Most of the RPGs I've spent time in claim to work with at least a modicum of simulationist agenda, and from what I've seen traditional games generally did the same.
It's the first system I've worked in that didn't have a strong player/GM split, often encouraging a relationship of animosity that I'd have to fight tooth and claw.
(Any system where knowledge checks are the default method of passing information to players as well as to characters smells of an inherent us vs them hostility to me.)
@BraddSzonye I actually reached the point in one 3.5 campaign where a player felt free to tell me that I wasn't Doing It Right because they knew the monsters and setting better than I did.
I've seen some research that suggests that most people actually like stories better when they've been spoiled. But people react to spoilers badly anyway.
@BraddSzonye I think I might mostly agree there, at least scoped to social conflict... but yea, you made some huge generalised statements that raised my hackles. I do apologise.
My next campaign had all the same monsters, but an entirely reskinned world so nobody could recognize what mechanic corresponded with what manual entry.
@BraddSzonye It's an attitude thing. "Spoilers" only matter when there is something to be spoiled; i.e., the GM/player split is still there and the players figure their role is to wander about GMland
oh, and in the future, when you get to that, that's what flag for mod is for, cause... it's a lot easier to do when it's the last 600 messages, instead of 600 messages in the middle of... 1200 messages
a dragon who... I think... either forgot about the monk out of paying attention to the wizard then couldn't see him, or figured the monk got roasted at the same time.
but if it's the latter, Sanguine may be confronted by a dragon who thinks he's gone and roasted the monk
Ask not where the dragon is, for you are always within its reach. Ask not what the dragon is, for to know the dragon is to be the dragon. Ask not who the dragon is, for it may be you.
@JonathanHobbs My working hypothesis was that the dragon had more pressing things to deal with than the Kirby, so if Kirby managed to stay well out of sight, the dragon would deal with the other things.
And it's a young dragon. An older dragon, having been insulted and then dared to eat the insulter, wouldn't have stopped for anything until it was sure the insult had been avenged and the Forest made a less rude place.
I'm off for a few hours. @BESW I can't decide whether Stellata should know how to speak Sindaria's language, but in order to prevent things being too difficult I think she should?
or at least should have some decent way of communicating
it would be an interesting complication if communication was difficult though.
is my new question http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/26113/what-should-a-new-gm-know-when-starting-their-first-paranoia-game a full-on duplicate of http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/7653/what-is-some-good-advice-for-starting-paranoia-with-a-new-group
There's a lot of overlap, but it's more slanted to a new gm trying their first new system, rather than an experienced gm trying another system. Would that keep it different enough.
@StuperUser : To my eyes, it's a full duplicate. The answers to the older question don't seem to assume any particular diversity in a GM's experience, and cover the subject well.
Put it like this: Reading through the answers there, do they seem helpful to you? Is there anything there that makes you go "I can't do _that_, that'd take a much more experienced GM?" If so, what?
If you have a _particular_ problem approaching _Paranoia_, something about the system that you just can't grok - that'd be another matter. But there's no point in taking a question _"How can I do [foo] in [bar]?"_, and…
@BrianBallsun-Stanton Yeah, I've heard such good things about it. I'll fully absorb all of the advice and the rules to understand how to run it as fun as possible. Gives me an excuse to finally watch Brazil as well.
Ah, an aspect in which a single word carries a multiplicity of meaning which is not readily apparent --or even possible to understand-- without game/setting/group-specific foreknowledge?
I see no problem with it provided the meanings are clear to the group.
High Concept: Assassin-Monk seeking her first blood.
Context: a tweens-age girl trained as an assassin, sent out to make her first kill, but with a Red Riding Hood narrative loaded with implicit themes of physical/mental/emotional maturation.
Although it was very interesting, I put the kibosh on any aspect that would require me to make references to menstruation mid-play in order to invoke part of its meaning.
If I'm going to boast it'll be about answering something difficult. This isn't the first item question I've seen (the other recent one is Pathfinder) that is glaringly obvious
@Lord_Gareth having taught a lot of people to play D20, reading comprehending those rules is a special skill. Most people who are new to it struggle to get through character creation.
WotC says that, but I don't think that's usually the stance of the community
> The spell functions as it normally would and is expended normally, but the dweomerkeeper does not require any material components or focus item, does not provoke attacks of opportunity, and ignores the target’s spell resistance, just as if she were using a supernatural ability instead of a spell. At every odd numbered level after 1st, the dweomerkeeper gains one additional use of this ability per day.
Wow.
I'd never come across that class before, that's silly
@C.Ross It doesn't get rid of XP components (note how the ability doesn't mention them), nor does it get rid of the special requirements behind Sanctified or Corrupt spells
And it's never really been what I'd call trustworthy either. Some (okay, almost all) of its content was hideously poor in quality, horribly worded and generally underpowered to the point of being personally insulting
I suppose you could justify Dragon and Dungeon as being a second party to the core development team, although it's a bit tough to distinguish between that and freelancers on core products.
Third party you could divvy up further between licensed and unofficial products. Although in practice we did it more by publisher than by licensing status.
And that's really separate from the issue of “official” products.
(Unless you're talking about e.g. the canon of Freeport.)
I stumbled across the old “insomniac monkeys” question. Funny situation, kinda bizarre, although I think a lesser version of it is common in a lot of games. Offered some new advice based on my own experiences with it.
I... guess I'd want an answer to spend more time on techniques for understanding why the players are doing it, so that I could use strategies that actually fit the problem?
My favorite campaigns were the ones without target endlevels and no explicit campaign plot to start. We'd spend the first few levels basically wandering around my world and I'd take notes on what they thought was cool (which became important and recurring) and what was lackluster to them (which faded away, never to be seen again).
Then I'd mix the things they found compelling with the noses they'd put out of joint in the process, and from that tension and plot would slowly curdle.
By the end of the campaign (these were usually based on school semesters, so it was a real-life deadline instead of a level-based one) things would be hopping, but it happened organically.
And I'd try to orchestrate downtime even then; stories have small ups and downs in tension within the larger structure.
And often the players just hand you something brilliant on a silver platter.
Start here for a short anecdote In Which The Players Increase The Tension For Me.
