Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="payn" data-source="post: 9583048" data-attributes="member: 90374">I think then, they will look at what it takes to actually steal a handysack from a person and expect those rules followed to a T and then expect them followed to a T after the sack is taken and needs to be retaken. (Im just playing devil's advocate here becasue I have gone down exactly these kinds of rabbit holes with players before).I think thats a bit extreme, I think the player might be rules hardwired and want them to be expected. More of a rules over rulings type that wants things fairly adjudicated by the GM, but also wants to know exactly how things will play out for their own player agency. What I have found is going over exactly what the sub-system is aiming to do, and more importantly how it works, before engaging usually gets sign on by the players. If someone is still stink eye about it, then it might just be a playstyle they dont like. I dont think so, there is so much opportunity for sub-systems like this. I think setting the expectations is right on the money. I also know, sometimes you dont know until you know, so even the best laid expectations can sometimes drift from sesh zero. Its all in how you roll with the punches. I now return us to our regularly scheduled thread.One time I had combat in a sea cave. The tide would come crashing back and everyone, players and enemies alike, had to make reflex not to fall over. That was a cool addition to the scene that made it feel really cinematic. This one worked well because it was a simple reflex or fall so it didnt impact things in any unusual way other than making footing not sure during the combat.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="payn, post: 9583048, member: 90374"] I think then, they will look at what it takes to actually steal a handysack from a person and expect those rules followed to a T and then expect them followed to a T after the sack is taken and needs to be retaken. (Im just playing devil's advocate here becasue I have gone down exactly these kinds of rabbit holes with players before). I think thats a bit extreme, I think the player might be rules hardwired and want them to be expected. More of a rules over rulings type that wants things fairly adjudicated by the GM, but also wants to know exactly how things will play out for their own player agency. What I have found is going over exactly what the sub-system is aiming to do, and more importantly how it works, before engaging usually gets sign on by the players. If someone is still stink eye about it, then it might just be a playstyle they dont like. I dont think so, there is so much opportunity for sub-systems like this. I think setting the expectations is right on the money. I also know, sometimes you dont know until you know, so even the best laid expectations can sometimes drift from sesh zero. Its all in how you roll with the punches. I now return us to our regularly scheduled thread. One time I had combat in a sea cave. The tide would come crashing back and everyone, players and enemies alike, had to make reflex not to fall over. That was a cool addition to the scene that made it feel really cinematic. This one worked well because it was a simple reflex or fall so it didnt impact things in any unusual way other than making footing not sure during the combat. [/QUOTE]

Verification