Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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
*Dungeons & Dragons
[rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.
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="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9653648" data-attributes="member: 6785785"><p>Please stop telling me what I like and dislike. I have told you repeatedly that I sometimes play games very much like the ones you're talking about.</p><p></p><p>It's not about liking or disliking. It's about recognizing what is happening at the table, and what the design choices allow to happen at the table.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You're focusing on the wrong thing. No one is saying that the GM can't or shouldn't give his NPCs strong traits. What we're saying is that those traits impact how the play of the game can function and so must be considered.</p><p></p><p>In and of itself, it's not really a problem to make a guard totally loyal to their liege. Indeed, such people are likely to exist. However, the way that this is presented in play, how it impacts the interactions of the players with this NPC, how it interacts with other setting elements, and <strong>most importantly how it interacts with other decisions that the GM has made</strong>... all of that matters.</p><p></p><p>It's my contention that the GM should be very aware of these things.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think that the GM considering the play implications of NPCs he designs to be all that restrictive on his creativity. </p><p></p><p>And it's not about being a jerk. Might someone willfully block players? Yes, of course... that person's a poor GM or is GMing poorly in that moment, at least. I'm more concerned with those who create these situations without realizing it. And given the lack of understanding about this topic in this thread, I think that's a relevant concern. </p><p></p><p>Now, again... if what you're talking about is what you prefer, then that's perfectly fine. But from my view, it's placing the GM's freedom above that of the players, and the setting above the game. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, and to what purpose? </p><p></p><p>Someone recently asked me, is the setting there to serve the game, or is the game there to serve the setting? That seems valid here. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure, I get that you fail to see it. But do you think people who are saying that they enjoy such games are lying to you? Or are they just wrong about what they enjoy?</p><p></p><p>Maybe consider what they're saying and accept that it's true for them, and then maybe try to imagine why it would be so. </p><p></p><p>If you can't, then sure, stop worrying about it and ask again in the next thread.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 9653648, member: 6785785"] Please stop telling me what I like and dislike. I have told you repeatedly that I sometimes play games very much like the ones you're talking about. It's not about liking or disliking. It's about recognizing what is happening at the table, and what the design choices allow to happen at the table. You're focusing on the wrong thing. No one is saying that the GM can't or shouldn't give his NPCs strong traits. What we're saying is that those traits impact how the play of the game can function and so must be considered. In and of itself, it's not really a problem to make a guard totally loyal to their liege. Indeed, such people are likely to exist. However, the way that this is presented in play, how it impacts the interactions of the players with this NPC, how it interacts with other setting elements, and [B]most importantly how it interacts with other decisions that the GM has made[/B]... all of that matters. It's my contention that the GM should be very aware of these things. I don't think that the GM considering the play implications of NPCs he designs to be all that restrictive on his creativity. And it's not about being a jerk. Might someone willfully block players? Yes, of course... that person's a poor GM or is GMing poorly in that moment, at least. I'm more concerned with those who create these situations without realizing it. And given the lack of understanding about this topic in this thread, I think that's a relevant concern. Now, again... if what you're talking about is what you prefer, then that's perfectly fine. But from my view, it's placing the GM's freedom above that of the players, and the setting above the game. Yes, and to what purpose? Someone recently asked me, is the setting there to serve the game, or is the game there to serve the setting? That seems valid here. Sure, I get that you fail to see it. But do you think people who are saying that they enjoy such games are lying to you? Or are they just wrong about what they enjoy? Maybe consider what they're saying and accept that it's true for them, and then maybe try to imagine why it would be so. If you can't, then sure, stop worrying about it and ask again in the next thread. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.
Top