Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RFisher" data-source="post: 1658105" data-attributes="member: 3608">Well, the rulings don't have to stand up to scrutiny by anyone outside the group, so they don't need to be any more expert than the knowledge available in the group. Less so since the players should be willing to compromise their own perceptions a bit. It's the referees world, so it operates by his fundementals laws. Though referees should likewise give due consideration to player...questioning of those laws.I guess one big difference in my play style from my younger, more argumentative days, is that I don't assume my understanding of how the world works matches the DM's. I tend to ask the DM questions to understand how things work in his world before trying things. &quot;Do I think I'd be able to...?&quot;We played free form campaigns. Some of them had plenty of dungeon crawling.Yep. Those problems occur no matter how heavy your ruleset is. So, a heavy ruleset appears to not be a solution to those problems. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I've certainly shared such concerns about free form style, even (or maybe especially) using just a free form magic system in an otherwise more structured system. In practice, however, I've found free form games or elements to not be significantly more subject to such problems.I'm not saying free form is the one true way. Heck, the majority of the games I've played have not been heavily free form, and I don't expect that to change. Although, these days the way I run any system leans a bit more towards a free form style.Free form may not work for everyone or for every group, but I think there are a lot of groups that it would work for if they'd give it a try.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="RFisher, post: 1658105, member: 3608"] Well, the rulings don't have to stand up to scrutiny by anyone outside the group, so they don't need to be any more expert than the knowledge available in the group. Less so since the players should be willing to compromise their own perceptions a bit. It's the referees world, so it operates by his fundementals laws. Though referees should likewise give due consideration to player...questioning of those laws. I guess one big difference in my play style from my younger, more argumentative days, is that I don't assume my understanding of how the world works matches the DM's. I tend to ask the DM questions to understand how things work in his world [i]before[/i] trying things. "Do I think I'd be able to...?" We played free form campaigns. Some of them had plenty of dungeon crawling. Yep. Those problems occur no matter how heavy your ruleset is. So, a heavy ruleset appears to not be a solution to those problems. :) I've certainly shared such concerns about free form style, even (or maybe especially) using just a free form magic system in an otherwise more structured system. In practice, however, I've found free form games or elements to not be significantly more subject to such problems. I'm not saying free form is the one true way. Heck, the majority of the games I've played have [i]not[/i] been heavily free form, and I don't expect that to change. Although, these days the way I run any system leans a bit more towards a free form style. Free form may not work for everyone or for every group, but I think there are a lot of groups that it [i]would[/i] work for if they'd give it a try. [/QUOTE]

Verification