Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 8134489" data-attributes="member: 7025508">The premise is true for a lot of games. In a lot of games the sort of things we're talking about simply are not covered by the rules; if they were. we wouldn't be having this discussion. Ok, I think I get the idea. I've certainly used mechanics where the players can dictate to at least suggest facts about setting, albeit these mechanics have been in more ancillary role. Various influence or contacts traits in WW games, or perhaps some drama points to dictate some setting details etc.But I absolutely would not want the game to revolve around such approach. At that point it becomes more like collective storytelling around some rules like Once Upon a Time (card game) and less like a tabletop RPG. Now in a GMless freeform games it is pretty common (and necessary) that the players just collectively make up the environment around their characters, but that is rather different format and one I'd personally consider inferior to GM-curated approach. To me the whole point of having the GM there is for them to use their judgement. I want them to come up with interesting things I want them to come up with surprising things and I trust them to do it better than a codified rule system could. And when I play a character, I don't want to be deciding setting details because that forces me constantly from in-character perspective to the narrator-perspective. Now this is not absolute, you always need to consider things from system or narrator perspective somewhat, and of course that is what the GM does all the time. But as player that is not what I primarily seek.</blockquote>

Verification