Link is here.  I'm sure this has been discussed before, but let's rehash it.  One of the things that piqued my interest was the following bit:

QuoteGM: Mulls this over, because there’s a pit trap right where John is looking. But it’s dark, so “No, there are about a million cracks in the floor. You wouldn’t see a pit trap that easily, anyway.” [A different referee might absolutely decide that John sees the trap, since he’s looking in the right place for the right thing].

My reaction a few years ago would have been, "That's not fair!  How can the DM just decide whether he sees the trap or not?  This is terrible and bullshit."

My reaction now is considerably different.  I won't say this approach is superior to the "modern" method of playing, but I will say that it is intriguing.  I suspect the emphasis on strict rules for every situation arose from tournament-style play in which the DM serves as a rules arbiter.

Some other quotes on the matter:

QuoteYour job isn’t to remember and apply rules correctly, it’s to make up on-the-spot rulings and describe them colorfully.

QuoteLook at it this way. There’s a priceless Ming Vase sitting on a table in the middle of a room where combat rages on all sides, swords swinging, chairs flying, crossbow bolts whizzing through the air. There is, however, no rule covering the chance of some random event that might affect the priceless Ming Vase. I’m not sure I need to say more, but just in case, I will. If someone rolls a natural “1,” or a “3,” or even if nothing specifically happens to trigger it, it’s blatantly irresponsible of you not to start some chain of events involving the Ming vase.  A sword goes flying – the table underneath the vase is hit by the sword – the vase is swaying back and forth, ready to topple – can anyone catch it, perhaps making a long dive-and-slide across the floor? That’s gaming.  Is it unfair? Well, it’s certainly outside the existing rules. It’s your job to create events outside the standard sequence of “I roll to hit. They roll to hit. I roll to hit.”  In combat, bad rolls can spontaneously gene rate bad consequences (make sure you do this to both sides, not just the players). You don’t need a table to generate bad consequences – just make it up on the spot. Good rolls might get good consequences, such as disarming the foe, making him fall, smashing him against a wall for extra damage, pushing him backward, etc. Again, make it up on the spot. Remember the Ming Vase!

It's a shame I hadn't been exposed to this years ago.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;707662Link is here.  I'm sure this has been discussed before, but let's rehash it.  One of the things that piqued my interest was the following bit:

QuoteGM: Mulls this over, because there's a pit trap right where John is  looking. But it's dark, so "No, there are about a million cracks in the  floor. You wouldn't see a pit trap that easily, anyway." [A different  referee might absolutely decide that John sees the trap, since he's  looking in the right place for the right thing].

This is only a problem where the GM has not done his work beforehand.  My notes say for that pit trap, ...  Ah yes here it is.  "The PC must make a detect hidden door check if actively looking at the spot.  If no Dark vision or, bright light, no check possible."

That's how we do things downtown children.

Fairly and consistently applied rulings are the goal. The risk is obvious, but the reward isn't as much so without having experienced it under a quality referee.

Unfortunately, it is very easy for some folk to lose faith and refuse to take said risk after being burned by a poor referee.

Quote from: FickleGM;707678Fairly and consistently applied rulings are the goal. The risk is obvious, but the reward isn't as much so without having experienced it under a quality referee.

Unfortunately, it is very easy for some folk to lose faith and refuse to take said risk after being burned by a poor referee.

Thing is, I can't fathom playing an RPG with a referee I didn't trust to make sound judgements. I'd either GM myself, or not play.

One of the ugliest things about the modern approach to RPGs is the notion that players are entitled to have a GM who runs the game the way they like. It's particularly ugly when expressed by guys who have been playing for years. If you're an experienced enough player that you've memorize whole books full of rules and can build super powerful characters with the expectation to play them to high levels, you're experienced enough to step up and run the fucking game yourself if you don't like how your GM runs his game.

Exactly. I have no problem at all with players who demand that a game is run the way they want and go out and find said game. My problem is when they demand this out of the GM they have OR just bitch about their GM. Either shut up and play, find a different game or, as you said, run the fucking game.

Quote from: Haffrung;707691One of the ugliest things about the modern approach to RPGs is the notion that players are entitled to have a GM who runs the game the way they like.

That's why God invented baseball bats...

So we're doing this again, well this likely won't be the last time I have this conversation so I may as well start getting exceedingly efficient at it.

"Rulings"/MTP are certainly an important part of TTRPGs indeed the fact that they have anything you can imagine as an input is one of the great strengths of TTRPGs. However "Rulings"/MTP can produce any result you can imagine and that's kind of lame. Because of their adhoc nature and and high variability it's hard for PCs to make meaningful choices, it's like the Monty Hall problem only the goats are Schrodinger's goats and the GM get's to decide if they're alive or dead after you open the box. Now you can say that you personally like playing that sort of game, but you can't claim it encourages player skill because player decisions don't actually matter.

Quote from: gamerGoyf;707726Now you can say that you personally like playing that sort of game, but you can't claim it encourages player skill because player decisions don't actually matter.

This proves that you know Jack and Shit about old school gaming, and Jack left town.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;707729This proves that you know Jack and Shit about old school gaming, and Jack left town.

Agreed. Heck, I can't see how a system that removes the ability of a GM to apply such rulings could even attempt to encourage player skill in any meaningful way.

Quote from: gamerGoyf;707726So we're doing this again,  r.

No, you are choosing to do this again. The op doesn't require we go down this path again. KBy all means feel free, but we know where everyone stands on the issue and are familiar with the arguments on both sides. Personally, i would prefer to hear more from the OP on his evolution on this front.

Quote from: FickleGM;707731Heck, I can't see how a system that removes the ability of a GM to apply such rulings could even attempt to encourage player skill in any meaningful way.

That depends on whether or not you think 'up up down down left right left right b a b a select' is a player skill.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;707733No, you are choosing to do this again. The op doesn't require we go down this path again. KBy all means feel free, but we know where everyone stands on the issue and are familiar with the arguments on both sides. Personally, i would prefer to hear more from the OP on his evolution on this front.

Actually I'm unfamiliar with the arguments of the other side that's sort of why I'm here, to deepen my understanding of RPGs by engaging in discourse with people who don't share my views. Unfortunately discourse isn't what's happening here. I presented a reasoned argument, in return I got the tribalistic posturing of the intellectually bankrupt.

Quote from: gamerGoyf;707726So we're doing this again, well this likely won't be the last time I have this conversation so I may as well start getting exceedingly efficient at it.

"Rulings"/MTP are certainly an important part of TTRPGs indeed the fact that they have anything you can imagine as an input is one of the great strengths of TTRPGs. However "Rulings"/MTP can produce any result you can imagine and that's kind of lame. Because of their adhoc nature and and high variability it's hard for PCs to make meaningful choices

No.  In my example the "pit trap" is of a certain construction that gives it  certain properties.  Just like something in real life.  You assume that there is an Acme Pit fall manufacturing company that produces these things and thus, PC's would know what to expect because of that uniformity throughout the game world.

Quote from: gamerGoyf;707736Actually I'm unfamiliar with the arguments of the other side that's sort of why I'm here, to deepen my understanding of RPGs by engaging in discourse with people who don't share my views. Unfortunately discourse isn't what's happening here. I presented a reasoned argument, in return I got the tribalistic posturing of the intellectually bankrupt.

I might suggest that starting "discourse" by using the term Magical Tea Party isn't conducive to conversation.  Generally, you shouldn't start off conversations with terms that are generally used in a pejorative fashion if you're trying to have a productive conversation.

Just sayin'.

Quote from: robiswrong;707740I might suggest that starting "discourse" by using the term Magical Tea Party isn't conducive to conversation.  Generally, you shouldn't start off conversations with terms that are generally used in a pejorative fashion if you're trying to have a productive conversation.

Just sayin'.

Well, he KNOWS that.