Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8707064" data-attributes="member: 6779196">I don’t agree. One can be a neutral referee in a system which favors the players. The result will just be that the players win most of the time. I agree strongly with the first paragraph, but I think the second is a play preference. Again, if the system favors the players (as 5e does), a game run neutrally in that system will result in their characters being the protagonists of the story. I think it’s a great compromise between DMs who want to strive to be neutral arbiters and players who want to play fantastical heroes.Indeed! I’m a big fan of emergent story. I just don’t see anything wrong with the system being set up so that more often than not, the story that emerges will be one where the players’ characters triumphed. The referee isn’t “supposed to” favor one side or the other, but the rules of the game can.Yeah, on that I agree with you for the most part. Though, again, I think a system can (and 5e does) stack things in the players’ favor so that they are likely to come out looking like the epic heroes of the story that emerges when run by a neutral referee. That might not be the aesthetic everyone prefers, but I think it’s a good way to allow referees to meet “OC” players half-way.</blockquote>