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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7801172" data-attributes="member: 6779196">I don’t think what you’re saying here is necessarily in conflict with what Iserith said. Goal and Approach, per se doesn’t require telegraphing, and I think it would be false to claim that the rules say it does. But, utilizing G&A without utilizing telegraphing is probably going to lead to some... mixed results, if we’re being generous. I think many of the examples and whatabouts that ask “well, how would you G&A folks deal with this” actually demonstrate this fact very effectively. Yeah, if you don’t like to make heavy use of telegraphing, expecting your players to phrase all their actions in a G&A framework would probably not work super well for you. I think this may be where the two sides are talking past each other. We’re each taking our own style of narration as a given. And our respective styles of action resolution just don’t gel well with each other’s styles of narration.So, to those saying, “G&A can be a useful tool, but it doesn’t work for every situation,” I think you’re right about that. For example, in a situation where you are keeping information that the characters would not have access to hidden from the players, G&A might not work super well. What I think may not be getting communicated as effectively as it could is that those of us who embrace G&A have found that by adjusting the narrative framework of our games to more consistently accommodate   G&A, we have found the results to be more to our liking than when we adjusted our action resolution techniques to accommodate the narrative frameworks we had used in previous editions. Your mileage may vary, and if you like the way your game runs just fine, don’t feel obligated to adopt our techniques.</blockquote>

Verification