Search results

If you want hard crucible then manbearcat and pemerton are your guys, although I think you'd need to change up how you're running the system. Otherwise just create npcs you like, that have understandable motives, that 'possibly' conflict with different player characters motives. Then just play...

Yeah we're in accord at this point. I have some questions about technique. Your players decide to give up the adventuring life and hope to open a shelter for stray dogs in a city they haven't been to. What would be your procedures for generating content? One of the things I'm curious about...

We've gone back and forth on this in the 'GM fiat - an illustration' thread. A brief primer for those who didn't read it. A) Are decisions constrained by established fictional constraints, including extrapolations based on 'plausibility', different to: B) The GM (or whoever) deciding...

I chafe a bit at this because: I can extrapolate based on logic, causality and consistency but BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF PERSON I AM, I'm naturally producing extrapolations that ALSO escalate (in the dramatic sense). So it isn't either/or You could in fact read Narrativism as saying, play...

This post maybe: https://www.enworld.org/threads/rant-the-conservatism-of-d-d-fans-is-exhausting.712674/post-9658684

Well I specifically wouldn't say that. Or rather, without context it makes no sense to say that because we're talking about techniques. I have no idea whether there are any techniques that could 'improve' your play, assuming you even found it desirable. The most common way of getting...

I reckon the two easiest ways to get Narrativism are through trad play with story fit characters (as you say) or playing something totally different to trad games, preferably without a GM, something like Showdown or Zombie cinema. I think the worst way is through PbtA. Not saying they don't...

This is why I've made repeated comparisons between Roberts play and my own and have pointed out how those exact preconditions created a moment of Narrativist reward in the play of @SableWyvern Where the current disconnects happen are along the lines of realism and when/how a situation is...

Yeah, that's my default way of doing it. Some games do ask for different ways.

So by reward I mean 'type' of fun. I for instance, you're watching a few good men, there's a scene where Kaffee has to decide if he wants to question the Colonel. As you're watching that you have anticipation, you want to find out what happens, when he decides there's a type of pay off (thematic...

We're getting somewhere but you're still misunderstanding a few things. Pretend me and my group are playing 5E or whatever edition you play in. Forget techniques for the moment. The defining feature is the group reward, I'll state this again because it's the thing that you need to beat people...

This is a common misconception. All Narrativism proper refers to is a type of fun. To be reductive: A character chooses one value over another, (first reward). That has consequences (second reward) In your scenario about the wolf, there's a beggar character who is trying to avenge his son...

Exactly this. A sandbox where the GM is making up what happens in response to the players going somewhere is faux agency because it's entirely inconsequential. To have consequence there must be CHANGE, not just revealing the world. As soon as you create the conditions for change, an established...

To me that's just normal play. I want to bring attention to something. The elements in play were: A brewing civil war An envoy who wants to recover a corpse A priestess A PC with differing allegiances To the extent the player choice was fun, then you can easily create a set of elements...

The last time I had to make something up where positioning details mattered in a way that was system relevant was a month or two ago. It was post-apocalyptic sorcerer and there was a church of fanatics who were keeping a demon in a vault. I remember my thought process was something like: I want...

I'm not sure I see them as being in conflict but if they do come into conflict then expression wins. Although I consider this pretty standard Narrativism. At it's core a group of people build up fiction and are using the (imagined) constraints of the fiction as a medium for expression. The hard...

I get where you're coming from, the mechanics would create a 'put up or shut up' situation. On the other hand it just seems like the group weren't interested in exploring theme stuff. At the very least we should have discovered: what all the players and you, irl, think of the Paladins actions...

Chiming in again to say I think the exact opposite is true but I'm not sure I can explain why better than I have done previously. To recap: If I have a choice, then as a person I'm making an artistic statement about the situation as it strikes me. Where that choice is, within the structure of...

I'd also expect a good chunk of Narrativist leaning people to be put off by personality mechanics as well, for the exact same type of reason. Declaring your characters priorities and declaring what changes them and in response to what, is pretty much the avenue of expression in a lot of rpg's.

Sure but there probably are people who do want far more of those moments but don't understand how to get them. And note that it goes both ways. Both Ben Milton and Sandrasan (two people heavily involved in the OSR space), both started off with Narrativist games and then realised they weren't...