Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
You're doing what? Surprising the DM
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 6096837" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Sure, something is going to happen. And obviously it will be bad for the PC. But, if playing BW by the book, <em>it won't be bad for the player</em>. That is, the upshot will be some form of adversity that the player finds engaging.</p><p></p><p>It follows from that there may be a type of player for whom BW has nothing to offer, because (i) there is <em>no</em> form of adversity that the player would find engaging, yet (ii) the way BW works just about guarantees that PCs will be facing adversity hard and often. This might be roughly the same sort of player who enjoys absurdly Monty Haul classic D&D, and perhaps also certain approaches to Rifts.</p><p></p><p>But from this thread, plus his broader posting history, I have ample evidence that [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] is not such a player. He is not averse to adversity for his PC; but he wants that adversity to be interesting and engaging to him, to speak to his reasons for playing <em>that</em> PC in <em>this</em> game. And he is saying, in my view quite reasonably, that he doesn't enjoy playing with GMs who won't acknowledge and respond to that, and who insist on framing and resolving situations without regard to those sorts of interests. It's a preference I happen to share both as a player and a GM.</p><p></p><p>You may think that my description of the approach to play that I am talking about - for present purposes let's call it "situation + say yes or roll the dice" set up in contrast to your preferred "setting + proposition, fortune, resolution" - is incoherent or self-contradictory. I don't believe so, but certainly acknowledge that description, like all human art, is fallible.</p><p></p><p>But I know that a true description of the approach is available, because I play that way, and so do many thousands of other RPGers, some of whom post about their experiences on these very forums. Obviously it's not the only way to play an RPG. But it is one completely viable one.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6096837, member: 42582"] Sure, something is going to happen. And obviously it will be bad for the PC. But, if playing BW by the book, [I]it won't be bad for the player[/I]. That is, the upshot will be some form of adversity that the player finds engaging. It follows from that there may be a type of player for whom BW has nothing to offer, because (i) there is [I]no[/I] form of adversity that the player would find engaging, yet (ii) the way BW works just about guarantees that PCs will be facing adversity hard and often. This might be roughly the same sort of player who enjoys absurdly Monty Haul classic D&D, and perhaps also certain approaches to Rifts. But from this thread, plus his broader posting history, I have ample evidence that [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] is not such a player. He is not averse to adversity for his PC; but he wants that adversity to be interesting and engaging to him, to speak to his reasons for playing [I]that[/I] PC in [I]this[/I] game. And he is saying, in my view quite reasonably, that he doesn't enjoy playing with GMs who won't acknowledge and respond to that, and who insist on framing and resolving situations without regard to those sorts of interests. It's a preference I happen to share both as a player and a GM. You may think that my description of the approach to play that I am talking about - for present purposes let's call it "situation + say yes or roll the dice" set up in contrast to your preferred "setting + proposition, fortune, resolution" - is incoherent or self-contradictory. I don't believe so, but certainly acknowledge that description, like all human art, is fallible. But I know that a true description of the approach is available, because I play that way, and so do many thousands of other RPGers, some of whom post about their experiences on these very forums. Obviously it's not the only way to play an RPG. But it is one completely viable one. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
You're doing what? Surprising the DM
Top