Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 7787188" data-attributes="member: 177">I'm going to suggest a point, which may or may not be what Garthanos is talking about....4e, and 5e, have spaces where the rules do not strictly say what happens - the player and GM are allowed to figure it out.  Whatever the player can convince the GM will work can work.  So, instead of "playing by the rules" the player, 'plays by the GM" - learning the GM's personal style, and what the GM is willing to allow, or not, and how much oomph the result will have by intuition.This is different than, for example, how FATE manages a similar issue - the rules do not in the same way say strictly what happens, but gives a definitive process for how it goes, and gives the player some idea of exactly what kind of bonus or oomph the result will have for a given investment of Fate Points to make a thing happen.So, 4e and 5e have areas without rules, structures, or well-defined processes.  FATE has a structure for resolving things the rules don't stipulate exactly.  Now, some players are fine with the "blue sky" approach, willing to push for anything in the hopes of it working out.  Others, one may dare to say many, are not interested in investing effort when they don't know what the result is likely to be, and so will not engage with such gaps.</blockquote>