What is the point of GM's notes?

[Manbearcat]

except 1 wasn’t a) a straight line of transmission (there is a lot to be skeptical about when it comes to claims of unbroken lineages and oral traditions in martial arts, with many arguably being more recent reinventions. 2) There were and remain a very high percentage of not functionally good martial artists. This was something we realized with the UFC: there was and is tons of martial arts practices that don’t work because the relied heavily on theory not enough on fire. I think it is similar with RPGs: fire-the table is most important.

Check out my post again.

I'm using "Martial Art" in the generic form here....as a stand-in here for any art that is primarily driven by the body (martial here meaning the physicality of it could turn a body into an implement for capability in combat); dance, ball sports, etc just as much as wrestling.

And, again, I'm talking "functional across the normal distribution of a population." Going into the octagon and getting your ass kicked by someone at the tail of the distribution of humanity doesn't mean you aren't a functional martial artist who can't defend themselves against an average attacker (and yes, I absolutely agree that there are a lot of "snake oil" martial arts out there and Kung Fu has been dealing with a comeuppance as of late - given its historical reputation as an apex martial art).

EDIT - if you (or anyone else) would like, we can just make it "physical arts"...whatever makes it so we're focused on the idea and not the details.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Check out my post again.

I'm using "Martial Art" in the generic form here....as a stand-in here for any art that is primarily driven by the body (martial); dance, ball sports, etc just as much as wrestling.

And, again, I'm talking "functional across the normal distribution of a population." Going into the octagon and getting your ass kicked by someone at the tail of the distribution of humanity doesn't mean you aren't a functional martial artist who can't defend themselves against an average attacker (and yes, I absolutely agree that there are a lot of "snake oil" martial arts out there and Kung Fu has been dealing with a comeuppance as of late - given its historical reputation as an apex martial art).

That is fair, but that also seems very broad. For example, I would argue humans have advanced technologically in terms of warfare and tactics, but that, I think is largely also a product of going to war (was is defiantly a pressure cooker). The same with a lot of sports, there is an evolution that occurs in that pressure cooker of competition that is generating massive revenue. But have we really gotten better at acrobatics? Have we gotten physically better at fighting? (maybe in some instances, but if you asked me would I rather be put in a death match cage unarmed against a random person from today, and a random person from 100,000 years ago, I think I might go with the person from today (because my intuition tells me we've evolved away from the needs of being as physically strong and enduring as we've become more civilized: and that the person from 100,000 years ago is more likely to have killed with their bare hands).

In terms of RPGs and teaching GMs, 90s storytelling, etc I have more thoughts on that but will have to post on them when I have more time

 

[Campbell]

I would hardly use the UFC as an example of trial by fire being a good training strategy. We are after all talking about a sport where fighters often train for 6+ months for a fight that usually takes less than 15 minutes. The training required to even be a mediocre fighter requires a strong grasp of striking, wrestling, and BJJ. In my personal while fluidity and adaptation are important, an undisciplined and haphazard approach in combat and strength sports is a recipe for disaster.

Not making an argument about anything else here.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I would hardly use the UFC as an example of trial by fire being a good training strategy. We are after all talking about a sport where fighters often train for 6+ months for a fight that usually takes less than 15 minutes. The training required to even be a mediocre fighter requires a strong grasp of striking, wrestling, and BJJ. In my personal while fluidity and adaptation are important, an undisciplined and haphazard approach in combat and strength sports is a recipe for disaster.

Not making an argument about anything else here.

The point is that fire is how you arrived at the Striking+Grappling formula. Prior to that there were all kinds of ideas floating around about what style was supreme and a lot of us we way off in our assumptions. But I also think if you go into an MMA gym, there is more of a trial by fire because you are sparring. And if you just look at BJJ, that is, at least as far as grappling is concerned, trial by fire because you roll against people who are trying to outdo you (and you can go pretty hard as long as people are tapping out). Same with a boxing gym: sparring at boxing gyms is pretty much like getting beat up for the first several months.

Training strategy obviously matters as well. But if you look at striking, you don't become even a mediocre striker just hitting pads, the bag, and working on your form in the mirror: you have to spar. It is the only way to figure out how to apply the techniques you are learning. You can see this clearly when people who don't spar, but have maybe trained in a style for a while, attempt sparring for the first time or do so very irregularly.

 

[innerdude]

@Bedrockgames, thanks for taking the time to try and create a more detailed breakdown of the process you use to try and generate "living world" play.

Even if my own experience with sandbox play has not generated the same kinds of synergy/effect as described, I am grateful for the effort you put in to describing the process.

Interestingly, the things you describe are not unfamiliar. I can distinctly recall the mental flow states of preestablished fiction -> player action declaration -> resolution -> extrapolation. I can clearly envision myself in the middle of that process, and recall my cognitive state.

For me the beginning of disillusionment was the realization that there were still so many points where I just had to create or extrapolate whole cloth. It felt . . . like despite my best attempts, that I still had too much control over the fiction. I wanted to give my players more control, to feel more like they were driving their own success, without me-as-GM simply smoothing over the path for them.

Yet I also didn't want their victories to come cheaply either. There may be another avenue of exploration to this beyond simply the prep/notes/prefabrication, which is how to telegraph/communicate challenges to the players. The thing that's been interesting in Ironsworn, is that the players have fully embraced their role in collaboratively changing the fictional framing of challenges as their actions resolve.

They're very willing to engage with the consequences as they arise, with a strong recognition that to maintain principled play, they need to engage in the spirit of the rules and take into account the fictional framing.

So most of the time so far in Ironsworn, the players' challenges have arisen much more organically.

I actually think I need to explore BitD to look more closely at the idea of clocks, as they seem to be a mechanic that orients toward how to introduce new challenges to the players.

 

[Fenris-77]

Clocks can be and are used in just about any system to track complex tasks of various sorts. In Blades they are pretty tightly tied to the basic game of course, and used for all sorts of things. Long term projects, faction events, consequences of various sorts, plus more in-game things like complex tasks (avoiding security for example) and opposed tasks, as well as combat stuff when appropriate. Even if you don't play Blades, those rules are a great primer for what clocks can be used for and how.

 

[Campbell]

The point is that fire is how you arrived at the Striking+Grappling formula. Prior to that there were all kinds of ideas floating around about what style was supreme and a lot of us we way off in our assumptions. But I also think if you go into an MMA gym, there is more of a trial by fire because you are sparring. And if you just look at BJJ, that is, at least as far as grappling is concerned, trial by fire because you roll against people who are trying to outdo you (and you can go pretty hard as long as people are tapping out). Same with a boxing gym: sparring at boxing gyms is pretty much like getting beat up for the first several months.

Training strategy obviously matters as well. But if you look at striking, you don't become even a mediocre striker just hitting pads, the bag, and working on your form in the mirror: you have to spar. It is the only way to figure out how to apply the techniques you are learning. You can see this clearly when people who don't spar, but have maybe trained in a style for a while, attempt sparring for the first time or do so very irregularly.

Not sure what you are trying to get at here, but in BJJ training you are provided with instruction, have technique training, perform drills, and roll. You do it all. You do not learn just by rolling. A strong grasp of theory, physical conditioning, learning individual techniques, training those techniques individually and as part of rolling. All are required. Skirt on any and progression of your skills will falter.

No one is arguing that the focus should not be on active practice, just that without intentionality, strong fundamentals, and developed technique that live practice generally will not go well. Even if you are naturally gifted training haphazardly will stagnate your growth.

Also sparring / rolling is way different than actually fighting. Sparring is part of training. Only bad training partners treat sparring like a fight.

I'll reiterate. Not making a gaming argument here.

 

[Fenris-77]

One, this metaphor has turned into a monster. Two, UFC is not the high bar that should be used to measure martial effectiveness. That's a silly bloody idea when it's still a sport that has extensive lists of things you aren't allowed to do. Anyway, I'll be moving on now, as you were gentlemen.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Not sure what you are trying to get at here, but in BJJ training you are provided with instruction, have technique training, perform drills, and roll. You do it all. You do not learn just by rolling. A strong grasp of theory, physical conditioning, learning individual techniques, training those techniques individually and as part of rolling. All are required. Skirt on any and progression of your skills will falter.

I understand that. My point was one of the things that positioned BJJ to do so well in ufc was they rolled and could do so fully. A lot of other styles had much more minimal levels of practicing against fully resisting opponents. Not denying the important difference other elements of training. But the fire of going against a fully resisting opponent is the only way to learn how to use those fundamentals in a real way.

 

[Manbearcat]

Not sure what you are trying to get at here, but in BJJ training you are provided with instruction, have technique training, perform drills, and roll. You do it all. You do not learn just by rolling. A strong grasp of theory, physical conditioning, learning individual techniques, training those techniques individually and as part of rolling. All are required. Skirt on any and progression of your skills will falter.

No one is arguing that the focus should not be on active practice, just that without intentionality, strong fundamentals, and developed technique that live practice generally will not go well. Even if you are naturally gifted training haphazardly will stagnate your growth.

Also sparring / rolling is way different than actually fighting. Sparring is part of training. Only bad training partners treat sparring like a fight.

I'll reiterate. Not making a gaming argument here.

I (no surprise) agree with all of this. One thing in particular I agree with (and was going to post on) is sparring being training. In the most important ways (structure, constraints, trust, neurological system deployment), it in no way resembles an actual fight. When you're in an actual fight (and its not clear to me how many commenters on here have been in actual fights...where your freedom, your life, someone else's life is hanging in the balance), all of that stuff in the parenthetical above is complete gone or disjointed.

And I will use this to make a gaming argument (to continue the argument I've been making). One of the primary reasons I've been making this case for reorienting the training regime of GMing is precisely because of that last part of the parenthetical above; neurological system deployment.

Back to fighting...

When you have enough applied trained as a physical combatant, being faced with actually having to lock horns with another human and defend yourself becomes a completely different ordeal neurologically. The adrenaline and cortisol dump that would put most people into a state of extreme agitation, fog, and oftentimes negatively impacting performance and confidence becomes muted or inverted. Trained fighters don't get swept away on a train of emotion and endocrine response, they're able to see things more clearly, able to be present, able to move better, able to de-escalate things. And their "monkey ego" is considerably less likely to be involved in the suite of decisions to come.

GMing is similar.

New GMs who are not prepared (because their base isn't underneath them, their fundamentals aren't sound, they haven't been through a regime of training that diminishes the adrenaline and cortisol dump that comes with the responsibilities of GMing) are likely overwhelmed by their endocrine response, their neurological system is firing in ways that is actually harmful to their performance, and they aren't confident.

That needs to be fixed. The best way I know to fix it is through the training regime I've been espousing here.