Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8340176" data-attributes="member: 71699">Got it. Focusing on the 'control' aspect of narrative control, it is concern with who exercises it. So then one might have<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Intents that inform which scenes our narrative will contain.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Actions, often stochastic, which narrate how the scene plays out.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">World, that delimits what may be included in the narrative, including architecture and inhabitants.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Characters, that add specific actors to the world.</li> </ol>And there is always the question, who controls which. In D&D, typically DM controls world and intents and actions of inhabitants that are not characters. Players control intents and actions of characters. Other games define ways that players can control world. As mentioned up thread, DMG Plot Points suggest a way to do that for D&D. For me the effectiveness of plot points, and the possibility that D&D can accomodate other arrangements of who controls what, are distinct questions.Playing to find out for me has never been a matter of who controls what, but how they exercise that control. Perforce, someone always just decides what happens next. What is interesting is how written rules interact with 'just decides'. So that another question aside from who controls what, is the usually multiple ways that they are guided or instructed to exercise that control.Thus one might envision three dimensions<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">narrative element (intents, actions, world, characters)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">controller of each element (DM, players, both)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">principles (or guidance) and instructions (rules) as to how control may be exercised (assuming, and in the way that, participants grasp and uphold them)</li> </ul></blockquote>

Verification