Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8654217" data-attributes="member: 29398">Why not?&nbsp; All I'm doing is chopping through the differences in wording to reveal the great similarity beneath.My intent was to (try to) point out that it seemed [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER] was taking what seems a very minor or trivial difference at most, wording the examples so as to greatly exaggerate this difference, and then assigning it far more weight than it warrants.Yes, different systems and game types can give different play experiences; but I posit no more so than can two different tables using the exact same broad-based system (e.g. non-4e D&amp;D) for different purposes.And some of what seem now to be couched as indie-game ideas a) have been around for ages, if not formalized, and b) are well worth following.&nbsp; The way [USER=5142]@Aldarc[/USER] describes &quot;fiction first&quot; just upthread, for example, is exactly how I've always (tried to) play and DM - as far as possible everything flows through the character* - even though the system I use is anything but 'indie' in its outlook. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />* - even down to, as DM, talking to the character rather than the player: it's always &quot;Falstaffe, what are you doing next?&quot; rather than &quot;Dave, what's Falstaffe doing next?&quot;.&nbsp; Really gets confusing, though, when someone has a character in the party with the same name as a different player at the table... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 8654217, member: 29398"] Why not? All I'm doing is chopping through the differences in wording to reveal the great similarity beneath. My intent was to (try to) point out that it seemed [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER] was taking what seems a very minor or trivial difference at most, wording the examples so as to greatly exaggerate this difference, and then assigning it far more weight than it warrants. Yes, different systems and game types can give different play experiences; but I posit no more so than can two different tables using the exact same broad-based system (e.g. non-4e D&D) for different purposes. And some of what seem now to be couched as indie-game ideas a) have been around for ages, if not formalized, and b) are well worth following. The way [USER=5142]@Aldarc[/USER] describes "fiction first" just upthread, for example, is exactly how I've always (tried to) play and DM - as far as possible everything flows through the character* - even though the system I use is anything but 'indie' in its outlook. :) * - even down to, as DM, talking to the character rather than the player: it's always "Falstaffe, what are you doing next?" rather than "Dave, what's Falstaffe doing next?". Really gets confusing, though, when someone has a character in the party with the same name as a different player at the table... :) [/QUOTE]

Verification