D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Thomas Shey]

I don't know. I've seen social groups break down from both.

It can happen both ways, but a single player is, in practice, usually more easy to dispose of than the GM. The usual times its a problem is when the player is one that everyone (or at least the GM) has a strong reason to keep (and usually beyond just "He's our friend"). Though not the only cases, a player who supplies the place to play or provides transport for the GM has more functional heft than a routine player.

,Admittedly the GM has more authority within the game, but that is contingent on the group buying in.

Yeah, but its still the case that a lot of people are taught (at least passively) to put up with a lot from GMs that they wouldn't from a random player. I think to act like that isn't true would be kind of a hot take.

A much bigger problem is when you have, say, a GM and five players, and three of the players are pulling in different directions than the other two and the GM (and probably different than each other). But at that point it stops being about individual problems and starts being about a bad group dynamic in general.

 

[AnotherGuy]

The first two sessions I ran it as a Living World sandbox, but both the players and I saw the friction. After session two, we talked, and I shifted my approach. I now treat the monthly campaign much like a boffer LARP event, logistically planned, high-engagement sessions that require different techniques. I won’t get into the details here, but the format has been working well, and it allows me to meet the table’s needs without abandoning my values as a referee.
It’s not unlike an adventure path, but with my own design layered in. A lot of it is about staging dramatic set pieces, like running a big location from Goodman Games’ Dark Tower.

I'd say out of the two, your monthly campaign comes closer to how I run things for my bi-weekly game, with differences of course.

You're still missing my point. This isn’t about whether Pemerton’s campaigns are inconsistent. I’ve said multiple times that his methods make sense within his own framework. In addition his use of plausibility and consistency seems to make sense. However, it is also clear that he prioritizes things differently than I do in his campaigns.

I agree with your this far.

That refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of structurally distinct approaches is the actual problem.

Although it is true I have not read enough of the exchanges (likely less than what I should have), but I think highlighting internal consistency & plausibility etc is not what should be the centre of your (you and his) discussion.
I think that is where things get caught in the cross-hairs.
And the reason for this is that then it seems to be a contest of who has the most plausible or consistent campaign which it should not be.
See below.

Except you are, by repeatedly focusing on surface similarities and refusing to engage with the differences others have pointed out. For example, one of my creative goals is to bring the world to life in a way that makes the players feel like they’ve visited it as their characters. That’s fundamentally different from what Luke Crane describes in Burning Wheel, where the focus is on beliefs, drama, and moral conflict. Both are legitimate. But they’re different in kind, not just in method.

Ok, how is the bolded for emphasis accomplished in your campaign?

Thanks for sharing that, it gives me a better picture of your table’s dynamics. From what you've described, your methods seem to align well with your goals. But I don’t see how this supports your earlier points. Listing shared techniques doesn’t address the structural distinctions we’ve been discussing. That’s the core of the disagreement.

I think the core disagreement (willing to be corrected) is this appeal to internal consistency or plausibility. This isn't where you two differ I feel.

You see, both of you can frame the exact same scenario but how you adjudicate the player's declarations and how that plays out (consequences etc) may reflect the difference in techniques/approaches, but both of you would create a plausible and internally consistent storyline. That is why I said upthread this should not be the focus.
I'm not sure if I'm being clear enough in this regard.

 

[AlViking]

And yet you raised nary an eyebrow when @robertsconley stated that he did exactly this and that it was expected that the same DM running both groups would have radically different campaigns.

You cut out the part where he clarified that it was extremely unlikely that two groups would make exactly the same decisions. Which is what I've seen. Same setting, same NPCs, factions and initial opportunities, different campaigns. The only thing in common was the initial setup.

 

[JConstantine]

By actor stance, author stance and director stance, do you mean this?

Broadly speaking, yes. Though a lot of elements that originated on the Forge morph due to imprecise usage in the broader RPG community (such as the exasperating conflation of Narrativist with narrative).

When I play Thurgon and Aedhros, I am playing in actor stance - I make decisions using knowledge and perceptions that my character would have. [snip]
On the other hand, it seems to me that a good chunk of "sandbox" play of a trad(ish) sort happens in author stance.

I don't doubt. Though I would point out that I did mention my observations were from outside ENWorld.
Further, I'd say almost every player actually uses each stance, varying in amount by playstyle and system used. Classic/player-challenge-based play seems mostly dominated by pawn stance, for example, but that doesn't mean the players never enter actor stance. Meanwhile, a common trend among BitD players is to deliberately get their first trauma as soon as possible in order to get another XP trigger, i.e. author stance, but they'll still roleplay in actor stance. Your specific observation about trad play mostly occurs before the first session, but I generally don't run the standard fantasy adventure party as a sandbox, preferring a non-linear railroad (what @zakael19 called rivers and lakes) for D&D.

Note that actor stance and director stance can occur simultaneously

Your example is more expansive of director stance than my understanding of it, but I agree it's possible for multiple stances to occur simultaneously. FFG's Star Wars, and it's use of the Destiny meta-currency is better example of system facilitated director stance, in my mind. But I'd say the prime example of director stance is how Fiasco is supposed to be played.

 

[JConstantine]

My approach is something of a hybrid. It definitely puts a great deal of emphasis on sects and characters (think any classic Shaw brothers martial arts movie with feuding groups of martial artists), and so in that sense it is closer to a Vampire the Masquerade sandbox than an OD&D sandbox. But dungeons and travel can be important. I do not do hex crawls (at least as I understand that term) but I do use hexes and don’t gloss over travel. So if the characters have to travel 90 miles to Dee, that is about three hexes on the map.

That emphasis on characters and sects is what I was focussed on, coupled with your talk about running mafia campaigns (and what is Vampire if not a supernatural mafia game?), led me to perhaps assume there was slightly more overlap with my own style than is necessarily accurate.

Dungeons are also important. One of the things I wanted to do with the setting was shoe dungeons are a big part of the genre (because I felt peopke downplayed this aspect of it).

I must admit, I don't generally think of dungeons when it comes to wuxia. My immediate thought is action driven by ambition and interpersonal drama: Immortal Sword Goddess wanting to prove she's the greatest martial artist; The Wheel King doing whatever it takes to get the Buddhist remains to cure his castration; the wise master needing to die for the hero to finally grasp that last lesson, etc. But the ancient city uncovered by the sandstorm in Flying Swords of Dragon Gate is clearly a D&D style dungeon, and I guess that undercity in Mystery of the Phantom Flame would count.

I am not being systematic when I run a game. I am going largely by feel and what seems like it would happen (i.e. how does Iron God Meng feel about the party’s betrayal, what would he do. I think a lot of it really revolves around a kind of instant characterization and immersion by GM into NPCs. It isn’t about long sequences of RP but just knowing what that character is thinking and feeling and seeing the game from their POV (you just feel it, like the blues)

This is precisely how I approach my V:TM sandbox.

 

[Bedrockgames]

That emphasis on characters and sects is what I was focussed on, coupled with your talk about running mafia campaigns (and what is Vampire if not a supernatural mafia game?), led me to perhaps assume there was slightly more overlap with my own style than is necessarily accurate.

I must admit, I don't generally think of dungeons when it comes to wuxia. My immediate thought is action driven by ambition and interpersonal drama: Immortal Sword Goddess wanting to prove she's the greatest martial artist; The Wheel King doing whatever it takes to get the Buddhist remains to cure his castration; the wise master needing to die for the hero to finally grasp that last lesson, etc. But the ancient city uncovered by the sandstorm in Flying Swords of Dragon Gate is clearly a D&D style dungeon, and I guess that undercity in Mystery of the Phantom Flame would count.

A lot of people associate it more with character drama, and that is fair because it has a lot of character drama. But while Flying Swords of Dragon Gate was an influence, I had mind what you see in old wuxia movies like Web of Death, Dragon Swamp, House of Traps, The Brave Archer series, etc. If you go back and watch those older films you will frequently see that sort of thing. Or movies like Swordsman II and Bride with White Hair (especially the sequel). Even the residence halls of great masters almost have the feel of a dungeon in many of the climaxes of these movies. And the stories of Jin Yong or Gu Long. You also see them in wuxia TV series. You often see things like tombs or chambers where the heroes find manuals. They are adventure stories so they can support a lot of different elements. I am in the middle of a lot at the moment, but at some point I will try to track down some more examples of what I mean from movies.

What I like about wuxia is you can do something very focused on character drama, but there is also room for a tomb trapped with baths of acid and nine fired dragon canons.

 

[JConstantine]

I had mind what you see in old wuxia movies like Web of Death, Dragon Swamp, House of Traps, The Brave Archer series, etc.

I only really started watching wuxia with Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (like oh so many Westerners, I expect), so I'm only really familiar with the modern wire-fu films.

They are adventure stories so they can support a lot of different elements.

Yeah, I kinda consider wuxia films - I guess especially the older stuff - to basically be the Chinese equivalent of the Ray Harryhausen flicks.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I only really started watching wuxia with Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (like oh so many Westerners, I expect), so I'm only really familiar with the modern wire-fu films.

Cool. Reign of Assassins is one of my favorite movies by the way (since you mentioned that). I do think more recent stuff leans more that way for sure. I would need to look at a list of movies and see which of the more modern ones might have the kinds of things I am talking about.

Yeah, I kinda consider wuxia films - I guess especially the older stuff - to basically be the Chinese equivalent of the Ray Harryhausen flicks.

that is a good comparison. They make very good use of sets. So a lot of them feature locations that can easily be used as inspiration for dungeons.

 

[J.Quondam]

That's not what the articles say. What have you seen that says differently?

"Their research leads them to believe there is a 99.7% chance that the molecules they see could lead to there being life." 99.7% chance that those molecules mean life.

A lot of pop science articles (and even researcher PRs) are notoriously bad about sensationalist headlines and overstating the importance of results, no thanks to our click-hungry online media environment. Anyway, here's a few non-paywalled articles that go into a little more in depth on that particular research:

Spoiler: because it's long-ish and off-topic

TL;DR: The 99.7% number applies to detecting those molecules in that planet's atmosphere; and there's plenty of debate among scientists if that result is legit and what it means. On earth, those molecules are associated with biological processes, so the authors' opinion is that the detection is strong evidence of life on that planet - but that's not at all a consensus viewpoint.

Here's a couple fairly thorough article explicitly separating the molecular detection from the inference that it means life:

Scientists find promising hints of life on distant planet K2-18b

Scientists find new but tentative evidence that a faraway world orbiting another star may be home to life.

www.bbc.com

A key quote: "The Cambridge group has found that the atmosphere seems to contain the chemical signature of at least one of two molecules that are associated with life: dimethyl sulphide (DMS) and dimethyl disulphide (DMDS). On Earth, these gases are produced by marine phytoplankton and bacteria. [...] "So, if the association with life is real, then this planet will be teeming with life," he added.​

Strongest Evidence of Alien Life Yet Found 124 Light-Years Away

Astronomers announced Thursday that they had detected the most promising "hints" of potential life on a planet beyond our Solar System, though other scientists expressed scepticism.

www.sciencealert.com

A key quote: "They found much stronger signs of the chemicals, though still well below the "five sigma" threshold of statistical significance scientists seek for such discoveries. [...] Even if the results are confirmed, it would not necessarily mean that the planet is home to life."​

This article focuses on the debate about the findings themselves (not all scientists agree the molecules in question have even been detected), as well as how the story has been framed:

Did the James Webb telescope really discover aliens? Here's the truth about K2-18b.

A study suggesting the exoplanet K2-18b may contain potential signs of alien life has been met with skepticism from the scientific community. Here’s the truth about what the James Webb Space Telescope saw.

www.livescience.com

A key quote: "Nikku Madhusudhan, lead author of both Cambridge studies, stressed that no actual life has been detected on K2-18b yet. "That's not what we're claiming," Madhusudhan, a professor of astrophysics at Cambridge, told Live Science. "But in the best-case scenario, it's the potential for life."​

And with that, i'll stop the OT posts.

 

[Faolyn]

And yet that's exactly the response we've seen in this very thread.

A Warlord creature being able to just make someone afraid? Utterly ridiculous.

Saying that that Warlord creature is actually magical--without even a moment spent on what kind of magic, or how it works, or whether it's a spell or just some other supernatural phenomenon, etc., etc.--and suddenly the criticisms disappear, such that I (and others) pointing out the problem had to consistently say "...not caused by magic" and other similar clauses.

It really is the case that magic gets an instant and almost universal get-out-of-explanation-free card.

It's not utterly ridiculous. You just won't accept any answer that doesn't match what you believe is correct. You said elsewhere that you give detailed answers because otherwise "no discussion would happen." But we can't have a discussion with you because you can't accept any viewpoint but your own is correct.

I gave you my reasoning for the frightened condition vs. the duel of wits and said, repeatedly, that I was talking about what was happening with game mechanics. You kept trying to drag the real world into it, despite that not being what the issue was about. You wanted to know how to deal with a railroading GM. I gave you multiple ideas. The only thing you would accept, as it turns out, is a total apology from them.

Perhaps, if you truly want a discussion, you should learn to accept other people's beliefs and words instead of insisting that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.