Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6453619" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I don't think we're talking about the same thing here.&nbsp; There were several of those podcasts and I don't recall which one &quot;access the plot dump&quot; took place in (likely 2 or 3 - not going to rewatch them to confirm).&nbsp; Its not the &quot;setting the scene for the players at the beginning of the adventure or at the beginning of their present situation&quot; that I think you're pointing too.&nbsp; That, of course, is a very fundamental aspect of GMing, story-telling, and screen-writing *.&nbsp; What I'm referring to is something that occurs mid-adventure;&nbsp; (1) heavy-handed GM exposition (typically through some NPC or another) in the place of a coherent, interwoven narrative that the players are mentally and emotionally engaged in and (2) the use of illusory mechanical resolution to access said exposition (when the plot/information dump was going to occur regardless).Here is another way to put it.&nbsp; You know how truly bad movies &quot;convey little but say a lot&quot; or maybe are &quot;full of sound and fury yet signifying nothing?&quot;&nbsp; The thematic material or the clues/portents of the big reveal are clumsily rendered or so opaque that you're sitting there half-way through going &quot;...what the hell?&quot;&nbsp; You're frustrated, you're bored, and you've mentally disengaged.Well, at some point in time during the creative process, the writers (etc) realized this was a jumbled pile of muck and the audience will have been totally lost or disinterested.&nbsp; How do they solve this?&nbsp; By further damaging the film.&nbsp; Instead of the big reveal being brief, agile, and impactful, they have to literally lead the audience back through the entire movie through an information-dump montage or the heavy expository monologuing by an on-screen persona or the voice-over actor.Now take that phenomenon and couple it with a tactic of telling the audience to roll the dice to see if they can access this information-dump, knowing full well that the &quot;rolling the dice&quot; in this case is just an illusionist's parlor trick.&nbsp; The information dump is coming.&nbsp; No matter what.&nbsp; But its a game so, because of that fact, they have to make the players &quot;feel&quot; like they're actually &quot;playing&quot; and &quot;pushing the game forward&quot; (even though when, as in this case, they're not).&nbsp; If I'm elitist (or whatever descriptor you would choose to use) because I don't like the techniques of (a) illusionist GMing (the behind the screen manipulation of action resolution mechanics while presenting them as being authentic drivers of play) and (b) plot/information dump by way of said illusionist GMing, then guilty as charged.&nbsp; It is damaging to a table agenda that puts forth the premise that the driver of play/story should be (1) conflict-oriented/emotionally-provocative situations + (2) player action declarations (by way of their characters) + (3) the table's consultation of the resolution mechanics (as required) and obeyance to their results + (4) the emotional/dramatic fallout of the synthesis of those prior 3.&nbsp; 2-4 cease to have any meaning when play is governed (authored) by illusionist GMing.&nbsp; That means that the players have little to no agency at the table and might as well just be listening to the GM's story. * There are, of course, virtues that deft GMs/storytellers/screen-writers would do well to observe there, one of the most important being &quot;less is more&quot; or perhaps &quot;convey much but say little.&quot;&nbsp; Sort of the provacative, minimalist approach of Cormac McCarthy.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6453619, member: 6696971"] I don't think we're talking about the same thing here. There were several of those podcasts and I don't recall which one "access the plot dump" took place in (likely 2 or 3 - not going to rewatch them to confirm). Its not the "setting the scene for the players at the beginning of the adventure or at the beginning of their present situation" that I think you're pointing too. That, of course, is a very fundamental aspect of GMing, story-telling, and screen-writing *. What I'm referring to is something that occurs mid-adventure; (1) heavy-handed GM exposition (typically through some NPC or another) in the place of a coherent, interwoven narrative that the players are mentally and emotionally engaged in and (2) the use of illusory mechanical resolution to access said exposition (when the plot/information dump was going to occur regardless). Here is another way to put it. You know how truly bad movies "convey little but say a lot" or maybe are "full of sound and fury yet signifying nothing?" The thematic material or the clues/portents of the big reveal are clumsily rendered or so opaque that you're sitting there half-way through going "...what the hell?" You're frustrated, you're bored, and you've mentally disengaged. Well, at some point in time during the creative process, the writers (etc) realized this was a jumbled pile of muck and the audience will have been totally lost or disinterested. How do they solve this? By further damaging the film. Instead of the big reveal being brief, agile, and impactful, they have to literally lead the audience back through the entire movie through an information-dump montage or the heavy expository monologuing by an on-screen persona or the voice-over actor. Now take that phenomenon and couple it with a tactic of telling the audience to roll the dice to see if they can access this information-dump, knowing full well that the "rolling the dice" in this case is just an illusionist's parlor trick. The information dump is coming. No matter what. But its a game so, because of that fact, they have to make the players "feel" like they're actually "playing" and "pushing the game forward" (even though when, as in this case, they're not). If I'm elitist (or whatever descriptor you would choose to use) because I don't like the techniques of (a) illusionist GMing (the behind the screen manipulation of action resolution mechanics while presenting them as being authentic drivers of play) and (b) plot/information dump by way of said illusionist GMing, then guilty as charged. It is damaging to a table agenda that puts forth the premise that the driver of play/story should be (1) conflict-oriented/emotionally-provocative situations + (2) player action declarations (by way of their characters) + (3) the table's consultation of the resolution mechanics (as required) and obeyance to their results + (4) the emotional/dramatic fallout of the synthesis of those prior 3. 2-4 cease to have any meaning when play is governed (authored) by illusionist GMing. That means that the players have little to no agency at the table and might as well just be listening to the GM's story. [SIZE=1] * There are, of course, virtues that deft GMs/storytellers/screen-writers would do well to observe there, one of the most important being "less is more" or perhaps "convey much but say little." Sort of the provacative, minimalist approach of Cormac McCarthy.[/SIZE] [/QUOTE]

Verification