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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="robertsconley" data-source="post: 9651613" data-attributes="member: 13383">I’ll be straight with you, I’ll answer your question, but I do want to point out something first. The way it’s phrased feels like it assumes I don’t accept other valid playstyles unless I say so here. That makes it harder to write a clean answer. I’m not upset, but I think it’s important to explain where I’m coming from before continuing.Sure, but focusing on that misses the larger point I was making.I think we’re both successful in producing the same kind of feeling for our players—mystery, weight, discovery, and character engagement. But that doesn’t mean our approaches are the same.Upthread, I went into detail about how I accomplish this in my Living World sandbox campaigns: how prep, impartial adjudication, a consistent world state, and emergent consequences support that feeling. I also analyzed how Torchbearer accomplishes this differently, like with conflict-driven mechanics.With your approach, I see the effect you’re describing, but I don’t yet have a clear picture of the process that produces it. If you’ve already laid that out and I missed it, my apologies. But if you walk me through what it is you do, I think we could pinpoint where our methods differ and what the consequences of those differences are, like I did with Torchbearer.And to touch on your initial comments, I firmly believe that when it comes to creativity, different techniques aren’t inherently good, neutral, or bad, they simply have consequences. If the consequences of a given approach or mechanic strengthen your creative goals, then that’s a success, regardless of the form it takes.</blockquote>

Verification