Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8626987" data-attributes="member: 6785785">I think that a lot of it boils down to expectations. D&D has, over the course of many editions/iterations/changes for personal preference, become a game that allows for many approaches. If you look at the earliest editions of the game, there are deliberate processes. Exploration turns and random encounters and inventory management and so on. The game worked a specific way as presented (although at times the presentation was poor, but the intention was for the game to be played a certain way). As we've moved through editions, that's changed, and a variety of ways to play have emerged. This has led to the latest edition which essentially eschews committing to any specific approach and instead attempts to allow for them all. This has then created the expectation that all RPGs should function similarly. That they should allow for a variety of approaches to play. And so that must be true of games that use Story Now, right? But I don't think that's true. The games I know that use Story Now have specific instructions on how to play. There are procedures that are explicit and expected. So because D&D "may" or "can" do something, people fail to see the difference with a game that MUST do those things.</blockquote>