Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
"Illusionism" and "GM force" in RPGing
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7920575" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>I still disagree the Golden Rule Zero (GRZ) is solely about enabling Force and not also a reaction to strictly codified rules play where nothing happens except if the rule say so, another current of the time that turn of the decade (70s/80s) was a reaction to.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I, honestly, have a hard time taking Pulsipher as a good source, given his inability to see any other kinds of gaming, sometimes even to recognize it. Pulsipher's more recent writing have indicated that even games like Burning Wheel do not meet his definitions of RPGs. I see him more as someone that had a strong opinion that happened to be a good one rather than a deep thinker that improved the discussion around RPGs through theory. My take, and a bit off topic.</p><p></p><p>That said, yes, there's a break in how you can approach gaming. Pulsipher was strongly for prep and no Force, but it's hard to say that the original material was so far in that corner.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure.</p><p></p><p>This is as much Force as denying the request, though. If, in the moment, the GM is placing blockers to corral the players in the direction the GM wants, that's Force. If the GM placed the blocker in prep, then it may be Force, depending on if it's intent is to corral to desired ends or a legitimate encounter/obstacle that can be circumvented or used by clever players. If the GM placed the blocker due to a failed roll involving exploration of that fork, then it's not Force, it's the GM responding to the failure to thwart the intent of the players, not insert his own intent.</p><p></p><p>I don't see how ignoring an application of Force if it's according to some principle or only occasionally used or if the players like it is helpful at all -- it dilutes the definition of Force from a useful description of a technique to an arbitrary derogative in situations we don't like. Force is a tool -- one that's easily abused -- and how/when it's used shouldn't change it's nature.</p><p></p><p>Nope, Gygax is advocating for Force. It doesn't become not Force if it's in pursuit of certain play aesthetics. Again, either Force is a defined tool or it's just an arbitrary label for play we don't like. I'm perfectly OK with Gygax advocating for Force, here. Force is, indeed, a useful tool in a lot of D&D or D&D-like play because the mechanics are generally pass/fail with fail being often related to character death. Smudging the corners a bit is a good tool, as Gygax notes here. Doesn't mean that it becomes not Force because you have a good reason. Rather, it's still Force, just employed for a good reason.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7920575, member: 16814"] I still disagree the Golden Rule Zero (GRZ) is solely about enabling Force and not also a reaction to strictly codified rules play where nothing happens except if the rule say so, another current of the time that turn of the decade (70s/80s) was a reaction to. I, honestly, have a hard time taking Pulsipher as a good source, given his inability to see any other kinds of gaming, sometimes even to recognize it. Pulsipher's more recent writing have indicated that even games like Burning Wheel do not meet his definitions of RPGs. I see him more as someone that had a strong opinion that happened to be a good one rather than a deep thinker that improved the discussion around RPGs through theory. My take, and a bit off topic. That said, yes, there's a break in how you can approach gaming. Pulsipher was strongly for prep and no Force, but it's hard to say that the original material was so far in that corner. Sure. This is as much Force as denying the request, though. If, in the moment, the GM is placing blockers to corral the players in the direction the GM wants, that's Force. If the GM placed the blocker in prep, then it may be Force, depending on if it's intent is to corral to desired ends or a legitimate encounter/obstacle that can be circumvented or used by clever players. If the GM placed the blocker due to a failed roll involving exploration of that fork, then it's not Force, it's the GM responding to the failure to thwart the intent of the players, not insert his own intent. I don't see how ignoring an application of Force if it's according to some principle or only occasionally used or if the players like it is helpful at all -- it dilutes the definition of Force from a useful description of a technique to an arbitrary derogative in situations we don't like. Force is a tool -- one that's easily abused -- and how/when it's used shouldn't change it's nature. Nope, Gygax is advocating for Force. It doesn't become not Force if it's in pursuit of certain play aesthetics. Again, either Force is a defined tool or it's just an arbitrary label for play we don't like. I'm perfectly OK with Gygax advocating for Force, here. Force is, indeed, a useful tool in a lot of D&D or D&D-like play because the mechanics are generally pass/fail with fail being often related to character death. Smudging the corners a bit is a good tool, as Gygax notes here. Doesn't mean that it becomes not Force because you have a good reason. Rather, it's still Force, just employed for a good reason. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
"Illusionism" and "GM force" in RPGing
Top