thread: 2011-09-08 : Trad vs Indie: FIGHT! pt2

On 2011-09-28, Vincent wrote:

Ah, good. Excellent.

Here's thing one: planning encounters is not planning outcomes. When I say "don't plan outcomes," I DO NOT include "don't plan encounters." Planning encounters as GM is a fun and productive part of the kind of no-planned-outcomes play I'm advocating here. (Which makes it unlike Universalis, for instance.) With me on that?

Here's thing two: there's a way to play D&D that makes it a legitimate tactical game. We're playing to find out whether we can defeat these goblins, and when this ogre jumps into the fight, it's a tactical problem that nobody at the table knows whether we can solve. This is a fun way to play, and serious in its own way, even though it's nothing at all like - and fundamentally incompatible with - Lord of the Rings.

With me on that too?

If you are, I can talk about no-planned-outcomes play that IS a bit like Lord of the Rings. Yeah?


This makes...
short response
optional explanation (be brief!):

if you're human, not a spambot, type "human":