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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8134947" data-attributes="member: 42582">But I didn't give an example of a GM giving motivations and plans for Rufus.I gave an example of the GM narrating an encounter with Rufus, in which Rufus says certain things.This is (in my view) a very big difference. As I see it, it is the difference between (1) the GM coming up with a story on his/her own, and gradually revealing it to the players - the paradigm RPG for this approach that I know of is CoC, but a lot of D&D also seems to be played this way - and (2) the GM presenting a fictional situation which is pregnant with possibility that the participants care about (because the GM has built on what those participants have signalled that they care about) and relying on the play of the game, including the action resolution mechanics, to determine what happens next.The GM can introduce Rufus collecting wine for 'the Master' with none of the following questions being answered: who is the Master? is he related to Thurgon, or Aramina, or Evard (whose tower Thurgon and Aramina not long ago burned down), or Thurgon's fallen order (the Knights of the Iron Tower, specified in backstory as a component of PC build)? Why does the master want wine - for a dinner party? for a sacrament? because he's an alcoholic? because he wants to bribe some orcs from attacking Auxol?Those things - and of course indefinitely many others - are all put in play by the encounter with Rufus that I described. I don't know the answer to any of them. Neither does the GM, and he doesn't need to in order to frame and adjudicate the encounter (which he did).Where in the south has Thurgon's brother gone looking for glory? The Hold of the Sea Princes? The Amedio Jungle? The south of the Pomarj? Did his wife go with him? Again, none of this is, or needs to be, known in order for the play that occurred to occur.What's one way that we might learn whether the younger brother's wife went with him? If I declare a Circles check for Thurgon to meet her. If I succeed, we know she's still in Auxol. If I fail, one  narration of that failure could be She's not here, she's gone south with her husband. That would be player agency in action.This is all illustrative of <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=1361" target="_blank">the technique described by Paul Czege</a> that I quoted upthread:I frame the character into the middle of conflicts I think will push and pull in ways that are interesting to me and to the player. I keep NPC personalities somewhat unfixed in my mind, allowing me to retroactively justify their behaviors in support of thisAnd both in itself as a technique, and in its relationship to player agency, it's quite different from the GM giving motivations and plans for the orcs.No. Action declaration: As we ride through the outskirts of Auxol, I keep my eye out for Rufus. It's five years since I've seen him - I wonder how he is doing? Resolution: make a Circles check.The basic structure of declaration and resolution is no different from a Streetwise check in Classic Traveller c 1977, or Gather Information in 3E D&D.What can I say - I don't agree that there is that "shitton" of other stuff that the GM has to make up. If the players haven't declared an action for their PCs, or aren't looking for the GM to frame a situation that will spur them to do so, then what is the GM doing worrying about things?Perhaps concrete examples would help me work out what you have in mind?</blockquote>

Verification