Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why does 5E SUCK?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6655551" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>I agree that it doesn't make it a bad thing (for 5e or for any other system) so long as it is there is player buy-in. Further, if OMGFORGE terminology forces (yeah) otherwise reasonable men to get all sandy below the belt, to tremble with rage and be incapable of further communication, then let us just call it "Steve" or "Pudding" or "Ham Sandwich". </p><p></p><p>The point is <strong><em>GM Ham Sandwich</em></strong> is a thing. A thing that has consequences on play. And we can talk about those consequences on play that <strong><em>GM Ham Sandwich</em></strong> has.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You know I love it when you talk all game theory and academic to me. /shiver.</p><p></p><p>Also, we can call it a theoretical generalisation. I think that is good for his meaning. I think the way it was used in the prior post was very "axiomish" though. But I'm very comfortable with it being a theoretical generalisation (and that being his meaning).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Naturally, given the rocky terrain.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You have gained skill at rhetoric and reasoning (300)!</p><p></p><p>I think maybe (or maybe not?) we're probably parsing language just a little bit differently here. The original post that I was responding to was about content creation, authoring adversity, and simultaneously authoring action resolution.</p><p></p><p>I will agree all day long that the formula of:</p><p></p><p>Situation creation + authoring adversity + playing prior authored adversity within the fictional positioning of the situation + authoring action resolution</p><p></p><p>is basically playing the game by your self. However, a character creation prologue scene in Dogs where the player wants the adversity to be "do I lick this bad habit" or "do I overcome my fear of heights" or "do I break my horse's wild spirit", the GM is then obliged to play that adversity (the bad habit, your fear of heights, your horse's wild spirit) that the player authored (with at least some input from the player on situation and consensus and transparency of stakes). </p><p></p><p>It certainly doesn't fully subordinate the GM's scene-framing authority to the player, but the input of the player on authoring their own adversity/situation (not playing/resolving, that is the GM's role), and thusly generating content, is well beyond the typical line of demarcation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6655551, member: 6696971"] I agree that it doesn't make it a bad thing (for 5e or for any other system) so long as it is there is player buy-in. Further, if OMGFORGE terminology forces (yeah) otherwise reasonable men to get all sandy below the belt, to tremble with rage and be incapable of further communication, then let us just call it "Steve" or "Pudding" or "Ham Sandwich". The point is [B][I]GM Ham Sandwich[/I][/B] is a thing. A thing that has consequences on play. And we can talk about those consequences on play that [B][I]GM Ham Sandwich[/I][/B] has. You know I love it when you talk all game theory and academic to me. /shiver. Also, we can call it a theoretical generalisation. I think that is good for his meaning. I think the way it was used in the prior post was very "axiomish" though. But I'm very comfortable with it being a theoretical generalisation (and that being his meaning). Naturally, given the rocky terrain. You have gained skill at rhetoric and reasoning (300)! I think maybe (or maybe not?) we're probably parsing language just a little bit differently here. The original post that I was responding to was about content creation, authoring adversity, and simultaneously authoring action resolution. I will agree all day long that the formula of: Situation creation + authoring adversity + playing prior authored adversity within the fictional positioning of the situation + authoring action resolution is basically playing the game by your self. However, a character creation prologue scene in Dogs where the player wants the adversity to be "do I lick this bad habit" or "do I overcome my fear of heights" or "do I break my horse's wild spirit", the GM is then obliged to play that adversity (the bad habit, your fear of heights, your horse's wild spirit) that the player authored (with at least some input from the player on situation and consensus and transparency of stakes). It certainly doesn't fully subordinate the GM's scene-framing authority to the player, but the input of the player on authoring their own adversity/situation (not playing/resolving, that is the GM's role), and thusly generating content, is well beyond the typical line of demarcation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why does 5E SUCK?
Top