Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 7598245">I've been thinking about these debates (this thread, and the Insight one). It occurs to me that both sides keep describing the most extreme version of the other side, e.g. it's &quot;the player solves a multivariable calculus problem&quot; vs. &quot;the DM makes passive checks for the characters without ever asking the players for input&quot;.&nbsp; It's pretty hard to reconcile differences when you start with such a huge gulf.Instead, what I've been thinking, is that the goal should be to come up with two variants of a scenario that are as close to each other as possible, but that one camp chooses version A, and the other camp chooses version B.&nbsp; That would help us identify where the actual disagreement is, and help both sides better understand the other side's position.And there's [MENTION=6830534]zedturtle[/MENTION] (of course...he's got expertise in Diplomacy) doing just that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 7598245"] I've been thinking about these debates (this thread, and the Insight one). It occurs to me that both sides keep describing the most extreme version of the other side, e.g. it's "the player solves a multivariable calculus problem" vs. "the DM makes passive checks for the characters without ever asking the players for input". It's pretty hard to reconcile differences when you start with such a huge gulf. Instead, what I've been thinking, is that the goal should be to come up with two variants of a scenario that are as close to each other as possible, but that one camp chooses version A, and the other camp chooses version B. That would help us identify where the actual disagreement is, and help both sides better understand the other side's position. And there's [MENTION=6830534]zedturtle[/MENTION] (of course...he's got expertise in Diplomacy) doing just that. [/QUOTE]

Verification