And as for Pacific Rim, the plot was EXTREMELY well structured. Too well structured. You could see the bullet points. It was a checklist of Syd Fields' "Screenplay" with a bunch of Campell's Heroes Journey slathered on top. And nothing else. No heart or soul. But again - if you liked it, you don't have to care what I say.

As an aside, that's why I've had it with The Hero's Journey ... I suspect that Campbell intended it to be descriptive (detailing a broadly common structure and set of tropes he observed), but so many writers have taken as prescriptive (a set of points they for some reason "need" to hit in order to tell a "good" story) that it's like paint-by-numbers, or watching someone dance to those sequenced footsteps.

First, I'm not paid to write for The Mad Adventurers Society. Not by the word. Not at all. I've recused myself from receiving any payment from them

Ahh, that was my accusation and thus I owe you an apology. I'm sorry, I didn't realize you're doing this for free on that site.

I do realize that my own predilections do not define value and I hope I expressed that adequately in my posts here.

The one that I can't stand is the "video blog" that takes 20 minutes to deliver information that could be read in under 5 minutes, can't be referenced or quoted easily, "Here, watch my presentation!" No -- we live in a deeply literate society, put your information in written form -- if it's not worth the effort for you to write it, it's not worth my time to watch it.

And now companies are starting to do it, for example Bioware burying important upcoming changes or details for SWTOR in their "chats" that take an hour to watch, instead of in articles that would take less than five minutes to read and that can be searched for keywords.

I am so there. There is something to be said for a well written, couple of Paragraphs. instead of a 15 minute rambling video of a talking head. not to mention the ones with heavy accents

Even if you don't agree. Hell, you don't need my permission to run your game any wrong way you want.

Troll much?

Even if you don't agree. Hell, you don't need my permission to run your game any wrong way you want.

Troll much?

I saw that too, but chose to ignore it at the time. It's probably worth mentioning that in my mind, the "wrong way" is the way that people don't have fun. I'm sure the statement was just clouded with hurt feelings, which are due in no small part to my comments.

I am so there. There is something to be said for a well written, couple of Paragraphs. instead of a 15 minute rambling video of a talking head. not to mention the ones with heavy accents

I can deal with heavy accents, but bumbling rambling, that rubs me the wrong way. Thank goodness for 2x speed on many popular video portals!

A story shouldn't be built upon ". . and, then . ." moments, but, they are great for when the party keeps rolling Despairs.

Some RPGs, Wushu for example, make good use of this technique. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose.

And then along came Jones. Big, bad Jones.

Never seen any of AngryGM's stuff before and I can see how his particular style might be a bit much to chew for some people. Personally I enjoyed the article, i thought it was entertaining and he makes some good points.

I think if I'm honest with myself I have been guilty of the whole "and then..." plot scenario more than once. Although the more common word for that would be linear or railroading.

What makes that article stand out for me is how he relates to the Star Wars movie. I was unimpressed but I didn't hate it and thinking about it I can see where I think I have improved and need to improve as a GM.

Reading through quite a few of AngryGM's other articles, I came across this:

http://theangrygm.com/ask-angry-ill-keep-my-d20/

Regarding this section:

Having run a bunch of Star Wars (and the Warhammer game before it) and also having watched a bunch of games being run, the first and most important thing to note is that the mere act of building the dice pool is a major break in the flow of the game. And I don’t just mean that it’s time consuming. It IS time consuming.

But more importantly, players tend to look at the dice pool and modify their action based on the dice pool. “oh, man, that’s a lot of difficulty dice, I’ll do this to add an advantage die.” There’s a lot of talk about the dice and the action that creates the die roll is constantly being edited until the dice pool is to the character’s liking. Now, I admit that every game has some of that. D&D has its share of “I’ll take a penalty? Then I’ll move over there before I fire” crap too. But gaming the dice pool becomes a MAJOR activity. And that means people are playing the dice instead of the action.

My question is, does this match the experiences of people here?

Reading through quite a few of AngryGM's other articles, I came across this:

http://theangrygm.com/ask-angry-ill-keep-my-d20/

Regarding this section:

Having run a bunch of Star Wars (and the Warhammer game before it) and also having watched a bunch of games being run, the first and most important thing to note is that the mere act of building the dice pool is a major break in the flow of the game. And I don’t just mean that it’s time consuming. It IS time consuming.

But more importantly, players tend to look at the dice pool and modify their action based on the dice pool. “oh, man, that’s a lot of difficulty dice, I’ll do this to add an advantage die.” There’s a lot of talk about the dice and the action that creates the die roll is constantly being edited until the dice pool is to the character’s liking. Now, I admit that every game has some of that. D&D has its share of “I’ll take a penalty? Then I’ll move over there before I fire” crap too. But gaming the dice pool becomes a MAJOR activity. And that means people are playing the dice instead of the action.

My question is, does this match the experiences of people here?

For the first couple sessions, sure. It fades quickly, and we started to narrate the reasons for modifications. It seems like you can only game it so far before it gets ridiculous, but I would surmise that the potential for abuse is there like it is with any game. For us, building and interpreting a dice pool is very quick, but I will note that we've been playing every other week since the beginner box came out so we have plenty of experience doing it.

Interestingly, AngryDM gave up the mantle of this schtick not too long ago. [edit: I guess not, maybe I dreamed that.]

I don't like how that article implies - nay, directly says we GMs of narrative systems are doing it wrong. That's not the kind of divisive doctrine our hobby needs.

I don't like how that article implies - nay, directly says we GMs of narrative systems are doing it wrong. That's not the kind of divisive doctrine our hobby needs.

I've been waffling on whether to post the article because of that part for about a week.

I really just wanted to see what sort experiences people have had on the part I quoted.

I don't like how that article implies - nay, directly says we GMs of narrative systems are doing it wrong. That's not the kind of divisive doctrine our hobby needs.

It really comes across to me that he is of the mentality "It didn't work for me, so it's wrong and my opinion on this is correct and nothing else matters."

And I hate that level of "I am right and you are wrong.", especially when it comes to a hobby where what is right and what is wrong will be different at every single table. Like you said, we need to be encouraging, not... whatever this is.

I don't like how that article implies - nay, directly says we GMs of narrative systems are doing it wrong. That's not the kind of divisive doctrine our hobby needs.

I've been waffling on whether to post the article because of that part for about a week.

I really just wanted to see what sort experiences people have had on the part I quoted.

Eh, different strokes for different folks, he's entitled to his opinion, as are we all. He's made a few other snide comments about "doing it wrong" that rub me the wrong way, but I cna't go around getting sore over what people on the internet say or think. Your question is totally apt, valid, and deserves a good answer!

I can say that with the groups I've played with, even 8-year-olds picked up and ran with the dice mechanic by the end of the one-shot. So there's that. There's a learning curve to everything, but if one has a prejudice of course one is going to have a bad time.

It really comes across to me that he is of the mentality "It didn't work for me, so it's wrong and my opinion on this is correct and nothing else matters."

And I hate that level of "I am right and you are wrong.", especially when it comes to a hobby where what is right and what is wrong will be different at every single table. Like you said, we need to be encouraging, not... whatever this is.

I like to think that he's helped others improve their games, but I too take issue with that attitude - particularly if someone were to bring it here , the very home of the game. I know it's just a schtick (man I hope it's just a schtick) but I'm sure it turns people off. I've been roleplaying as long or even longer and I feel like people who get set in their ways and don't want to try new things (a crime of which I am often guilty) end up missing out.

For the first couple sessions, sure. It fades quickly, and we started to narrate the reasons for modifications.

That's my experience as well. First, it took 20 only minutes of gaming for "Team 50+" to get a handle on the dice mechanic.

Building the dice pool in a narrative way *adds* to the tension, so it's not a major break at all. He's dead wrong about that. But building the dice pool in a narrative way takes some rethinking on how to approach that moment in the game, it's not immediately intuitive, especially coming from a "one die fits all" game like D&D.

As for gaming the pool, that's unavoidable. But I don't let the players change their minds about what they intend to do just because, say, I happen to flip a DP. It might affect their post-roll actions, but that's fine. It's exactly the same as in D&D where you rolled pretty good and still missed, or you blasted something with fire and it grins: now you know something and will react accordingly.

It really comes across to me that he is of the mentality "It didn't work for me, so it's wrong and my opinion on this is correct and nothing else matters."

And I hate that level of "I am right and you are wrong.", especially when it comes to a hobby where what is right and what is wrong will be different at every single table. Like you said, we need to be encouraging, not... whatever this is.

I like to think that he's helped others improve their games, but I too take issue with that attitude - particularly if someone were to bring it here , the very home of the game. I know it's just a schtick (man I hope it's just a schtick) but I'm sure it turns people off.

I'm just amused by the people who get upset by it.

I'm just amused by the people who get upset by it.

Takes all kinds, I tell ya.

As for gaming the pool, that's unavoidable. But I don't let the players change their minds about what they intend to do just because, say, I happen to flip a DP. It might affect their post-roll actions, but that's fine. It's exactly the same as in D&D where you rolled pretty good and still missed, or you blasted something fire and it grins: now you know something and will react accordingly.

I actually do allow them to rethink things - at least a little bit - when the pool gets challenging. Nothing like donning your best coprophagic grin and saying, "You sure you want to do that?" It seems like there's more wiggle room in the dice here than you might get with many other systems.

As for gaming the pool, that's unavoidable. But I don't let the players change their minds about what they intend to do just because, say, I happen to flip a DP. It might affect their post-roll actions, but that's fine. It's exactly the same as in D&D where you rolled pretty good and still missed, or you blasted something fire and it grins: now you know something and will react accordingly.

I actually do allow them to rethink things - at least a little bit - when the pool gets challenging.

Granted it might come up for me at some point and I might allow it depending...more accurate to say I haven't felt the need to yet. We came close last game where the players met an Inquisitor, so one PC says "I shoot him", and I say "okay, here's the difficulty" (RRPS). The "oh crap" moment was priceless, but in that case I wouldn't have allowed a change of mind because their *character* still doesn't know how hard it will be. The player did decide to Aim twice instead of moving, which was a nuance I was fine with.

Granted it might come up for me at some point and I might allow it depending...more accurate to say I haven't felt the need to yet. We came close last game where the players met an Inquisitor, so one PC says "I shoot him", and I say "okay, here's the difficulty" (RRPS). The "oh crap" moment was priceless, but in that case I wouldn't have allowed a change of mind because their *character* still doesn't know how hard it will be. The player did decide to Aim twice instead of moving, which was a nuance I was fine with.

That's the perfect situation in my mind - a very subtle modification, not a direct change of action. The PC is still shooting, just...better.

My question is, does this match the experiences of people here?

Not even close, the guy is smoking crack. How much time does it take to go "Eh, the Bounty Hunter is at medium range, he's got some fancy armor and he's hiding behind some rocks. Call it two purples and a couple of blacks, and don't forget his nemesis-ness"

Does he have no thumbs? Does he have claws for hands? How hard is it to grab dice?

As to gaming the system, well duh. That's the whole point. Players SHOULD go "Hey, my engineer friend just pulled out the hydraulics feeds on the conveyor belt. Wouldn't that spray slippery oil all over the floor? Shouldn't they have a black to shoot at us?" or "Can I have a blue on my droid programming roll because I was raised by a group of wild astromechs?"

***EDIT***

Going and reading the article, the guy's an idiot. "Narrative dice systems rely on the GM to improvise on the spot and to invent new story elements whenever the dice demand it. They put a lot of pressure on the GM to think on the spot" - because god forbid a GM have to improvise.

I admit, It's starting to annoy me when one particular player keeps asking me if he can "aim" on non-combat checks. However, I think he's mostly joking. But other than that, I love the kind of table talk Desslok mentioned above.

The overall reaction is why I almost didn't post it.

One of my concerns in looking at the dice pool system that FFG uses for Star Wars has always been that it would lead to the sort of heavy pre-roll "dice pool debating" that AngryGM reports that he encountered.

After seeing that part of the article, I was hoping to get a broader range of opinions on whether that concern is justified, instead of falling victim to confirmation bias based on a single article from someone who might have his own preconceived slant.