Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AlViking" data-source="post: 9620733" data-attributes="member: 6906980">He didn't really explain anything. He threw in a comment about a session 0 that I agree with and then ignored the statement with the rest of the comment.&nbsp; But this was in a game where he thought the whole point of his game was to kill of 3 characters because everybody rallied around it.&nbsp; In a 1-shot with throw-away characters I might enjoy that kind of&nbsp; game if I knew what was happening going in because it has zero long term impact.&nbsp; Then he just goes back to doubling down on old school adversarial GMing &quot; the GM's goal should be defeating or foiling the players. &quot; Which is one way of playing the game but is not the one true way that he touts.He also said nothing about calling other types of game a time-wasting slop if you don't play his way.&nbsp; There wasn't anything new here.&nbsp; There was a bit of explanation of the game he ran and then he doubled down on his statements that a good game will always be adversarial and made it clear that killing off multiple characters was an example of a great game. There wasn't anything new.For reference it's here <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/mike-mearls-d-d-is-uncool-again.711123/post-9620122" target="_blank">WotC - Mike Mearls: &quot;D&amp;D Is Uncool Again&quot;</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="AlViking, post: 9620733, member: 6906980"] He didn't really explain anything. He threw in a comment about a session 0 that I agree with and then ignored the statement with the rest of the comment. But this was in a game where he thought the whole point of his game was to kill of 3 characters because everybody rallied around it. In a 1-shot with throw-away characters I might enjoy that kind of game if I knew what was happening going in because it has zero long term impact. Then he just goes back to doubling down on old school adversarial GMing " the GM's goal should be defeating or foiling the players. " Which is one way of playing the game but is not the one true way that he touts. He also said nothing about calling other types of game a time-wasting slop if you don't play his way. There wasn't anything new here. There was a bit of explanation of the game he ran and then he doubled down on his statements that a good game will always be adversarial and made it clear that killing off multiple characters was an example of a great game. There wasn't anything new. For reference it's here [URL='https://www.enworld.org/threads/mike-mearls-d-d-is-uncool-again.711123/post-9620122']WotC - Mike Mearls: "D&D Is Uncool Again"[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification