to be more episodic rather than serial adventures. Meaning one-shot adventures/modules strung together to form a campaign rather than a set adventure path from 1-20 or whatever. To me, the absolute worst of all possible games would be a heavy-crunch railroady megadungeon.As a referee, I have a strong preference for rules light or rules ultra-light games. Immersion first. Play worlds, not rules. And open-world sandboxes. The referee plays the world, the players play their characters. The referee sets up the world, fills it with factions and NPCs, situations and hooks. The PCs react to those elements as they choose. And the referee reacts accordingly, the world changes and presents new elements to the PCs. The PCs react to those elements as they choose. Etc. The game just rolls from there. I'm quite flexible in that I'm not invested in the players doing this or that specific thing and will react to whatever they throw at me, but I'm quite inflexible in that my preferences are set and I've little interest in running games a different way.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="overgeeked, post: 8961924, member: 86653"] As a player, I'm good with no rules on up to medium-crunch games. 5E is near the upper edge of the crunch I'm willing to deal with. Though my tolerance for that level of crunch is almost gone. I'm good with heavy role playing or RPG as board game. I prefer sandboxes, though I'm fine with linear adventures, but I have absolutely zero tolerance for railroading of any kind. It's anathema to RPGs as far as I'm concerned. If the referee needs to negate player choices to push a predefined story, they should go write a novel. I prefer one-shots or shorter campaigns, or if a longer campaign for there to be more episodic rather than serial adventures. Meaning one-shot adventures/modules strung together to form a campaign rather than a set adventure path from 1-20 or whatever. To me, the absolute worst of all possible games would be a heavy-crunch railroady megadungeon. As a referee, I have a strong preference for rules light or rules ultra-light games. Immersion first. Play worlds, not rules. And open-world sandboxes. The referee plays the world, the players play their characters. The referee sets up the world, fills it with factions and NPCs, situations and hooks. The PCs react to those elements as they choose. And the referee reacts accordingly, the world changes and presents new elements to the PCs. The PCs react to those elements as they choose. Etc. The game just rolls from there. I'm quite flexible in that I'm not invested in the players doing this or that specific thing and will react to whatever they throw at me, but I'm quite inflexible in that my preferences are set and I've little interest in running games a different way. [/QUOTE]

Verification