Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 9500794" data-attributes="member: 70468">I haven’t read the thread because I don’t have much time for ENW lately (due open source contribution stuff, new baby, etc). I had a conversation with my brother recently about the difference between D&D 5e and Blades in the Dark. He’s never played a tabletop RPG before but was interested due to playing Baldur’s Gate 3 on PC.I explained the differences in terms of what they do with a bit about how people approach them as players (in terms of how they develop and relate their characters). I didn’t talk about theme or premise or other jargon (from all the various jargons). I’ve said it before, but I really dislike the tendency in the hobby to categorize everything, which is why I didn’t use it here either. It seems more like tribal identification than anything really useful.(However, I should note there is useful stuff, but it tends to be more about design and how games work rather than on how they are played. It can be interesting to talk about it in terms of design, but it gets annoying when people want to apply that to themselves or their play.)From what I can tell from the OP, there’s a mismatch between the game the player wants to play and what the GM wants to run. That’s something that should be sorted out when the game is pitched, though having a conversation during the game is also good (as was done here) when it’s clear there’s a misunderstanding.I haven’t played the FFG Star Wars games, but it seems weird to have a bunch of detailed gear stuff and not actually incorporate it (and gear progression) into the game. I don’t know whether that’s a design whiff or if the OP wants to run a game that’s a bit different from what the designers intended. It’s okay to tweak a game, but discussing that’s (again) a session zero thing to make sure everyone understands.</blockquote>

Verification