Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 9547823" data-attributes="member: 5142">I'm not sure if I would say "worse," but IME I don't necessarily think that it fundamentally solves anything because all else being equal, nothing fundamentally changes. The barbarian may benefit from your more open approach but so does the mage. It feels a bit like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. The core problem persists. I'm honestly not sure what you are talking about. I would not describe table-based rulings as being motivated by a "strict anti-metagaming attitude" or having anything to do with "Mother, May I?" It generally derives from a desire to shift rulings from the sole purview of the GM to the collective table of game participants, even if the GM remains the final arbiter. For example, this is an attitude that one sees in how the rules of games like Fate and Fabula Ultima are written.</blockquote>