Search results

No, a lot of it isn't disparaging at all Max, unless you find any analysis of game play disparaging to you. Basically what you are doing now is a move in a kind of censorship. And yes, I know, many truly reprehensible people start with this argument. I'm not interested in pushing it to justify...

The terminology policing goes FAR beyond questions of offense.

I would just say that learning and practicing equanimity is a primary indicator of maturity. I think that is a part of what Lewis meant. It's a central theme of Aurelius' Meditations.

Well, so can princesses! 😁 I think we agree in this area. I certainly wouldn't consider either term derogatory, at least not inherently. @JConstantine's CS Lewis quote is pretty spot on. If I was concerned with seeming childish I would certainly not play RPGs!

Isn't 'cops and robbers' equally gender charged? Just because you are used to certain phraseology and terms doesn't make them neutral.

Maybe. I think part of the issue is that these kinds of debate push people towards more and more absolutist definitions of things, where it's much more difficult to point to real world play and classify things definitively. I will say that I think 'full on' Narrativist play is very immediate...

Well, this is not really sufficient. Narrativist play is play that is focused on a premise. That premise has, or begets situations with, moral weight. The characters are fit to address this, have passion (it matters to them), something opposes them, and nobody has predecided the direction events...

OK, you got me. 15,000+ posts of a slew of trad GMs oozing 'I own this part of the game' and you post a quote from John Harper that talks about what the GM is 'in charge of', and my using the term 'owns' is gaslighting?! Look, I'm going to accept that you didn't use the word, I don't think...

A lot of stuff just doesn't seem to 'come off' in trad play. So, for instance, the highly technical Ocean's Eleven style of heist, where the players have to do all the planning and detailing of things based on a GM's presentation of a scenario. Problem number one is the sheer amount of detail...

And, just to point out one of the reasons why I favor this sort of 'consequence resolution' is that ACTUAL game situations are so threadbare when compared to real life. It is beyond any reason to imagine that a game would have detailed all the things that your scenario posits. That is, that...

Well, I think you could have pretty much any of the kinds of Apocalypse you speak of. I mean, maybe Humanity has a collective unconscious? There's a massive pandemic, and people get WEIRD! I'd be hesitant to spend a lot of time, personally, on trying to come up with a lot of setting logic for...

Yeah, I'm getting on my actual PC where I can type (ah, the joy of Model-M keyboards!), so lets see if I can be a bit more cogent: You use the word 'owns' and I have kind of just accepted that, but I don't think we mean precisely the same thing by that. In trad play 'GM Ownership' is sort of an...

Yeah, I have very little to say about whatever sorts of play go on in different groups. I'm not there. I played games that sound similar to what you describe between 1975 and about 1997 or so that I would describe as 'trad'. I've played in some even since then, though I have not run something...

Yet you keep posting...

Well, I'm not entirely sure about that either. I mean, the most obvious and straightforward AW game is basically 'Mad Max', but it is far from the only possibility. I've not played a ton of AW to be able to say what is most common. OTOH DW and similar games, which are equally specific about...

I think there's no big difference here. DW DR just leaves 6- up to the GM, presumably they make a soft move that follows. Honestly I don't think RaS even applies to something like this. It's probably just Act Under Fire, or if there's no pressure then you just succeed unless something has...

My response is that you are drastically limiting the game to dealing only with things you, the GM, decide on. I don't think you all see how nearly total your domination of the content of play is. I'm just not interested as a player in being stuck in that box!

There's NO established world at all. The apocalypse is not described nor constrained in any way. The premise is simply that civilization as we know it, no longer exists, for some undefined reason. The characters have obviously survived and it's up for grabs what sort of life they have. The game...

Again, nothing changed. Presumably in the fictional world we are to imagine the runes always represented a map. While I agree that 2 minutes ago that imagined fact didn't exist, many other things are also not yet established in the fictional world. All that I can see really being objected to is...

The MC is now going to make a move. Guess what? That 'worst' is about to manifest! If a thief studied a lock in DW, I would trigger Discern Realities and they'd roll. On a 6- the lock might be trapped, and you're now poisoned with deadly red jellyfish toxin! You recognize the symptoms, and...