What is *worldbuilding* for?

[hawkeyefan]

Does every movie "stink" because there's someone who didn't like it (or wouldn't like it if they watched it)? I don't think it's an imperative, in creative or hobby endeavours, that they appeal to everyone.

I know nothing of [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION]'s game except from what I can infer from his posts on these boards. Given his criticism of the way I adjudicated the bazaar-feather scene in my BW game, and his hints at how he might run a somewhat similar episode in his game, I infer that I wouldn't particularly enjoy playing in his game. That's not any sort of tragedy - after all, I'm not, and as far as I know he doesn't paticularly want me to.

It similarly seems that Maxperson would not enjoy GMing a game where the GM is what he calls "useless" - ie has the job of framing, embellishing success, and adjudicating consequences for failure, but does not have the sort of authority over outcomes that he seems to favour. But, again, that doesn't seem to be a problem as he is not being forced or even (as far as I know) asked by anyone to GM such a game.

Sure, but I was joking. I was taking the extreme, incomplete view that each of you has of the other's game and treating those like they are the only two options.

But in reality, I don't really think the crappy worldbuilding game that you're describing really exists, or at least is not typical of games that include what you call worldbuilding. Not any more than the awful player driven game that Max is describing where everything is made up on the fly and nothing makes sense and the GM is just there to abdicate dice rolls actually exists.

Both of you seem so intent on showing how horrible the other style is that you don't seem willing to listen to any of the positives about that style.

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah. When someone uses the term ‘railroad’ I’m confident they don’t really understand what they’re talking about.

OK, then: how would you define 'railroad' in an RPG context?

 

[Tony Vargas]

OK, then: how would you define 'railroad' in an RPG context?

Depends on the RPG. Boot Hill? The Railroad could be the villain trying to steal the townsfolk's land, for instance...

Both of you seem so intent on showing how horrible the other style ....

I suppose they could both be right.

 

[pemerton]

If the player is going to describe exactly how a success plays out, and exactly how failures play out, the DM doesn't need to be part of that game.

And who has ever said that players get to establish the consequences of failure?

Not me. Not Eero Tuovinen. Not any quote I've posted from a rulebook (for DitV, BW, MHRP, maybe others I'm forgetting).

In fact, in replies to both you and [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION], I have reitereated, again and again, that the GM narrates failures and this is a principal source of story dynamics.

Did you now read those posts?

 

[pemerton]

What a profound defense of the use of stereotypes because it's taking about generalities and not specific people.

I'll ask again: do you disagree that railroading is a relational property? Did you miss my post about that, or are you just dishonestly ignoring it?

 

[pemerton]

I was taking the extreme, incomplete view that each of you has of the other's game and treating those like they are the only two options.

But in reality, I don't really think the crappy worldbuilding game that you're describing really exists, or at least is not typical of games that include what you call worldbuilding.

I appreciate the sentiment behind your post - genuinely - but my issue with GM-heavy worldbuilding is not that it's done badly.

It's that I don't like it.

I won't reiterate why, as I feel I've probably done that enough in this thread. But I'm not saying that I just don't like it when it's badly done.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

And so do I. Like I’ve said multiple times, much of my notes are to help me when the plays say, “I do x” and nothing immediately comes to mind. In addition, when you have time to consider things you’ll often come up with better ideas than just in the moment.

I find that the quality of cool increases significantly for me when I am able to provide additional inputs to my improv and reactions to what the players/characters say and do.

And no, making a list has nothing to do with what I or others consider cool. Lists and such are a process, a tool to help produce the content.

The only way to determine whether the content is cool is in your interactions and communication with the players, along with your own assessment of what’s cool to you.

OK, I guess I'm trying to still understand what these notes and lists and maps and such DO. I think we've actually got that however, it was way back around post 1200 IIRC, so I suspect now we're talking about something 'else'.

So, here's a small example:

A player states the desire of his character to collect all of the Seven Swords of the Greatest Heroes. After some number of travails he finds himself in a situation, which I have framed, in which he can gain one of these swords, or he can save someone's life (lets assume they're innocent and worthy of saving, that's how I could frame it). Its up to the player. His beliefs are now being put to the test! Every element of play leading up to this was directed in some fashion to this point. It might have included many setbacks and other equally trying situations, but here he is now, and he's got to choose.

I think that's pretty much the boiled down essence of the standard narrative mode of play. You don't HAVE to dispose of all background or 'myth', but you DO have to focus on the dramatic conflict, which is posited, INHERENTLY and can truly only come from, the player of the character.

 

[Lanefan]

And who has ever said that players get to establish the consequences of failure?

Not me. Not Eero Tuovinen. Not any quote I've posted from a rulebook (for DitV, BW, MHRP, maybe others I'm forgetting).

In fact, in replies to both you and [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION], I have reitereated, again and again, that the GM narrates failures and this is a principal source of story dynamics.

Indeed.

But is the DM allowed to here introduce her own thematic elements or story ideas, or is she still bound to narrating failure only within the bounds of the PCs' stories and how they are affected?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Nod. I was making a similar observation, from another angle. Discussions like this go back to Role v Roll and three-fold theory, and the general animus against D&D at that time, and indeed to criticisms of before and since.
The defensiveness is understandable.

Yeah, well, I think it gets a bit extreme. I mean, here we are on page 207, but if you go back to page 1 I think post 2, maybe it was post 3, was already launching an attack on the OP...

 

[Lanefan]

OK, I guess I'm trying to still understand what these notes and lists and maps and such DO. I think we've actually got that however, it was way back around post 1200 IIRC, so I suspect now we're talking about something 'else'.

So, here's a small example:

A player states the desire of his character to collect all of the Seven Swords of the Greatest Heroes. After some number of travails he finds himself in a situation, which I have framed, in which he can gain one of these swords, or he can save someone's life (lets assume they're innocent and worthy of saving, that's how I could frame it). Its up to the player. His beliefs are now being put to the test! Every element of play leading up to this was directed in some fashion to this point. It might have included many setbacks and other equally trying situations, but here he is now, and he's got to choose.

This is cool.

But wouldn't it be easier for you if you, on hearing the player's goal is to collect the 7 Swords, then came up with ideas on where each of those swords might be placed and what might be guarding them - and made notes on such - so as to save yourself having to make it all up on the fly later?

I think that's pretty much the boiled down essence of the standard narrative mode of play. You don't HAVE to dispose of all background or 'myth', but you DO have to focus on the dramatic conflict, which is posited, INHERENTLY and can truly only come from, the player of the character.[/QUOTE]