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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8140152" data-attributes="member: 6785785">So I appreciate the detailed reply. I think in a lot of ways we agree, and I think that mostly it's just a matter of preference in how we approach gaming. I'm gonna snip it down a bit, because I feel we're drifting away from matters related to agency, and I know we've talked about a lot of this stuff before in one way or another.There are times where it can be interesting to watch the players pause and then debate what to do about a situation, how to proceed. But I like when those moments are reserved for kind of major moments. When the decision is not a major one, I want things to move. I don't like those big pauses happening often. This can be a product of the system, or parts of it. It can be for other reasons, too, of course.Sure, that's all great. I agree about the group being the focus. But I prefer when each PC also has their own things going on, their own agenda to pursue. Focus can rotate as needed, and I would hope the players are all okay with indulging a little time spent on characters other than theirs now and again. Plus, the characters are usually invested in one another, so getting their help doesn't usually require a lot of convincing. I think this ties into a lot of the things that others are mentioning, where the players are able to shape the content of the fiction. It's about their characters.Why would that be the case? Does the player like to be bored?Sure you can. People do it all the time. So let me say this....if I'm in your game, and a volcano explodes when our PCs are near it, I'm not gonna buy that this was a neutral decision. Sure, you could show me some notes that say you had predetermined that this thing was gonna blow on August 5 of whatever year.....and then I'm going to point out how you're largely in control of the pace, and the date and of possibly dropping prompts into play to get us to go near the volcano. And if the volcano erupts when the party is no where in the area....I'm very likely not to care at all. If the whole goal of this is to set up some kind of legitimacy to the idea of neutrality, it just seems odd.So you have a GM plot you want them to engage with. It's fine. Where is the player agency in this scenario? Probably to decide to go after the book in the first place. Then, most everything else is "the world" responding to what the PCs are doing. But really, there is no "world" so it's the DM deciding what happens next. All the stuff about the necromancers and the foreign ones learning of the book (how did that happen? It seems it happened to further the plot, but I imagine it would be described as "the world responding to the PCs' actions) and then attacking the PCs and waging war on the town, and placing bounties on the PCs.....all of that is the GM having a story idea.It's not bad. It just doesn't appear to have a high level of player agency. It's the GM constructing a story in advance around the PCs. Or at least, that's how it seems.Backstory is fine. I think the opposition to the use of hidden backstory is more about the GM thwarting player intent because of the preconceived ideas that the GM has about the fiction, but which the player doesn't know. I think that's a different thing than using backstory to help set up current events or to establish a scenario that you'd like the players to engage with. Why would the GM ask more than one player to confirm what was to the North? Why would more than on player be attempting a check to determine the terrain?I mean, if you put a river that flows north to south, how would it later become relevant that it has to flow south to north? And how would this river only be susceptible to this if it was placed at the time of play instead of months before? Again, I don't think anyone is saying that all players should be able to at any time determine any and all fictional elements in the setting. There are ways to allow this to work within the constraints of the game. There's more than one game. More than one approach. It sometimes seems like you can only see things through the lens of how you play your one game.</blockquote>

Verification