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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mark CMG" data-source="post: 6438193" data-attributes="member: 10479">A mental bible about ones setting can be as simple as the latter or even more rich, and that is generally the mark of a more thorough or dedicated GM, but there is always a setting bible.  It can't be helped.  Saying that there is is simply the codification of an involuntary or voluntary process every GM goes through from the moment they undertake the role.  I know there is no way you cannot recognize this nor really object to my defining it in this manner.  I know you think about your setting and believe other GMs do as well, and that the more one thinks about their setting and running their game the better a GM they will likely be.I'm afraid this discussion, between the two of us at any rate, has gotten to the point where you wish to nay say.  Aside from outright arguing something I know with which you agree, the remainder of the post where you address me seems to want to point out areas where later RPGs that have storytelling elements and more fully formed storytelling games both have elements of RPGs, something I have said from the start but which you seem to want to argue as if I have never said it, or simply because I haven't repeated it whenever I have had to repeat my definition of (trad) RPGs.  Sorry, buddy, but this has become unproductive.Don't forget that there are dice.  By your logic we must recognize the authorship of dice as well.  Or, we can recognize that the main guideline for GMing is that the game and setting are the GM's to do with as they will and if they wish to include a "Deck" or any other item outlined in the DMG, or wish to include or exclude a class or race, or wish to randomize something with dice it is their purview.  That makes setting authorship in a (trad) RPG solely that of the GM, even if a player, through his character, looks for crates in a previously undetailed alley and finds them.  It's the bottomline of how it works and your attempt to take the argument to an extreme opposite position really points a fine point on how obvious it is, your interpretation notwithstanding.Oh, and btw, can you quote (the full post) where you claim I said "PC generation falls outside of the scope of "trad RPGing", which only concerns the role playing of the characters once they are created)" because I think you are misunderstanding the point I was making.  It may have been some akin to the RPing not starting until after the PCs are generated or some such.  And, you do understand this doesn't negate the fact that the GM decides what can be used by the players in PC generation, the range of what the players can bring into his setting, to use to explore his setting?  It may just be the separation of the OP "Character play vs Player play" rather than the RPG to RPG with storytelling elements to storytelling games discussion we've been having but, in any event, it is frightfully clear you either didn't understand the post you are quasi-quoting or have taken it out of context to try and support an argument that misunderstands (trad) RPG GMing anyway.</blockquote>

Verification