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: 8154296" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think this is hard to assess in the abstract.When you add new components to the shared fiction, in what context are you doing it? Are you using that to resolve action declarations in ways that override the mechanical framework? That looks like force - and I don't think it takes too much of it to turn the game into a railroad.Are you doing it when the system tells you it's your job to do so - eg a new scene needs to be framed? a failure consequence needs to be narrated? And when you do so, whose suggestions and ideas are you being influenced by?I think a GM who repeatedly frames scenes and establishes failures without regard to player-evinced concerns is pushing towards force/railroad territory. I think a GM who establishes failure consequences by having regard to those concerns (eg in BW style) and who frames scenes having regard to what the players say or show that they want is probably not running a railroad.I think there's an interesting noun/verb contrast here. For instance, in BW play generally speaking the players tend to provide the nouns - via their Wises-checks, their relationships and Circles checks, the entities and events named in their Beliefs, etc. But the GM has a lot of responsibility for providing the verbs - if a check fails, then one of those nouns should be put in jeopardy in some fashion; a well-framed scene will put one of those nouns at stake; etc.</blockquote>

Verification