Is RPGing a literary endeavour?

Aldarc · Jun 5, 2019

Maxperson said:
I did. You are arbitrarily deciding that some peoples preferences(religion, diet, etc.) are more valuable than other peoples preferences, calling one side names if they don't cave in to your arbitrary decision.

So if you were ordering a single pizza for the entire group to share, and you knew that one of your friends had dietary restrictions that precluded those toppings, that you would still order the pizza that disregarded those dietary restrictions of your friends? I'm sorry, but how are you even a functioning human being? How is that not being selfish and callous to others? How is that person not being a massive wang-rod?

Imaro said:
What does this even mean? Anytime I'm relaying information (regardless of it's literary quality), unless you are constantly interrupting me, you are (at least until I am finished speaking) a passive audience member to whatever I am narrating.

I'm fairly certain that this has been explained by pemerton earlier in the thread.

Maxperson · Jun 5, 2019

Aldarc said:
So if you were ordering a single pizza for the entire group to share, and you knew that one of your friends had dietary restrictions that precluded those toppings, that you would still order the pizza that disregarded those dietary restrictions of your friends?

It depends. If 7 of us want pepperoni and one person is vegetarian, we're getting pepperoni. 1 person's personal choices do not trump 7. It's about the number of people, not who prefers what. Religion is a preference. Vegetarian is a preference. Liking pepperoni is a preference. They are all equal. About the only thing I can think of that would be unequal is if someone had an allergy to a topping type. Then it would not be a preference and people would be jerks if they got that topping on the pizza, assuming they knew in advance about the allergy.

I'm sorry, but how are you even a functioning human being? How is that not being selfish and callous to others? How is that person not being a massive wang-rod?

Judgmental much? LOL

Imaro · Jun 5, 2019

Bedrockgames said:
I could be wrong but I believe Pemerton is talking about players actually having input into content. This would definitely make them not passive. Further even if the player input is just through their questions to the GM and their actions as characters, I think there is a huge difference between a game where players recognize the GM has a space allotted for narration, versus ones where the players can freely interject, challenge or declare actions at any point. Obviously that doesn't mean people are rude. Everyone usually gets a chance to say what they have to say. But the GM's narration isn't treated very differently from other elements of the conversation.

Ok I'm more confused... If "Everyone gets a chance to say what they have to say..." then at some point narration is occurring and there is a passive audience listening to it. I'm failing to see the difference here since characters are free to ask questions, act or do whatever they want once the boxed text (or sometimes when the boxed text) of say a module is being relayed. Now if we are speaking to players creating content during play whenever they want...well then we are back to a small subset of specific games and a specific/narrow playstyle.

Imaro · Jun 5, 2019

Aldarc said:
I'm fairly certain that this has been explained by pemerton earlier in the thread.

Link? And if not why bother posting this the thread is enormous at this point...

Aldarc · Jun 5, 2019

Imaro said:
Link? And if not why bother posting this the thread is enormous at this point...

It's not my job to do your work for you.

Imaro · Jun 5, 2019

Aldarc said:
It's not my job to do your work for you.

So then why make a useless reply? Thanks...

Aldarc · Jun 5, 2019

Imaro said:
So then why make a useless post? Thanks...

To remind you that this has probably been answered before in the thread if you bother to read the thread. I took the effort to go back to the OP and some of the early posts to read through because it was my resonsbililty to do so in order to contextualize the thread. I think that you can manage.

Imaro · Jun 5, 2019

Aldarc said:
To remind you that this has probably been answered before in the thread if you bother to read the thread. I took the effort to go back to the OP and some of the early posts to read through because it was my resonsbililty to do so in order to contextualize the thread. I think that you can manage.

So it probably has been answered... right, I'll get on searching over 100 pages of a thread for what might be answered....

Oh and for the record this isn't school or a job I don't have work, and I don't have a responsibility related to this. Chill dude. You don't want to help fine then just don't reply... it's way easier than the wasted word count you're adding to.

pemerton · Jun 5, 2019

Imaro said:
Anytime I'm relaying information (regardless of it's literary quality), unless you are constantly interrupting me, you are (at least until I am finished speaking) a passive audience member to whatever I am narrating.

I don't think this is true. I don't intend what follows to be triggering for anyone, and apologise if it is - I couldn't come up with a completely safe example. But, that said, and continuing on:

If I relate to you the information that a bomb is about to go off in your building, I don't think you would be a passive audience. I think you would engage with what I'm saying in many quite active ways. Including, perhaps, certain sorts of interruptions, but not limited to those.

EDIT: I think this post from Campbell, not far upthread, presents an idea of players as something different from a passive audience:

Campbell said:
What is fundamental to me is that we are all involved in the process as creative peers and everyone's contributions are valued equally. Also that everyone is expected to contribute. Also that contributions move play forward and demand action from other players (GM included).

Conversely, a way upthread [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] talked about a GM "rolling up the plot wagon". To me at least, that suggests a situation in which the players are something of a passive audience.

Imaro · Jun 5, 2019

pemerton said:
I don't think this is true. I don't intend what follows to be triggering for anyone, and apologise if it is - I couldn't come up with a completely safe example. But, that said, and continuing on:

If I relate to you the information that a bomb is about to go off in your building, I don't think you would be a passive audience. I think you would engage with what I'm saying in many quite active ways. Including, perhaps, certain sorts of interruptions, but not limited to those.

So is this what you mean in an rpg situation... not regulated to but including active interruption of what you are saying? Besides active interruption what would be other ways of interacting beyond that of a passive audience that using narration disallows? Though I think I would still contend I'm passive until you've communicated the situation (a bomb about to go off in the buiding) to me and I require further clarification, information, etc. The thing is I'd probably gain more/better information/clarity if I waited until you finished telling me wat you know before interrupting...