What is the point of GM's notes?

[Emerikol]

You're conflating living world and the idea of gamist play, they aren't synonymous at all. Living world isn't an idea that's limited to one kind of game or even one style of game. The amount of prep needed for game A depends far more on the GM than it does the style of game in question.

No. I used the term gamist to mean a term that has taken on special meaning in gaming circles beyond it's pure English meaning. It has nothing to do with the Forge.

 

[prabe]

I suppose if a GM detailed his entire world out at the sandbox level and had hundreds of assistants helping he that it would not invalidate the design as a living world. As for the second bullet, I suppose if a GM in error created something that was impossible for a group to experience it wouldn't invalidate the rest of the design. Otherwise it's a pretty practical definition of what I'd call a living world.

Phrasing my question differently: Those three requirements for "living world" also seem to me to apply to the campaigns I'm running--which I would not describe as a "living world." How could we tell whether I'm wrong about my own campaigns?

 

[Campbell]

Part of the reason I prefer not to talk about games in terms of play styles is that it has the tendency to join agenda and technique at the hip often to the point of making a fetish out of particular techniques. The particular techniques get treated as the only way to get there instead of just a way (often one not sited to all groups with similar aims). I use to get pretty wrapped up in that way of thinking myself. When I first came across Burning Wheel I thought the only way to get crisp character driven play was the particular techniques found in Burning Wheel. Then I played Dogs in the Vineyard and ran Sorcerer which achieve similar ends in incredibly different ways.

 

[Maxperson]

Phrasing my question differently: Those three requirements for "living world" also seem to me to apply to the campaigns I'm running--which I would not describe as a "living world." How could we tell whether I'm wrong about my own campaigns?

Why would you describe it as not being a living world?

 

[Doug McCrae]

Further to post #2683 above, here are two more examples of the use of "living world". The first recommends a significant amount of prep while the second advocates 'Schrodinger's GM-ing' – abandoning one's prep!

Dragon #65 (1982), Law of the land by Ed Greenwood
In the article “Plan Before You Play” (DRAGON™ issue #63), we looked at politics on a large scale… But more important in AD&D play is the to-and-fro of local human interaction, the politics of everyday life in a village or a kingdom…

Development of local politics will give any campaign depth and believability, and at the same time create reasons and impetus for characters to undertake adventures (and players to role-play). Make a world seem real, so that what occurs matters to the players, and you will make play far more enjoyable and memorable — and a DM owes it to his or her players to give them an active, living world to engage their interest, rather than a colorful background of artificial, lifeless immobility through which characters are allowed to rampage.

Dragon #184 (1992), “You again!” by Scott Sheffield
During the course of play, PCs invariably suffer various misfortunes. Given time, players might attribute their unfortunate circumstances to the fiendish machinations of their slippery NPC foes. Sometimes their suppositions may indeed be correct, while at other times they may be wildly inaccurate. If a player incorrectly concludes that the party’s nemesis is behind the PCs’ misfortunes, you as the DM shouldn’t disabuse the player of the notion. Instead, permit the players to draw their own conclusions, and have fun.

If the players’ inferences are erroneous but nevertheless intriguing, a nimble DM can modify the story line in that direction. Done well, this enriches play as players start to see the adventuring environment as a living world where happenings are not a collection of random encounters without meaning or connection.

 

[Fenris-77]

No. I used the term gamist to mean a term that has taken on special meaning in gaming circles beyond it's pure English meaning. It has nothing to do with the Forge.

I think we all know what gamist means in terms of RPGs. Try not to assume that everyone else is a blithering idiot, this will go faster. For a lot of people the boundaries between GNS and the Forge are blurry at best anyway (not that I mentioned the Forge). Now, if you don't mean gamist in terms of GNS theory, then you're the blithering idiot, no offense, because no one is going to have any idea what you're talking about.

 

[Emerikol]

Phrasing my question differently: Those three requirements for "living world" also seem to me to apply to the campaigns I'm running--which I would not describe as a "living world." How could we tell whether I'm wrong about my own campaigns?

Well, as stated elsewhere, the term Living World took on a meaning long ago and it pretty much aligns with what I've said above. I'm not saying that people can't feel like their world is living and it not meet those requirements. I'm just saying the gamist term took on a meaning. At the time, the two ideas probably overlapped very well. A lot of time has passed though and others may get that feeling other ways.

So applying the term to your game, I'd say it would be a Living World by definition whatever you thought. If you want to ignore the term and talk about the plain English usage then I'd assuredly have to interview your players.

 

[Emerikol]

I think we all know what gamist means in terms of RPGs. Try not to assume that everyone else is a blithering idiot, this will go faster. For a lot of people the boundaries between GNS and the Forge are blurry at best anyway (not that I mentioned the Forge). Now, if you don't mean gamist in terms of GNS theory, then you're the blithering idiot, no offense, because no one is going to have any idea what you're talking about.

No. Gamist existed a term long before the Forge ever existed. I meant a term that has been drafted for use beyond it's plain English meaning. The Forge very much did that but the Forge doesn't own the term.

I think everyone but you got my meaning so take that as you will.

 

[Fenris-77]

No. Gamist existed a term long before the Forge ever existed. I meant a term that has been drafted for use beyond it's plain English meaning. The Forge very much did that but the Forge doesn't own the term.

I think everyone but you got my meaning so take that as you will.

Dude, try not to be a jerk. It's a GNS term, which I mentioned, and has no currency as a term outside that. Perhaps you should go back and read my entire post instead of just identifying the word Forge and losing your mind. Just a thought...

 

[Emerikol]

Dude, try not to be a jerk. It's a GNS term, which I mentioned, and has no currency as a term outside that. Perhaps you should go back and read my entire post instead of just identifying the word Forge and losing your mind. Just a thought...

I know it's a GNS term. I didn't use it that way. I explained myself. You apparently just won't relent.