Search results

This is actually a really interesting conundrum for me. In theory actually I don't disagree with what @deleuzian_kernel says. In practice I think it would be hard to port procedural generation into a lot of games because backstory is so entwined with npc priorities. In those games, no npc...

Then the GM isn't committed to playing situationally? If the backstory is part of the situation (whether the players know it or not), then it is kind of real in the sense that there is a fact of the matter. Or put another way. Can the GM change the backstory mid way through? Like decide it...

What I've found is that if you're both playing to find out what happens. Then fiat is fine as long as it's seen as living world + choice the person is making in response to you. You need to be on the same page that this is something that can actually go either way. If the GM or Player for that...

I don't know if it's all trad. Even 30 years ago when I was doing full on trad, I'd have taken your characters backstory and made it part of the plot. You get to ideologically dismantle the slavers and have sword fights with them and so on. And taking backstory and making it plot seems far more...

How do you know if it is a challenge? Do you frame the scene with the challenge in mind, like 'this is a skill challenge scene about x'. Or do you talk about the character goal on a meta level, like the player may say 'my characters wants to achieve x' and so then you frame a scene?

I use really bog standard conflict resolution. Two characters are talking and one of them says something. We need to know if it triggers a conflict. So we have to ask if there is a conflict. Which means a conflict between what and what? we need to identify the two opposing forces. Your lover...

What's the issue with fiat? Do you just want to add a dice roll or are you not sure what you'd be rolling for?

Yeah I agree. This is like rubber meets road stuff because we're dealing with how effective the results of an action should be and when it causes a new conflict. I'm playing the pool at the moment and my basic rule is something like 'as effective as you want/think up until the point you want to...

Like with Sorcerer dice. You can just fiat, well not by the rules but you catch my drift. The dice aren't doing any mediation between player authority in terms of the outcomes the players want. They provide bounce or 'the unwelcome' if you buy into Vincent's whole thing (I'm on the fence about...

Yeah I agree with all you said so I don't have much to add. Yeah I really should mention this more. 99% of rpg play is mediocre imo. Most of the texts are terrible and a great deal of play is a confused mish-mash that would be greatly improved if it was more considered. A lot of my arguments...

Well it depends on whether you mean it in a tautological sense. Could there be a situation where the player is interested in seeing what's going on to the west but playing to the fidelity of their character means they 'have' to accede to the Duke's request?

My default preference is for 'off screen' stuff to be known about by everyone at the table, simply so we're on the same page. Yet there are some back story parts that are commonly hidden that necessitate other back story parts to be hidden. The most common hidden backstory part is the status of...

What do you think the benefits of having a GM are then? Because to me, having hidden information seems one the features. although given it's the feature i'm least keen on the other reason I've found is strong scene framing authority. gmless games have to deal with that somehow and it does have...

Yeah this is it. A ton of the criticism is about not having an equal/fair say in the outcome

That gave me a lot to chew on. I read through the threads and saw many of the same basic issues brought up. How about this: We (our side) have very strict jobs regarding how we view the fiction and what we do with that and those jobs don't cross over to other players. There's no consensus...

I actually don't think me, you or Micah care about agency at all. As it's conceived of by many of the Narratavists in this thread. I'm still trying to figure out a way of describing what we do care about. Our basic loop of play is something like 'constrained positioning creates outcomes which...

Being able to answer that question with clarity, about any decision made by anyone, is really at the core of understanding what we're doing. Or at least it would enable us to communicate better. Although maybe a lot of people don't need to understand because it's an intuitive thing or at a...

@Manbearcat I'm taking an extreme position to highlight what's fundamental. Yeah if I was actually doing the set up for RotJ I'd have a clock where the Empire wins but presumably there would be ways to disrupt it or at least change the result of the outcome so the entire rebel fleet wasn't...

That sounds spot on as my kind of 'default' approach to play. You're describing it how I would (and do) describe it if I'm giving an overview.

The short answer is, yeah totally agree with you, there needs to be sufficient no-myth space. Or backstory can't lead to totally deterministic outcomes all the time. Not sure I would frame it that way though but then we're getting into the aesthetics of resolution systems.