Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 7394933" data-attributes="member: 6698278">I just wanted to be clear I was replying to your post.I think at the root of things is the fact that my games are more gamist.&nbsp; Here are some examples of things true for my style of games1.&nbsp; Preparation is important.&nbsp; The right spells, the right equipment, the right plan.2.&nbsp; Caution is often in order.&nbsp; Sometimes only boldness will save you.&nbsp; No one will put their finger on the scale.3.&nbsp; Like real life, sometimes you die.&nbsp; It doesn't have to be your fault even.&nbsp; Your job is to play the game well and try to avoid dying.&nbsp; If you play really well you will win a lot more than you lose.&nbsp; You will still occasionally lose and sometimes you'll get lucky.&nbsp; When you get lucky, it's a story that is told many times over the years.4.&nbsp; There will be in game frustrations.&nbsp; Obviously as DM, I try to limit how often I put those sorts of things in an adventure, but they will happen on occasion.&nbsp; The sweet reward is ultimate triumph over that vexing villain that tormented the party for so long.&nbsp; I mean the classic adventure is save the princess right?&nbsp; So you have to find the princess and that can be a task on occasion.&nbsp; That is okay for us.&nbsp; 5.&nbsp; The players as their characters will try to impact and change the world which already exists.&nbsp; They will acquire power and wealth by adventuring.&nbsp; They will also often involve themselves in things outside of adventuring.&nbsp; Building businesses, ruling kingdoms, building a temple to their faith.&nbsp; Accomplishing these things in game will be hard.&nbsp; They players will have to strive hard to achieve these goals.&nbsp; Obviously acting as their characters but the players will have to think hard or they will lose.6.&nbsp; So it's party vs the world.&nbsp; Doesn't have to always be a unified party but I tend to prefer those types of groups personally.&nbsp; So for me roleplaying is not at all like a novel.&nbsp; In a novel, you never want the reader to be bored or frustrated by some repetitive obstacle.&nbsp; You are making your game adhere to the needs of a novel and that makes sense given your style.&nbsp; For me, without the chance of genuinely losing, winning has no sweetness.&nbsp; You know ultimately your party will do interesting things, survive or at least die in some notable way the player chose.&nbsp; You have your finger on the scale to make sure of it.&nbsp; Because what you enjoy is &quot;being cool&quot; which is fine.&nbsp; That is a lot of fun for many people.&nbsp; I prefer doing something genuinely hard and succeeding when I do it well and the luck of the dice (or favor of the Gods) are with me.&nbsp; So I am not trying to convince you to switch to my style nor am I interested that much in your style.&nbsp; I think if for some reason it was a very limited low commitment campaign for me I might enjoy a few hours of your style in the right unusual genre but never as a long running campaign.&nbsp; I think I understand why you like it.&nbsp; To be honest I don't think even if we are using the exact same rules set that we are playing the same game.&nbsp; We are playing radically different games.&nbsp; I could see people enjoying both styles.&nbsp; Personally I'm far enough on my end of the scale to not like yours as much.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Emerikol, post: 7394933, member: 6698278"] I just wanted to be clear I was replying to your post. I think at the root of things is the fact that my games are more gamist. Here are some examples of things true for my style of games 1. Preparation is important. The right spells, the right equipment, the right plan. 2. Caution is often in order. Sometimes only boldness will save you. No one will put their finger on the scale. 3. Like real life, sometimes you die. It doesn't have to be your fault even. Your job is to play the game well and try to avoid dying. If you play really well you will win a lot more than you lose. You will still occasionally lose and sometimes you'll get lucky. When you get lucky, it's a story that is told many times over the years. 4. There will be in game frustrations. Obviously as DM, I try to limit how often I put those sorts of things in an adventure, but they will happen on occasion. The sweet reward is ultimate triumph over that vexing villain that tormented the party for so long. I mean the classic adventure is save the princess right? So you have to find the princess and that can be a task on occasion. That is okay for us. 5. The players as their characters will try to impact and change the world which already exists. They will acquire power and wealth by adventuring. They will also often involve themselves in things outside of adventuring. Building businesses, ruling kingdoms, building a temple to their faith. Accomplishing these things in game will be hard. They players will have to strive hard to achieve these goals. Obviously acting as their characters but the players will have to think hard or they will lose. 6. So it's party vs the world. Doesn't have to always be a unified party but I tend to prefer those types of groups personally. So for me roleplaying is not at all like a novel. In a novel, you never want the reader to be bored or frustrated by some repetitive obstacle. You are making your game adhere to the needs of a novel and that makes sense given your style. For me, without the chance of genuinely losing, winning has no sweetness. You know ultimately your party will do interesting things, survive or at least die in some notable way the player chose. You have your finger on the scale to make sure of it. Because what you enjoy is "being cool" which is fine. That is a lot of fun for many people. I prefer doing something genuinely hard and succeeding when I do it well and the luck of the dice (or favor of the Gods) are with me. So I am not trying to convince you to switch to my style nor am I interested that much in your style. I think if for some reason it was a very limited low commitment campaign for me I might enjoy a few hours of your style in the right unusual genre but never as a long running campaign. I think I understand why you like it. To be honest I don't think even if we are using the exact same rules set that we are playing the same game. We are playing radically different games. I could see people enjoying both styles. Personally I'm far enough on my end of the scale to not like yours as much. [/QUOTE]

Verification