NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8497697" data-attributes="member: 16814">You seem to be describing the exact thing I'm talking about as if it rebuts it.  If the GM is free to decide whatever they want at whatever moment, then as a player I'm unmoored in being able to predict what result a given action will have.  I don't know if the GM is going to be sticking to a process or just going with the flow or some other thing and so play becomes not one where the player is trying to engage with the fiction and the system and forge forwards but rather one where the player is engaged with the GM and trying to slant to get the GM to decide in a way favorable to the player.  That this argument is also one that goes straight to "system doesn't matter" should be apparent, and thus dismisses any argument that this is a D&D based argument -- it works as well in any other system.  That said, there's no reason to avoid this if it's what the table enjoys.  It's not wrong.  I just don't understand it's usefulness in a discussion of how different approaches to the game can work and what differentiates them.  This argument starts by dismissing that as a useful consideration and just goes with the approach "let the GM tell you what's happening."  It's usually paired with some exhortation to "trust the GM," but I find that to be a trivial statement -- I'm not really going to be long playing in any kind of game where I don't trust the participants.</blockquote>

Verification