What is the point of GM's notes?

[Bedrockgames]

You say that these descriptions are not accurate, but you're barely able to accurately describe what you do in your living world concept without appealing to vague and generic assertions about a living world and/or marketing-speak evocative language.

I have said many times I am not the best mouthpiece for this style, there are people better at conveying these concepts than myself. But I don't think I am 'barely able to accurately describe" what I do, nor do I think I am speaking in marketing speak. You keep saying that. It isn't what I am doing. I maintain the language "living world" is very important to understanding the concept. But I am happy to explain what living means in this case and have done so

 

[prabe]

When I spoke of RPG play as a shared illusion we all maintain that was not pointed at any given way to play them. I mean all RPGs played in all ways. That in many ways we are all magicians trying to fool each other so that imaginary things feel real. This is pretty much how I view all media. If you feel I'm wrong about that please convince me otherwise.

I'm not going to argue, because I don't believe you're exactly wrong, but I think you're missing the extent to which the audience conspires with the author. Willing suspension of disbelief is a thing, I think, regardless of medium. I think it's particularly important in TRPGs, and I think it's as important for GMing as for playing.

I don't think we're disagreeing so much as looking from different angles.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I'm not going to argue, because I don't believe you're exactly wrong, but I think you're missing the extent to which the audience conspires with the author. Willing suspension of disbelief is a thing, I think, regardless of medium. I think it's particularly important in TRPGs, and I think it's as important for GMing as for playing.

I don't think we're disagreeing so much as looking from different angles.

I largely agree here. I think I would break it into two points for myself:

1) The players matter (there is a conspiracy of the audience as you say)
2) While I wouldn't use the language illusion myself (because I do think you are often setting down concrete details and such), the difference in what I am talking about is the illusion being maintained is one of two layers: the stuff that happens in the world---including what the players do---and the world. Keeping that world from being ephemeral or amorphous is incredibly important in the kind of living world I am talking about. And while notes are part of how you keep it from being amorphous they are not the only way.

 

[Aldarc]

@Bedrockgames, could you please learn to compile/consolidate your quotes when responding to people? It's not fun getting/reading multiple posts from the same person quoting the same post? It often feels like a gish-gallop.

 

[Bedrockgames]

@Bedrockgames, could you please learn to compile/consolidate your quotes when responding to people? It's not fun getting/reading multiple posts from the same person quoting the same post? It often feels like a gish-gallop.

I prefer not to do that it (to me it just becomes a giant wall of text when there are multi-quotes in threads: and I am not especially skilled at the formatting of it). It isn't done as a gish gallop, it is done so I can take points individually, focus on them and talk about them. I find when I multi-quote I am just rapidly working my way through all the points, not giving each the focus it warrants

 

[hawkeyefan]

I have said many times I am not the best mouthpiece for this style, there are people better at conveying these concepts than myself. But I don't think I am 'barely able to accurately describe" what I do, nor do I think I am speaking in marketing speak. You keep saying that. It isn't what I am doing. I maintain the language "living world" is very important to understanding the concept. But I am happy to explain what living means in this case and have done so

So what do you think it is that you as a GM of “your style” do that @pemerton doesn’t do?

Portray NPCs as dynamic individuals? Try to think about them based on their goals? Try to think of the world independently of the PCs?

The Living World/Sandbox approach you’ve described is so broad from what i’ve been able to glean, that it’s hard to think of it as its own method or style. I don’t think you’ve described anything that I wouldn’t expect to see in many games of differing styles.

 

[Bedrockgames]

So what do you think it is that you as a GM of “your style” do that @pemerton doesn’t do?

Portray NPCs as dynamic individuals? Try to think about them based on their goals? Try to think of the world independently of the PCs?

The Living World/Sandbox approach you’ve described is so broad from what i’ve been able to glean, that it’s hard to think of it as its own method or style. I don’t think you’ve described anything that I wouldn’t expect to see in many games of differing styles.

i don’t know. I am cautious to even attempt that. It seems to me I am frequently told everything from the living sandbox doesn’t exist to its so broad it encapsulate every other style. Now it is apparently the same as pemerton. if it’s the same, clearly there would be no disagreement. But I am not going to pretend to know what his style is. What I can say is, if what I am saying isn’t any different, then what are the objections to?

My feeling is defining your style in contrast to a poster online is a bad way to figure out what works at your table. Again I think I have laid out my style clearly, I think I haven’t been been overly broad. Other posters here appear to pick up on what I am saying (and away from this thread I have zero problem communicating my approach)

 

[Bedrockgames]

Portray NPCs as dynamic individuals? Try to think about them based on their goals? Try to think of the world independently of the PCs?

The Living World/Sandbox approach you’ve described is so broad from what i’ve been able to glean, that it’s hard to think of it as its own method or style. I don’t think you’ve described anything that I wouldn’t expect to see in many games of differing styles.

I think this is a little bit silly to say. Clearly folks know what we mean by sandbox, they know what we mean by living world. To suggest a sandbox living world is the same as adventure path for example doesn't make sense. To say it is the same as an investigative adventure doesn't really make sense either. To say it is the same as one based on scenes or based on characters having dramatic arcs doesn't quite make sense either. The point of this kind of campaign is it is meant to be something players can freely explore and move around in as their characters, and in order for that to work, having the living world where NPCs are also pieces in play is important. Lots of adventures can feature living NPCs. This is why I mentioned the Feast of Goblyns quote earlier (that wasn't a sandbox adventure). But if you extend that principle to the world, and you do so in a sandbox style campaign, you clearly have something different from what a lot of people here are talking about.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Also on the living world concept, if people want a better explanation that is perhaps more palatable to the sensibilities of this thread: read Stars without Number. Kevin Crawford explains what a living world is there (posters in this thread who don't take my position have praised him: and it is praise he surely deserves). Or check out the Alexandrian Video I posted a link to. At a certain point it doesn't really feel like people want to understand what I am trying to convey (I think a lot of it is people really just reject it or reject some of its assumptions)

Again here is the relevant text from Crawford:

This is the short video on the subject from Justin Alexander:
EDIT: Will try to put some more resources in here (Matt Colville has a video on sandboxes and made one recently that gets at some of the things Hawkeye touched on)

 

[Maxperson]

Apparently the Ramones are a Great Old One on my world. That ... wasn't something I anticipated when I started writing it up.

I'll counter with R.E.M. I feel fine.