Quote from: Coffee Zombie;971605Absolutely no argument there. I had a gamer in my group (for a time) that drank and gargled with that koolaid, and to this day, we could never get him to articulate exactly what his issue was with GMs and trust. Nobilis and Dogs in the Vineyard were his darling games, and he insisted on calling games by their author's title, rather than the trade name of the game. Just fricking odd. We stopped playing with him, and the problem nicely went away.

Hmmm, interesting point (re: the lack of immersion). And a complaint I've made about FATE in particular, though it doesn't share that particular rolling trait. I wonder if it's the more "game-ish" nature of the games you cite that leads to this. Player characters become the centre point by default in the system, enforced by the system, with the system revolving around their choices. Contrast with traditional games, where the same thing can happen to high level characters when actual challenges to their power become rare and/or contrived. There's probably a psychological component there worth looking into one day, if I'm ever that bored...

I got news for you and Pundit. The PCs are the center of the universe, as far as the game goes. Regardless of system, it is all about what they do. Yes, the world rolls on around them, and reacts to their incursion when necessary. But there's just no game without the PCs. Pundit's issue is ego, pure and simple. That, and he likes dice. Rather than admit that, we get this ridiculous and untenable philosophical argument that dice=empowerment.

On that: Pundit's assertion that creatures, and by extension, the GM, have no influence on the game simply because the GM isn't rolling the dice fails to address the breadth and scope of true threats/actions in any game. If it's just about the dice rolls, then such things as putting plots in motion, making clever tactical decisions, parlaying, treachery, calling for reinforcements, misdirection, choosing the high ground, spell casting, clever use of magical items, and all the other things a GM can do other than roll a dice are moot, and you wouldn't need a GM at all. you'd play a board game, because you wouldn't care about the challenges a GM can create that go beyond the dice. (By the way, the tactical stuff aside, the creatures CAN affect character stats in BH, through level difference, and invoking disad, to name two mechanical aspects. So, Pundit is wrong on that, too, likely because he saw a "swine ghost," and didn't think the whole thing through before firing off an errant salvo).

All this isn't to say that some systems do not move away from the traditional role of the all-powerful and godlike GM. Some will, and whether that approach has merit is outside the scope of this thread. It's pretty obvious that BH simply isn't one of those systems. It still has the GM doing all the things a GM typically does, except rolling the dice. Just using my short list of various options, above, it's pretty obvious that there's more to running a game than rolling the dice. In fact, I would offer here that dice rolling is the least important thing a GM does.

Quote from: RPGPundit;971418Yes I have. And I'm railing against how for no good reason other than disempowering the GM, the GM is forbidden from rolling dice in combat.

The GM rolls enemy Hit Dice for enemy HP, and also rolls for enemy damage, in combat. :cool:

I think you are a touch too busy ascribing nefarious motives to the rather innocuous.

Quote from: Opaopajr;971628I think you are a touch too busy ascribing nefarious motives to the rather innocuous.

To be fair, that is his raison d'être.

Maybe there's a Domino theory for RPGs. If you let D&D start with player facing rolls, pretty soon the rest of the game might fall under the influence of communism...I mean, storygaming.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;971662Maybe there's a Domino theory for RPGs. If you let D&D start with player facing rolls, pretty soon the rest of the game might fall under the influence of communism...I mean, storygaming.

All I know for sure is that we don't stop them in Vietnam, GMs in Burma, Thailand, Indonesia, and even Japan will not be able to roll their dice behind their GM screens.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;971662Maybe there's a Domino theory for RPGs. If you let D&D start with player facing rolls, pretty soon the rest of the game might fall under the influence of communism...I mean, storygaming.

Maybe Pundit could give arms and training to the OSR Mujahideen to slow the spread of this corrupting influence on the hobby.

I think the perfect weapon would be The Pundit Hack. The GM rolls all the dice, and if the players so much as dare touch them, the GM is allowed to shoot them in the face.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;971696I think the perfect weapon would be The Pundit Hack. The GM rolls all the dice, and if the players so much as dare touch them, the GM is allowed to shoot them in the face.

Or the Game Daddy variant where he has his daughter shoot you in the face if anyone touches his dice.

Quote from: Baulderstone;971697Or the Game Daddy variant where he has his daughter shoot you in the face if anyone touches his dice.

Player: "Don't shoot me!"
GM: "Don't worry, I won't shoot you."
Player sighs in relief.
To daughter: "Shoot him."
Player shits pants.

I approve of the direction this thread has taken.

The person running this website is a racist who publicly advocates genocidal practices.

I am deleting my content.

I recommend you do the same.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;971751The next thing you know, the Swine will be releasing RPGs in which no one rolls dice. Fucking Swine.

I see what you did there...

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;971698Player: "Don't shoot me!"
GM: "Don't worry, I won't shoot you."
Player sighs in relief.
To daughter: "Shoot him."
Player shits pants.

Lol one vote for The Game Daddy variant.

Quote from: Itachi;971785Lol one vote for The Game Daddy variant.

I stole that from a movie, but I couldn't remember which one until now: De Palma's Scarface:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=958GzzqgWnw

Just imagine Scarface is pissed off because Frank touched the dice.

wow, now I can't read Pundit's missives without that fake Al Pacino Cuban accent in my head. It's kinda awesome.

Quote from: cranebump;971427How about we flip this, and you tell us why you think a GM should roll the dice?

I covered this already: because the GM should control the world; and a 'world' where the players roll the dice creates an impression of a world where only the player's characters are real, and everything else is just window-dressing.