Search results

So, I think it is legitimate to discuss the process and the content of what those imaginings are, and what constitutes fiction that meets the needs of the participants. But, like you, I am not in favor of confusing the issue by talking about 'causality' or 'reasons' WITHIN the fiction. It is...

Here's an observation though about that. In @zakael19 example, I don't know how else you could do anything even similar to that scene where the guy overcomes his self-doubt and defeats the Dool Spirit. Even if you did it in D&D, I almost guarantee it would be implemented with a saving throw...

Well, maybe some custom moves aside, the GM 'says' the fiction. Some moves like Discern Realities or Spout Lore constrain the GM in terms of the nature of their authoring, and may compel them to say something, but never exactly what. Players do get authority over their bonds, which could...

Yes, but you're missing the key point here, real world examples are irrelevant. This is not the real world, it is some fiction invented by another person. There's no causality, and there is an agenda (whatever that is, I'm not judging those) as well as game related and other constraints. Arguing...

It's totally different! Trust me, I've played this kind of thing every which way. What you get in Narrativist play is far more directly engaging with the characters, and thus the players. I would not really call it a committee design. More like no 'design' at all. Note that the real world is...

But, in, say, a Dungeon World game I might run, where do my players lack any freedom to do something that is present in your game? I mean, yes DW assumes that play will always be substantive and relegates other things like shop keeping or other nonconsequential RP to a non mechanical freeform...

Sure, OTOH I trust players to play with integrity. Why is one side of the screen privileged? I feel like this stems back to some primordial formulation of play where everything was supposed to be a contest between the GM's diabolical cunning dungeon design and the players ability to read between...

It feels a little clunky, but I am not going to put up a lot of objections to this kind of language, if it is used carefully.

I wish I could find some. When we talked in Forge terms, which don't reference agency at all, we also got bashed! I'm not hostile to the notion that there are, ultimately aesthetic, reasons to play different sorts of RPG. It is clearly the case that no one game can fill all needs and match all...

I'm simply pointing out that there are ways that work which are not Dave's ways, and the underlying point was that I was impressed by the open ended nature of the game, not especially by Dave's implementation. Although I certainly wasn't aware, then, that there were other options.

IMHO it was replaced by WotC with a unified 3e design precisely because it had become unmanageable. 2e had reached a point of, essentially, collapse. Anything you attempted to add or change had to deal with 1000s of other elements. Or else just punt. For non-player-facing stuff punting is OK...

Very interesting! I had never really considered the artistic aspect, at least explicitly. I think most GMs with much experience can relate to it though, aesthetics does matter, at least in some play. Not sure if that is the best play or not, it's likely to be conflicted (like how Edwards talked...

Well, I don't think it would happen exactly like that, but it might. The description would probably be more specific, like say in Dungeon World the GM might describe a scene, with the setting being a village, without defining anything further about it. This scene would engage something of...

Not to get into any kind of contest about it, but look at it from the other perspective. I can plainly see that the approach you are describing leaves an overwhelming amount of influence over play in the hands of the GM. I get that you have reasons for that, that it forms a part of the...

But, you don't need an all-powerful referee to come up with "what happens when I cast Icy Ray on the stairs and use my shield as a toboggan." The rules are not going to address it directly, but several approaches suggest themselves. The one thorny point is the Czege Principle. Who creates the...

Right, but I think the answer here is basically to point out that all these responses and such are the GM doing dynamic world building. So, yes, the world responds, but the response is entirely in the hands of the GM, and is usually opaque to the players, to a large degree. To the degree that...

Techniques vary somewhat, but let's say we were discussing Dungeon World. Suppose a character is lost and wants to find his friend whom he has a bond with "I will always protect Joe." He reaches a point where he has a choice of directions. He could choose correctly or incorrectly. The GM clearly...

Ugh, bad design. This is why AD&D turned into a hot mess. Just say no.

I think you're overreacting a bit, but mainly I'm struck by the notion of a 'narrative constraint'. I am not sure what those are.

There's been a LONG history of debate as to how arbitrary and contrived (I never used this term) 'sim' play is, or isn't. If you missed something it was the last 10 years, or more, lol. I'd note that some posters here have not really taken sides, though I think in many cases positions are taken...