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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="John Morrow" data-source="post: 2393685" data-attributes="member: 27012">It also removes a huge portion of the game from reliance on a GM's judgement.The degree of subjectivity matters.  It's not a matter of escaping subjectivity entirely but reducing or limiting.I'm not talking about quibbling about an extra +2 circumstance bonus.  I'm talking about whether a 40 foot fall should leave a character largely unharmed, badly wounded, or dead.  If a system has no falling rules, the GM's assessment covers that entire range of options which is quite a bit larger than a +2 circumstance bonus, correct?Often, yes.  Nobody expects perfection.  But the reason why complex rules are usually complex is because they have specific procedures for handling specific situational conditions.  Applying them can be entirely objective to the point where two players could run a combat between their PCs without any GM judgement calls in some cases.  In many ways, the Internet is the land of the excluded middle argument -- all or nothing.  But in this situation, degrees matter.  Both objectivity and subjectivity have costs and create problems.  Where you set the bar along that scale will determine what problems and benefits you get.It all depends on why your role-play.  All of those things were real enough problems that they've ruined games for the people that cited them.  In most people's book, things that ruin the enjoyment of the participants are generally considered "problems".  As for basing assessments only on the situation and setting, that's what dice are for and even if the decision is otherwise subjective, the feel of a GMs subjective decisions will vary greatly depending on the factors that they base that subjetive decision on.</blockquote>

Verification