Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 7328102" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Couple comments on the (apparently) Strawmanish nature of my 9 points below:- This was a request to comment directly on a commenter's statement that world-building by the GM was an art, was something they appreciated as a creative enterprise in and of itself, and that (one of the primary) roles of players is to explore and appreciate that effort and/or engage in a choose-your-own adventure approach to RPGIng based on that worldbuilding.- This come on the heels of (after and before further) aggressive commentary by a GM stating that THE SETTING IS MINE (and other related commentary).  This was not rebuked and this sentiment has been reiterated in other forms in this thread by other commenters and throughout ENWorld's many threads (again, especially in threads that decry players for optimization).- Finally, only 1-6 I state appears to be broadly agreed upon.  I'm still baffled how that is remotely contentious.  7-9 is where the conversation is to be had (and people need to comment on where they stand on it), but 1-6 is as benign as it gets.[HR][/HR]Comments relating directly to your above post and to your comments about our short one-off we ran in 4e.  I can't find your mention regarding it, but I know I saw you invoked it.  I want to say it was one of the Linear Fighters, Quadratic Wizards threads of yore!  I believe that (as relates to this thread), the pair of contentions you, I, and others were making were the following:* In D&D systems with (a) Vancian casters with Enchantment spells (especially with prolific spell load-outs) and (b) noncombat action resolution governed by a process sim (internal causality rather than genre logic) task resolution (rather than conflict resolution), Wizards/spellcasters are going to be inevitably dominate noncombat action resolution.* The only way this doesn't take place is for GMs to either (a) preemptively protect crucial plot-points/NPCs by pulling out the classic (eye-roll-inducing to any hardened, long term player) blocks (secret backstory) or (b) make up and deploy those blocks on the spot when its clear their carefully sewn plot efforts are about to be undone by a few key spell power-plays.  * Limited backstory/malleable setting (the only thing that is firm is what has been established in play), nerfed Vancian Casting (in both breadth and potency), and conflict resolution mechanics that are governed by genre logic are a functional way to deal with these issues.Our efforts showed a pretty orthodox example of how an obstinate chamberlain who is denying access to the king can have his efforts upturned dramatically without:a)  Spellcasters dominating the action.b)  Immersion being shattered (in fact, when your conception of your archetype is realized in play by your deft action declarations meeting successful action resolution, I would say that is a big + for immersion!).c)  Firm backstory having to be the reference point for the GM's role in adjudicating action resolution and evolving the fiction afterward.</blockquote>

Verification