Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="payn" data-source="post: 9261164" data-attributes="member: 90374">This is really an interesting question. I tend to take cues from the folks im playing with. If they are the character sheet holds all the answers types, I know its going to be a pretty literal interpretation of the ruleset. Though, other folks are very comfortable with ambiguity and vagueness. I suppose that's going to happen over 50 years of moving between rulings over rules back and forth. The templates folks form die hard. I recall a number of old school GMs in 3E that thought wealth by level was pure poppycock. That magic items are a luxury, not an entitlement. They didnt understand the mechanics of the game, they just played it according to their formation years. Which is why the meme, &quot;nobody reads the DMG&quot; exists. Folks have been mostly able to play their way for decades. When their way is most interfered with, is when they complain about editions most.I have a bit of a hybrid approach to skills. I like the literal interpretation for things like jumping a gap. Just find the appropriate skill and attribute, and make the check. Though, something like negotiating a contract is an entirely different ballpark. Here I tend to loosen up and look to the player to drive some creativity amongst the narrative. Its not a simple skill check and done, but a series of negotiations between GM and player. These are pretty clear examples, but it can get a bit blurry in practice over the myriad of situations a game will encounter.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="payn, post: 9261164, member: 90374"] This is really an interesting question. I tend to take cues from the folks im playing with. If they are the character sheet holds all the answers types, I know its going to be a pretty literal interpretation of the ruleset. Though, other folks are very comfortable with ambiguity and vagueness. I suppose that's going to happen over 50 years of moving between rulings over rules back and forth. The templates folks form die hard. I recall a number of old school GMs in 3E that thought wealth by level was pure poppycock. That magic items are a luxury, not an entitlement. They didnt understand the mechanics of the game, they just played it according to their formation years. Which is why the meme, "nobody reads the DMG" exists. Folks have been mostly able to play their way for decades. When their way is most interfered with, is when they complain about editions most. I have a bit of a hybrid approach to skills. I like the literal interpretation for things like jumping a gap. Just find the appropriate skill and attribute, and make the check. Though, something like negotiating a contract is an entirely different ballpark. Here I tend to loosen up and look to the player to drive some creativity amongst the narrative. Its not a simple skill check and done, but a series of negotiations between GM and player. These are pretty clear examples, but it can get a bit blurry in practice over the myriad of situations a game will encounter. [/QUOTE]

Verification