Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7384318" data-attributes="member: 82106">I think there IS a meaningful distinction in terms of what the GM is telling the players and who's engaged by it, and in what way. My point was that, since all gaming is interaction back and forth between participants, then the QUALITY of that interaction is what is meaningful, not its existence. So when you said "its all the same" I objected. I believe that was Pemerton's objection as well...I believe you, and I agree! So the question of the thread is now, basically, "why not run it No Myth?" Why have a fixed setting with established facts created by the GM ahead of time, which may become inconvenient stumbling blocks in the way of achieving the desired type of story? I don't mean that to say "why put challenges in the way of the character's goals" either. I could, in No Myth, state that the character has to survive a long and grueling trek far to the north. He could run into all sorts of problems along the way that test his resolve, tempt him to abandon his quest, provide opportunities to gain valuable support/equipment/knowledge, etc. We can both do that. Given that you didn't know about the character's goal before the game was started, does it serve your interests to have things predefined. What if there was no place on your map for northern barbarians? It would present some difficulty. You could revamp the map, maybe nobody has anything vested in the current version, but I didn't even make a map, so I have no issue. I mean, we established that there are people who believe backstory and world detail have specific values. I'm pretty equivocal about that myself, but at least we're willing to agree there is a coherent argument there and its not ridiculous, even if we aren't that into it.Yes, I said the same thing, basically, in a post that probably came after this one. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Well, a lot of comments have had the tenor of "why can't the players just go to the end of the story?" (IE buy the holy sword in the local market on day one). So, when I hear this kind of statement I think of it as a question about pacing and who has responsibility and control over that. It was more of an aside <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Just saying that in WA Cosmology killing Torog is sort of the on ramp to divine levels of power. Its set up that way. Sort of like killing a demon lord, doable if you're REALLY bad-assed, but then you ARE really bad-assed at that point! Still, its not something that a GM has to cheapen his game to introduce. [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]'s characters in that game are effectively myths. They're the most powerful members of their races who have ever lived. That's the conceit of 4e, Epic tier is where you're almost like a god. Sort of like 20th level play in AD&D (or the super high-level stuff in BECMI).</blockquote>

Verification