Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8640253" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Right. I think, particularly in a fairly common school of play with D&D, there's this kind of murky mix where if the backstory/fiction isn't all out of the hands of the players and often hidden from them, then the game is 'easy' or 'lacks surprise/danger/drama'. At the same time, if its too nailed down, then there's no way to present that story, and the game 'lacks verisimilitude'. If it employs ANY kind of non-concrete mechanics on the player side, then its 'not immersive', but no amount of completely arranged nonsense counts as that, as long as the GM can lampshade it as "just the story" (GM authored fiction). Its a kind of unspoken set of laws where there's one right way to play, which is approximately what 5e is optimized for. All other ways are 'wrong' in some fashion or other. Anything that smells of Narrativist play at all is double plus wrong! Its kind of a default mindset, and a lot of arguments seem to just assume the 'truths' that are espoused there. One myth is certainly the "Only preauthored fictional position can possibly matter, making it up on the fly is 'cheap'."</p></blockquote><p></p>