Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="happyhermit" data-source="post: 7400787" data-attributes="member: 6834463">It's quite simple really. Certain things will be difficult to impossible in a game, it's a part of what makes a game work/seem &quot;real&quot;, etc. This can be accomplished in many ways; system rules, house rules, table consent, GM, etc. If you want to state a preference for more of one and less of another, that's fine as long as you realize there is nothing inherently bad about any of them. But making it seem like this is something unique to worldbuilding would be wrong of course.It can actually, because there is more than one way to worldbuild, there's more than one way to run a game with worldbuilding, and there's more than one world to build. This results in varying effects and consequences. Just like how a &quot;no myth&quot; game can have a lot of negative consequence for a given persons preferences, or it can not, or it can have only a few, depending on how it's actually implemented.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="happyhermit, post: 7400787, member: 6834463"] It's quite simple really. Certain things will be difficult to impossible in a game, it's a part of what makes a game work/seem "real", etc. This can be accomplished in many ways; system rules, house rules, table consent, GM, etc. If you want to state a preference for more of one and less of another, that's fine as long as you realize there is nothing inherently bad about any of them. But making it seem like this is something unique to worldbuilding would be wrong of course. It can actually, because there is more than one way to worldbuild, there's more than one way to run a game with worldbuilding, and there's more than one world to build. This results in varying effects and consequences. Just like how a "no myth" game can have a lot of negative consequence for a given persons preferences, or it can not, or it can have only a few, depending on how it's actually implemented. [/QUOTE]

Verification