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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7582536" data-attributes="member: 16814">There are some techniques that you can use.  Frame scenes that require action, for one.  If you say, "You've entered the town, what do you do," you'll get blank looks.  If you instead just frame, "As you enter town, you see a female elf being dragged off down an alleyway by some black masked thugs, what do you do?" you'll get a more involved response.5e as a system fights pretty hard against more player focused techniques.  It lacks a general resolution system for conflicts, instead using a process-sim approach of using resolution for the atomic actions instead of the situation.  This isn't bad -- I'm running 5e right now and having a blast.  But it does mean that it doesn't really work as well as other systems for a tightly interlocked player-agenda-driven game where the GM puts the players' agendas in constant danger.  Again, not a dig, just a truth.  5e does other things really, really well, hence why it's the 8,000 pound (sic) gorilla on the game market.You can do some things that are more player driven, though it requires the GM to shoulder even more burden due to the system mastery it requires to be able to improvise challenges quickly.  There's some things that can help, like adopting a Skill Challenge framework, but you need to get buy-in from players for these kinds of things.  I have a recent bit of play I posted in another thread that shows how I ran a recent 5e game in a more open style, but, as my party levels, that will become increasingly difficult to do as prep becomes more complex.  Still, the advice to frame scenes that require action rather than bland scenes with nothing obvious is a good one to start moving towards getting players to engage with declared actions rather than waiting for things to happen to them.</blockquote>

Verification