GM DESCRIPTION: NARRATION OR CONVERSATION?

Bedrockgames · Jun 21, 2019

Imaro said:
Can you give an example of this conversational style that accepts the way all people communicate?

No, I am spending enough time posting. I am not going to spend more writing examples out.

Bedrockgames · Jun 21, 2019

Imaro said:
EDIT: Also what do you do if you have a player who likes evocative narration??

Then I give them a little evocative narration because fun at the table is more important than ideas about what works at the table. But I won't go full pathfinder because of one player either. It is about the mix of the group. I view running a game like making food for everyone. You can't cleave to an ideologically pure playstyle if you have mixed groups, and most groups are mixed. At the same time. Speaking in that style really is about the furthest thing from my natural comfort zone, so there is probably only so far I would go there (but that is purely about the fact that at a certain point, I start to seriously not enjoy myself as a GM if I am spending all my time devising narrations before hand or reading from boxed text all the time).

The Crimson Binome · Jun 21, 2019

HJFudge said:
Of course players are allowed to consider your word choice. That is the primary tool that is used to communicate the game environment. It is not metagaming. You, the DM, are describing the scene to the players so that the players may make choices and react to the scene in character. Asking them to ignore what you tell them and not consider why you decided to describe the Spike Demon as friendly as opposed to threatening is nonsense of the highest order.

Don't react to my choice of words. React to what those words mean.

The spike demon is equally threatening, regardless of which words I use to convey that threat. It isn't suddenly less-dangerous, just because I use cheap words and pop-culture references to convey that threat. It isn't more-dangerous, if I use scary words and graphic imagery. It is what it is, nothing more and nothing less, regardless of out-of-game factors such as the vocabulary of the one describing it.

If you can't separate the content of a message from the box it's packaged in, then that's on you.

Aldarc · Jun 22, 2019

Imaro said:
EDIT: Also what do you do if you have a player who likes evocative narration??

What do you do if you have a player who doesn't like evocative narration???

dragoner · Jun 22, 2019

What does "evocative narration" even mean?

Hussar · Jun 22, 2019

Aldarc said:
Just like in the other thread, you continually failed (miserably) to demonstrate that words like "wield" are non-conversational or "a deliberate word choice for a fantasy RPG." IMO, the phrase "wielding a gun", for example, is conversational language. I had even demonstrated that you can have prose with a young child's vocabulary while others indicated that some people exercise a larger vocabulary in their conversations, so vocabulary size and diction should not be equated to prose or non-conversational language. It seems that you never learn and just repeat your same mistakes over. Too bad.

I also don't think that something becomes narrative prose just because we use word fields that are more common in some contexts over others. "Halbard" is not a common word of conversation either, but the GM telling players "he charges at you with his halberd" is not necessarily prose either, but can be delivered with a conversational tone or manner.

Wow. Bitter much? Just because you got spanked once in a thread, you need to carry that baggage over here too?

I proved it sufficiently over there as well - the use of words like "wield" are outside of standard conversation simply because standard conversation doesn't use words like that. This isn't opinion, this is actual fact. Sure, "halberd" isn't a standard conversational word either, but, that's a game specific term, so, I already told you that that isn't included.

The trick is, most people don't even really realize they are shifting their speech patterns. But, we do shft them when playing and shift them beyond simply incorporating game specific language.

Bedrockgames · Jun 22, 2019

Guys, two people asserting victory in another thread doesn't shed any light on who made their point better.

Fenris-77 · Jun 22, 2019

Saelorn said:
If your players are cheating, then they need to stop. If they're incapable of following the rules, then it's time to find new players. Enabling this bad habit is literally the worst thing you could possibly do.

Cheating? Who said anything about cheating? You're entitled to your opinion of metagaming of course, but kindly refrain from telling me my business when all you're talking about is your opinion. It's not nearly a simple enough topic for you to be patronizingly dismissive about other people's ability to run a game and manage a table.

Bedrockgames · Jun 22, 2019

dragoner said:
What does "evocative narration" even mean?

That has been one of the difficulties of finding clarity in the conversation. It is basically shorthand for speaking in 'boxed text' or 'prose' style.

Aldarc · Jun 22, 2019

Hussar said:
Wow. Bitter much? Just because you got spanked once in a thread, you need to carry that baggage over here too?

Excuse you? Revisionist history much?

I proved it sufficiently over there as well - the use of words like "wield" are outside of standard conversation simply because standard conversation doesn't use words like that. This isn't opinion, this is actual fact. Sure, "halberd" isn't a standard conversational word either, but, that's a game specific term, so, I already told you that that isn't included.

No you didn't. You still haven't now, Hussar.