Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8959271" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Having an agenda for play is not secret railroading. If it was, then every game would be a railroad because there's always some kind of agenda for play. For example, in my campaign of Spire, the characters were members of a revolutionary group devoted to fighting the ruling class of High Elves in the city of Spire. That's their overall agenda.So, given that... tell me how the campaign went. It's a railroad, right? Tell me what happened. No, people are saying that PC death is not the only consequence that has meaning. That encounters can matter beyond just PC survival. That you fail to see that despite the many times it's been pointed out doesn't change that. Not necessarily. In the Heart RPG, characters often will die (or otherwise have their adventuring career end) when they achieve their ultimate goal. So here you are basically siting &quot;system says&quot; as an element of combat. But when it was used to explain other elements of play, you don't even know what it means. Think of how combat works and how uncertain it is. Now apply that to other areas of play. For both the GM and the players. Ignore the idea that the GM can just do whatever they want whenever... some games and gamers actually frown on that. Imagine if there were rules everyone was expected to follow for how characters interacted socially.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 8959271, member: 6785785"] Having an agenda for play is not secret railroading. If it was, then every game would be a railroad because there's always some kind of agenda for play. For example, in my campaign of Spire, the characters were members of a revolutionary group devoted to fighting the ruling class of High Elves in the city of Spire. That's their overall agenda. So, given that... tell me how the campaign went. It's a railroad, right? Tell me what happened. No, people are saying that PC death is not the only consequence that has meaning. That encounters can matter beyond just PC survival. That you fail to see that despite the many times it's been pointed out doesn't change that. Not necessarily. In the Heart RPG, characters often will die (or otherwise have their adventuring career end) when they achieve their ultimate goal. So here you are basically siting "system says" as an element of combat. But when it was used to explain other elements of play, you don't even know what it means. Think of how combat works and how uncertain it is. Now apply that to other areas of play. For both the GM and the players. Ignore the idea that the GM can just do whatever they want whenever... some games and gamers actually frown on that. Imagine if there were rules everyone was expected to follow for how characters interacted socially. [/QUOTE]

Verification