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
Players choose what their PCs do . . .
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="Campbell" data-source="post: 7644164" data-attributes="member: 16586"><p>I actually consider Pathfinder 2e pretty progressive as far as most mainstream role playing game texts is considered. There is general sense for the most part that the rules should be followed and a healthy respect for following the fiction. No where in the text does it suggest overriding the rules or changing the fiction for the stake of the story. The advice for setting DCs is entirely from the context of the fiction. It also returns time and time again to the idea that the game belongs to the whole group. There are allowances for GM judgement calls, but the examples are always as an advocate for the fiction. I'm a big believer in GM judgement applied in a disciplined way. Although there are continued calls to "the story" the text clarifies that the story is about the player characters and the choices they make. It also makes overtures to several indie techniques like lines and veils, setting stakes, and failing forward. There is also no mention whatsoever about fudging dice rolls. </p><p></p><p>It also generally does a good job of clarifying that it's talking about how to play Pathfinder, not role playing games in general. There's really only one section I find problematic. Here it is:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I have no objections to this as a description of playing Pathfinder. In fact it sounds like a game I could be interested in playing or running. This is not a knock on Pathfinder as a game. Where it falls down is as a description of all roleplaying games. As an example Monsterhearts and Masks are definitively not concerned with overcoming challenges. Like you advocate for your character and we play to find out what happens, but your goal as a player is to play with integrity and passion. Overcoming gamist challenges and skilled play is not really the objective. </p><p></p><p>This can be seen clearly in their experience systems. In Masks you mark potential for failing a roll, opening up to a team mate, for exposing a weakness or vulnerability, and for going along when provoked by a team mate. There are other conditions, but you get the idea. In Pathfinder you get experience for defeating monsters, winning social conflicts, and achieving objectives. I was actually impressed with all the non combat awards, but fundamentally you got rewarded for winning. That's good. Pathfinder is a game about overcoming challenges, but not all roleplaying games are.</p><p></p><p>Basically what I'm saying is that you don't really need to define what a roleplaying game is. You can just define what your game is. I think it's actively helpful to do so because you can clarify exactly how your game is played with less carryover baggage. This is what Masks does. It's actually what Pathfinder does for the most part - just not in that one section, but is far as mainstream texts go it's pretty good in this regard. Far better than most.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Campbell, post: 7644164, member: 16586"] I actually consider Pathfinder 2e pretty progressive as far as most mainstream role playing game texts is considered. There is general sense for the most part that the rules should be followed and a healthy respect for following the fiction. No where in the text does it suggest overriding the rules or changing the fiction for the stake of the story. The advice for setting DCs is entirely from the context of the fiction. It also returns time and time again to the idea that the game belongs to the whole group. There are allowances for GM judgement calls, but the examples are always as an advocate for the fiction. I'm a big believer in GM judgement applied in a disciplined way. Although there are continued calls to "the story" the text clarifies that the story is about the player characters and the choices they make. It also makes overtures to several indie techniques like lines and veils, setting stakes, and failing forward. There is also no mention whatsoever about fudging dice rolls. It also generally does a good job of clarifying that it's talking about how to play Pathfinder, not role playing games in general. There's really only one section I find problematic. Here it is: I have no objections to this as a description of playing Pathfinder. In fact it sounds like a game I could be interested in playing or running. This is not a knock on Pathfinder as a game. Where it falls down is as a description of all roleplaying games. As an example Monsterhearts and Masks are definitively not concerned with overcoming challenges. Like you advocate for your character and we play to find out what happens, but your goal as a player is to play with integrity and passion. Overcoming gamist challenges and skilled play is not really the objective. This can be seen clearly in their experience systems. In Masks you mark potential for failing a roll, opening up to a team mate, for exposing a weakness or vulnerability, and for going along when provoked by a team mate. There are other conditions, but you get the idea. In Pathfinder you get experience for defeating monsters, winning social conflicts, and achieving objectives. I was actually impressed with all the non combat awards, but fundamentally you got rewarded for winning. That's good. Pathfinder is a game about overcoming challenges, but not all roleplaying games are. Basically what I'm saying is that you don't really need to define what a roleplaying game is. You can just define what your game is. I think it's actively helpful to do so because you can clarify exactly how your game is played with less carryover baggage. This is what Masks does. It's actually what Pathfinder does for the most part - just not in that one section, but is far as mainstream texts go it's pretty good in this regard. Far better than most. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Players choose what their PCs do . . .
Top