Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="thefutilist" data-source="post: 9315370" data-attributes="member: 7044566">I’ll try and explain myself better (although the following is a bit reductive)When I was doing genre play, I’d kind of play into the genre. So the choices for my character tended to be what was genre appropriate. If I was playing batman (or most super heroes), I wouldn’t kill because that breaks the genre and I’d be judged for breaking the genre.The way I play now, there is no genre standard in the appraisal. If you’re a superhero and you kill, then you’re judged as a human being based on whatever standard of ethics the players have. You won’t be judged for breaking the genre.In terms of neo-trad play, I think it’s more like the first than the second. You’re trying to affirm the players vision of their character, not judge them as a human being. You’re also being less responsive to the situation, you’re always folding it back towards your vision. It’s the player version of the many roads to Rome GM style. Only if the group’s on the same page, then you’re all heading to Rome. The GM is creating opposition that isn’t going to screw with your conception of your character.Or put a very different way. The way I play now, Batman could never kill and that might actually make him the villain. We'd have to see how the story goes, I don't think you'd want that kind of uncertainty in either genre trad or neo-trad.</blockquote>