Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9509358" data-attributes="member: 42582">As you've probably worked out, I'm not really a &quot;party goals&quot; guy.Even in my Traveller game, where the PCs travel together on the same spaceship, that's because most of them are in the pay of the vessel owner. The things they are trying to achieve are all a bit distinct, though overlapping in the sense that I deliberately present situations that speak to the various PCs.Torchbearer has a rule that all the PCs have to enter and leave a phase (town, adventure, camp) together, and so in that sense it mandates a party. But it doesn't mandate a party goal. The players have individual goals. The trad-est way to do goals is to have the players pick something that relates to a scenario the GM presents to them. We tend to have the players set their goals by reference to the unfolding fictional situation, and then rely on the system - which I think is pretty powerful - to make it possible for them to aim at those goals.The example was great!If I followed it properly, you're using the FR proper names to play a sort-of &quot;anchoring&quot;/&quot;coordinating&quot; role, but not as an independent GM-controlled way of establishing consequences. If I've got that right, that's my main way of using setting.It wasn't clear whether the stuff with the ward after the skill challenge was player-instigated, or GM glossing of the player's success. You will easily guess that my preference is the former rather than the latter (though the dichotomy is not always as stark in play as it is when stated like I have here).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9509358, member: 42582"] As you've probably worked out, I'm not really a "party goals" guy. Even in my Traveller game, where the PCs travel together on the same spaceship, that's because most of them are in the pay of the vessel owner. The things they are trying to achieve are all a bit distinct, though overlapping in the sense that I deliberately present situations that speak to the various PCs. Torchbearer has a rule that all the PCs have to enter and leave a phase (town, adventure, camp) together, and so in that sense it mandates a party. But it doesn't mandate a party goal. The players have individual goals. The trad-est way to do goals is to have the players pick something that relates to a scenario the GM presents to them. We tend to have the players set their goals by reference to the unfolding fictional situation, and then rely on the system - which I think is pretty powerful - to make it possible for them to aim at those goals. The example was great! If I followed it properly, you're using the FR proper names to play a sort-of "anchoring"/"coordinating" role, but not as an independent GM-controlled way of establishing consequences. If I've got that right, that's my main way of using setting. It wasn't clear whether the stuff with the ward after the skill challenge was player-instigated, or GM glossing of the player's success. You will easily guess that my preference is the former rather than the latter (though the dichotomy is not always as stark in play as it is when stated like I have here). [/QUOTE]

Verification