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
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
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="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 7575734" data-attributes="member: 85555"><p>I am of two minds on this front. On the one hand, I can see how this should be the case with literary and cinematic criticism, since it sort of straddles analysis and review, and a lot of it is based on how we react to what we see or read. On the other hand, I've been reading a lot of film criticism and analysis lately for wuxia, but I come from a history background. And just as an outsider, I find some of this kind of thing a bit perplexing, and I find it is often hard to get the sort of concrete information I am looking for at times (I guess I just find some of the analysis very flowery, but not very grounded in something I can make use of). Again, I am coming at it as an outsider, so maybe I am just missing something. </p><p></p><p>That said, I think we are talking about analyzing game design. To me that is almost more of an engineering issue. We are trying to understand why people like different modes of play, what systems and mechanics work, what don't, what mechanics are good for what approaches, etc. Obviously people also have their own subjective opinions about gaming. My contention though has been that a term like Mother May I, clearly is going to make exploration of that harder. I get that sometimes it is said with humor. Ron Edwards recently did a series of videos on sandboxes, and I think he called them Kitty Boxes or litter boxes. I chuckled when I first saw it, because it is a clever thing to say. But I think the effect it had was, the actual points he was trying to make about sandboxes (which I didn't agree with, but he did have sound points that warranted a response) were not really heeded by anyone in the sandbox camp (because the label he chose was so dismissive). I think at the same time, it kind of clouds our ability to understand why people like something when we choose these sorts of labels. You can be critical of an adventure structure, but if you are going to be critical of it, you should probably really understand why people use it in the first place and why they keep using it. Calling GM Decides mother may I, I don't see how it helps to understand what is driving that kind of play at all. Whereas keeping it as a term for a failed state of play, makes total sense (because failed states of play are undesirable and mother may I is undesirable--no one wants a game of Mother May I when they play RPGs). </p><p></p><p>I appreciate it if you haven't been using Mother May I. I was under the impression you had, but I apparently just assumed that. I will say though, the OP was launched because I was making that point to demonstrate this playstyle wasn't mother may I. So I think we were still grappling with that disagreement over the course of this thread.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 7575734, member: 85555"] I am of two minds on this front. On the one hand, I can see how this should be the case with literary and cinematic criticism, since it sort of straddles analysis and review, and a lot of it is based on how we react to what we see or read. On the other hand, I've been reading a lot of film criticism and analysis lately for wuxia, but I come from a history background. And just as an outsider, I find some of this kind of thing a bit perplexing, and I find it is often hard to get the sort of concrete information I am looking for at times (I guess I just find some of the analysis very flowery, but not very grounded in something I can make use of). Again, I am coming at it as an outsider, so maybe I am just missing something. That said, I think we are talking about analyzing game design. To me that is almost more of an engineering issue. We are trying to understand why people like different modes of play, what systems and mechanics work, what don't, what mechanics are good for what approaches, etc. Obviously people also have their own subjective opinions about gaming. My contention though has been that a term like Mother May I, clearly is going to make exploration of that harder. I get that sometimes it is said with humor. Ron Edwards recently did a series of videos on sandboxes, and I think he called them Kitty Boxes or litter boxes. I chuckled when I first saw it, because it is a clever thing to say. But I think the effect it had was, the actual points he was trying to make about sandboxes (which I didn't agree with, but he did have sound points that warranted a response) were not really heeded by anyone in the sandbox camp (because the label he chose was so dismissive). I think at the same time, it kind of clouds our ability to understand why people like something when we choose these sorts of labels. You can be critical of an adventure structure, but if you are going to be critical of it, you should probably really understand why people use it in the first place and why they keep using it. Calling GM Decides mother may I, I don't see how it helps to understand what is driving that kind of play at all. Whereas keeping it as a term for a failed state of play, makes total sense (because failed states of play are undesirable and mother may I is undesirable--no one wants a game of Mother May I when they play RPGs). I appreciate it if you haven't been using Mother May I. I was under the impression you had, but I apparently just assumed that. I will say though, the OP was launched because I was making that point to demonstrate this playstyle wasn't mother may I. So I think we were still grappling with that disagreement over the course of this thread. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
Top