Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7920559" data-attributes="member: 16814">The use of mechanics that will result no matter what in the outcome the GM wants are uses of Force.&nbsp; In every game I'm aware of, the rules say mechanics are used to determine the success or failure of a PC action.&nbsp; If that result is just what the GM wants it to be, then, yes, your correct that it doesn't matter how the GM tells the players what idea the GM has and it doesn't really matter what the players try to have their PCs do.&nbsp; This is gamestate is often referred to as a railroad.The other side of the coin is that the GM has no agenda for play, and is engaged in play to find out what happens.&nbsp; Blades in the Dark is the version of this play that I'm most familiar with, so I keep using it as an example.&nbsp; In Blades play, there is no 'next thing' in the GM's head. The core concept of the game is that the PCs are a crew of criminals in the haunted city of Duskvol.&nbsp; The players start a session of play by declaring what score they want -- who the target is, what the objective is, and how they'll start the score, ie, the initial fictional framing of the attempt.&nbsp; The GM has no part in this, they have to take what's presented to them and go.&nbsp; Then, the mechanics are engaged for the initial position of the game, the Engagement roll.&nbsp; This can be good, bad, or both.&nbsp; After the roll, the GM's job is to frame a scene involving all of the factors of the score and the engagement roll that puts the players in a spot so that play can begin.&nbsp; The players react to being in a spot by declaring actions, which either work or generate a roll.&nbsp; The outcome of the roll (good, bad, both) determines what constraints are on the GM for advancing the result.&nbsp; The game is built for both good and bad to be the most common outcome, leading to increasing complications for the PCs (the snowball) which drives the action forward.&nbsp; The GM is improvising in small chunks with tight constraints, so it's not really very hard to follow the lead of the game.&nbsp; It also provides good recommendations and guidelines for play that, if embraced, make Blades one of the least burdensome on the GM games I've played.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7920559, member: 16814"] The use of mechanics that will result no matter what in the outcome the GM wants are uses of Force. In every game I'm aware of, the rules say mechanics are used to determine the success or failure of a[I] PC action[/I]. If that result is just what the GM wants it to be, then, yes, your correct that it doesn't matter how the GM tells the players what idea the GM has and it doesn't really matter what the players try to have their PCs do. This is gamestate is often referred to as a railroad. The other side of the coin is that the GM has no agenda for play, and is engaged in play to find out what happens. Blades in the Dark is the version of this play that I'm most familiar with, so I keep using it as an example. In Blades play, there is no 'next thing' in the GM's head. The core concept of the game is that the PCs are a crew of criminals in the haunted city of Duskvol. The players start a session of play by declaring what score they want -- who the target is, what the objective is, and how they'll start the score, ie, the initial fictional framing of the attempt. The GM has no part in this, they have to take what's presented to them and go. Then, the mechanics are engaged for the initial position of the game, the Engagement roll. This can be good, bad, or both. After the roll, the GM's job is to frame a scene involving all of the factors of the score and the engagement roll that puts the players in a spot so that play can begin. The players react to being in a spot by declaring actions, which either work or generate a roll. The outcome of the roll (good, bad, both) determines what constraints are on the GM for advancing the result. The game is built for both good and bad to be the most common outcome, leading to increasing complications for the PCs (the snowball) which drives the action forward. The GM is improvising in small chunks with tight constraints, so it's not really very hard to follow the lead of the game. It also provides good recommendations and guidelines for play that, if embraced, make Blades one of the least burdensome on the GM games I've played. [/QUOTE]

Verification