I do not!A dragon god who's my best friend eats you all. I win!Where's the challenge? If you just sit around and tell stories and how you want them to unfold, you don't need all those rules that deal with challenges and how to overcome them.
And that's why the classic RPG needs a GM - To populate the world with NPCs and challenges.
That's what the other players are for. You've split up the DM into all the players, who make up the NPCs and challenges your character encounters. Then your characters hav to work together to overcome the challenges you all made.
Instead of the DM saying 'there's an ogre, what do you do', YOU are the one saying 'there is an ogre, what do we do?'. That is the difference.
And yes, you don't need all those rules for challenges. That's what freeform is about. You don't even need a character sheet.
I don't mean you. I mean Bahamut.
I don't mean you. I mean Bahamut.I do not!A dragon god who's my best friend eats you all. I win!Where's the challenge? If you just sit around and tell stories and how you want them to unfold, you don't need all those rules that deal with challenges and how to overcome them.
And that's why the classic RPG needs a GM - To populate the world with NPCs and challenges.
That's what the other players are for. You've split up the DM into all the players, who make up the NPCs and challenges your character encounters. Then your characters hav to work together to overcome the challenges you all made.
Instead of the DM saying 'there's an ogre, what do you do', YOU are the one saying 'there is an ogre, what do we do?'. That is the difference.
And yes, you don't need all those rules for challenges. That's what freeform is about. You don't even need a character sheet.
Joke's on you, then. He's busy being a magical fighter jet and forcing monster turtles on their knees. All because he things he has to obey this chick who has the hots for this other chick. Not that I judge, mind you, but you'd think a dragon god worth his salt had better things to do than to help some weird people annoy those poor turtles.
Giving this some additional thought, from the dungeon crawl perspective it might even be possible. Something that works kind of like the munchkin board game. Where players move around a dungeon, or other map, and are chased by monsters, and use a card based system for surprises, traps and such, and having set rules for how monsters fight. But this would be less an rpg and more a tabletop strategy game. Much less.
And yes, you don't need all those rules for challenges. That's what freeform is about. You don't even need a character sheet.
I was just confused because this is in the Pathfinder RPG section, that's all ;-P
(Seriously: Nothing against free-form storytelling, but when I'm playing old-fashioned D&D or its successor, I think a GM is indispensable. Maybe I'm just clawing to some outdated traditions, but I can't imagine playing the game without some guy behind a screen I can blame for everything that goes wrong. Or running the game myself occasionally, torturously tormenting players.
|
A dragon god who's my best friend eats you all. I win!
If by win you mean "don't have a game to play anymore". Personally, I find driving all of my friends away to be a loss. But like I said, this style requires mature players.
Edit: Stop posting when I'm not looking. :P I do agree it's usually too much trouble and work plus the hassle of getting a group you can trust that much.
But in my experience, GM's are seldom a problem. That means that I recognize that some GM's definately ARE problems but really it is usually a player with control issues's that is more of a problem.And frankly most bad Gm's are also folks with control issue's.
Now I would be very intrigued to see a workable RPG with no ref in it just because the concept sounds interesting. But really, I am sort of taken back by the, what seems to me, rising tide of players wanting GM's/DM's/Ref's to have less and less 'control'.
Seriously the issue usually is trust and maturity, not your game system. If your group is mature and trusts each other than pretty much all these 'GM' issues don't happen.
I'm a GM and not a control freak at all.
By the way: It'S GMs! NOT GM'S! No apostrophe for plurals! I keep asking myself "The GM's what?" and dreading the answer!
Same for issues
and issues's? That's so wrong on so many levels's's's!
And it's definitely. Comes from definite, which comes from finite. No a at all in there!!!!
Anyway, I just want to reiterate that I have no control issues or anything like that! And now you better believe me because I'm always right! YOU HEAR ME!
;-)
(Reminds me of that knock-knock joke:
"Knock knock!"
"Who's there?"
"Control freak! Now you say 'Control freak who?'")
(And, since we are on the topic of knock-knock jokes:
"Knock knock!"
"Who's there?"
"Doctor"
"Doctor Who?"
"Exactly!")
(Extra bonus: Some of the "knocks" I had to backspace:
knick, kcnock, knicok
And I didn't use copy&paste. I never learn)
A dragon god who's my best friend eats you all. I win!If by win you mean "don't have a game to play anymore".
Well, if it comes to winning RPGs, I'm peer-less! ;-)
That would be me :) I sent you the link before somebody did in the forum, sorry for the confusion, but that is basically the same game as Kolokotroni gave out.
You know, funny thing about that. I was told that I was a railroading control freak DM who doesn't let the players come up with creative solutions because the captain of the guards didn't believe that the theives guild was based in the super guarded castle archives and the players should be allowed to go investigate...umm yeah. I'm all for creative solutions...but what ammounts to basically asking somebody who works at the pentagon that you know that there are terrorists there so you should be given full access isn't creative...it's bloody stupid. I was actually being nice and not having them get arrested for it actually.
And again, that is a prime example of trust and maturity being a key element. To react like that shows a LACK of maturity on the players part and a lack of trust in you from them.
If they trust that your being fair then they will not over react when they characters meet a logical roadblock that can stop their ambitions. If they are mature they will look at the situation from more than just their viewpoint and try to see the reasons you propose for why that avenue of approach is not working.
Maybe time for some better players?
"A game without DM's"
Oh... a girl can dream!!!
You know, funny thing about that. I was told that I was a railroading control freak DM who doesn't let the players come up with creative solutions because the captain of the guards didn't believe that the theives guild was based in the super guarded castle archives and the players should be allowed to go investigate...umm yeah. I'm all for creative solutions...but what ammounts to basically asking somebody who works at the pentagon that you know that there are terrorists there so you should be given full access isn't creative...it's bloody stupid. I was actually being nice and not having them get arrested for it actually.And again, that is a prime example of trust and maturity being a key element. To react like that shows a LACK of maturity on the players part and a lack of trust in you from them.
If they trust that your being fair then they will not over react when they characters meet a logical roadblock that can stop their ambitions. If they are mature they will look at the situation from more than just their viewpoint and try to see the reasons you propose for why that avenue of approach is not working.
Maybe time for some better players?
It depends on the context. I have had dms that constantly styfle ideas because they arent prepared for them and dont want to improvise. It can get frustrating, and sometimes it comes to a head at the least of the offenses. So if in the above example the dm had already handwaved away 4 or 5 ideas and the players finally complained at the guard not believing the bluff because they were fed up?
Also it could be matter of preferences. Perhaps the party rogue got a 40 on his bluff check and feels like the roll should have made up for the less then believable lie. There is certainly room for a mature player to be on either side of the argument (whether the die roll is more important then the actual wording of the bluff).
Assuming the player is immature (or the dm for that matter) simply because he was unhappy with a dm call is a bit of a leap if you ask me.
A GAME WITHOUT DM'S
You shut your ********* mouth! ;)
It depends on the context. ... Assuming the player is immature (or the dm for that matter) simply because he was unhappy with a dm call is a bit of a leap if you ask me.
While I can see where your going, being unhappy with a GM call is one thing and calling the GM a "railroading control freak DM who doesn't let the players come up with creative solutions" is a bit more exteme. I know I pesonally would never tell any of my friends off like that.
While there are many varied skill levels among GM's and players alike, it has been my experience that when both have more level/mature heads and there is a good degree of trust between them that the examples of problems you state don't come up as well.
I trust that if something extreme happens in the games I am in that the GM is not trying to screw me, cheat, wipe out my character for a whim or some petty reason. I trust them and their storytelling to make a good, exciting situation that I can overcome, heroically. So if (or more realistically when) something happens that seems to go counter to reality, I take it in stride.