Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 9343421" data-attributes="member: 6795602">I can see introducing the unwelcome being applicable to early d&amp;d combat and dungeon/world design as well.&nbsp; Except it’s just as much about introducing the exceptionally welcome as the unwelcome.&nbsp; So I don’t quite agree that it wasn’t present early on, but at this point it’s basically just an ideal that really good and really bad things shouldn’t just happen, there should be some structure/process to get there. I find this part pointlessly inflammatory. I find most players in my 5e games quite willing to put their characters on the line.&nbsp; Even intentionally sacrificing them at times for story reasons, such as buying time/etc. Presumably there’s a difference in system blocking and the DM blocking.&nbsp; Yet, in the systems in question the DM has wide latitude in determining consequences when the system says there should be one.&nbsp; So much latitude and consequences coming up so regularly that I’d argue the GM can force just about anything he wants to eventually happen. I think they can be, though principles in some games could be argued to solve this potential issue.&nbsp; D&amp;D doesn’t mention any such principles, but most ‘good’ DMing styles have their own implicit principles that prevent this. I don’t agree here either.&nbsp; The games in question don’t have specific fiction that must be produced, and what you can say isn’t compelled, albeit both have restrictions, then that isn’t a railroad. Some fiction must happen. That doesn’t mean this particular fiction must happen.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 9343421, member: 6795602"] I can see introducing the unwelcome being applicable to early d&d combat and dungeon/world design as well. Except it’s just as much about introducing the exceptionally welcome as the unwelcome. So I don’t quite agree that it wasn’t present early on, but at this point it’s basically just an ideal that really good and really bad things shouldn’t just happen, there should be some structure/process to get there. I find this part pointlessly inflammatory. I find most players in my 5e games quite willing to put their characters on the line. Even intentionally sacrificing them at times for story reasons, such as buying time/etc. Presumably there’s a difference in system blocking and the DM blocking. Yet, in the systems in question the DM has wide latitude in determining consequences when the system says there should be one. So much latitude and consequences coming up so regularly that I’d argue the GM can force just about anything he wants to eventually happen. I think they can be, though principles in some games could be argued to solve this potential issue. D&D doesn’t mention any such principles, but most ‘good’ DMing styles have their own implicit principles that prevent this. I don’t agree here either. The games in question don’t have specific fiction that must be produced, and what you can say isn’t compelled, albeit both have restrictions, then that isn’t a railroad. Some fiction must happen. That doesn’t mean this particular fiction must happen. [/QUOTE]

Verification