Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
5e* - D&D-now
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8527565" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Uh, I give up trying to find where the whole text of that was posted. All I can say is that my interpretation was that the player is responding to whatever the GM said. I mean, sure, it will follow from the PC's fiction, that would be the only possible meaning of playing in character at all! It still has to respond to GM produced situation. The key being I don't see any point where the player has an input on the fiction except "my character does X." Now, this might be highly significant, or almost meaningless, remembering that in C* there is just a response by the GM, who is going to decide what happened. I've argued MANY times that GMs can basically justify ALMOST any response to player input of this sort! They can bring in hidden backstory, or simply decide that 'Y' is what is likely to happen now in response to X. Obviously there's a constraint based on what will convince people to keep playing, but otherwise, nothing really.</p><p></p><p></p><p>This is a restatement of the oft-trotted-out "the players control the story because they say what their characters do" but we've long and convincingly argued that this is only sufficient to produce a fiction that is entirely in the hands of the GM in every important factor. How does the player engage with this theme of creating cold and ice and snow in the world? The GM has to add this to the fiction, because the player can ADD NOTHING, they can only react! </p><p>Now, that doesn't mean the game cannot be fiction first, as again this C* game has nothing really except fiction. The question here is if it is a game or not! Its a telling of fiction by a GM with inputs by players as to actions taken by their characters. You posit the 'cold sea cultist' but how is this even conveyed to the GM? Obviously I can simply TELL the GM, in a side conversation at the table, about it, and write it on my sheet, but it isn't part of the fiction and I have no mechanism to introduce it (well, again, I can do so in a sort of 'thought bubble' during play like "I do X because I'm a cold sea cultist and ...."). </p><p></p><p>OK, its 'true' that I'm a cold sea cultist, so what? I mean, you may or may not build some fiction on that. I am just not seeing where player generated fiction gains any 'purchase' in the system.</p><p></p><p>Contrast this with DW where, at the very least, the player has a defined set of traits they get to set, which is to say bonds and alignment, plus to whatever degree race and class themselves count, as well as probably some choices of equipment and starting class features.</p><p>Now, if you are to say that the GM must necessarily create fiction which FOLLOWS FROM THE PLAYER'S DESCRIPTION of their character, you would be getting closer to what I would say is meaningful player contribution to the fiction.</p><p></p><p>What makes it 'likely it does'? I assume 'I' is a player declaring an action. I mean, this seems beyond what you first outlined, or maybe I just drastically failed to understand. If every GM introduction of more fiction MUST build on the previous player declaration, then we have a shared fiction exercise, what is often called a 'conch passing game'. However, we are still stuck in terms of there being no 'game' involved, at least in a more formal sense. Without cues and mechanical parts, how do we actually arbitrate who gets to decide what?</p><p></p><p>Well, if we have certain types of principles, then it could be anywhere from largely a GM centered telling with a bit of player interjection of action statements, or it could be virtually directed by the players with the GM as a bit of a director who sets the scenes the player's demand. I would also want to know if there would be other rules in that case, as we would want to know about what the process for character evolution/change might be, for example. Can I stop being a cold sea cultist? If not then my input might still largely be located in defining the main characters which the story is about, but not much of what happens to them.</p><p></p><p>I mean, I'm not sure all these issues are still closely related to whether fiction comes first and last anymore. They are more about who's story is this. There are 'story games' of all sorts in this respect. Some, like DW, have players defining a lot of the direction and plot and setting. In others these things may be completely nailed down and the questions focus on other things, like maybe relationships between the PCs or something.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 8527565, member: 82106"] Uh, I give up trying to find where the whole text of that was posted. All I can say is that my interpretation was that the player is responding to whatever the GM said. I mean, sure, it will follow from the PC's fiction, that would be the only possible meaning of playing in character at all! It still has to respond to GM produced situation. The key being I don't see any point where the player has an input on the fiction except "my character does X." Now, this might be highly significant, or almost meaningless, remembering that in C* there is just a response by the GM, who is going to decide what happened. I've argued MANY times that GMs can basically justify ALMOST any response to player input of this sort! They can bring in hidden backstory, or simply decide that 'Y' is what is likely to happen now in response to X. Obviously there's a constraint based on what will convince people to keep playing, but otherwise, nothing really. This is a restatement of the oft-trotted-out "the players control the story because they say what their characters do" but we've long and convincingly argued that this is only sufficient to produce a fiction that is entirely in the hands of the GM in every important factor. How does the player engage with this theme of creating cold and ice and snow in the world? The GM has to add this to the fiction, because the player can ADD NOTHING, they can only react! Now, that doesn't mean the game cannot be fiction first, as again this C* game has nothing really except fiction. The question here is if it is a game or not! Its a telling of fiction by a GM with inputs by players as to actions taken by their characters. You posit the 'cold sea cultist' but how is this even conveyed to the GM? Obviously I can simply TELL the GM, in a side conversation at the table, about it, and write it on my sheet, but it isn't part of the fiction and I have no mechanism to introduce it (well, again, I can do so in a sort of 'thought bubble' during play like "I do X because I'm a cold sea cultist and ...."). OK, its 'true' that I'm a cold sea cultist, so what? I mean, you may or may not build some fiction on that. I am just not seeing where player generated fiction gains any 'purchase' in the system. Contrast this with DW where, at the very least, the player has a defined set of traits they get to set, which is to say bonds and alignment, plus to whatever degree race and class themselves count, as well as probably some choices of equipment and starting class features. Now, if you are to say that the GM must necessarily create fiction which FOLLOWS FROM THE PLAYER'S DESCRIPTION of their character, you would be getting closer to what I would say is meaningful player contribution to the fiction. What makes it 'likely it does'? I assume 'I' is a player declaring an action. I mean, this seems beyond what you first outlined, or maybe I just drastically failed to understand. If every GM introduction of more fiction MUST build on the previous player declaration, then we have a shared fiction exercise, what is often called a 'conch passing game'. However, we are still stuck in terms of there being no 'game' involved, at least in a more formal sense. Without cues and mechanical parts, how do we actually arbitrate who gets to decide what? Well, if we have certain types of principles, then it could be anywhere from largely a GM centered telling with a bit of player interjection of action statements, or it could be virtually directed by the players with the GM as a bit of a director who sets the scenes the player's demand. I would also want to know if there would be other rules in that case, as we would want to know about what the process for character evolution/change might be, for example. Can I stop being a cold sea cultist? If not then my input might still largely be located in defining the main characters which the story is about, but not much of what happens to them. I mean, I'm not sure all these issues are still closely related to whether fiction comes first and last anymore. They are more about who's story is this. There are 'story games' of all sorts in this respect. Some, like DW, have players defining a lot of the direction and plot and setting. In others these things may be completely nailed down and the questions focus on other things, like maybe relationships between the PCs or something. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
5e* - D&D-now
Top