Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 8928235" data-attributes="member: 4937">I agree with this is as a fundamental principle for almost every play style and aesthetic of play I can think of.&nbsp; It's OK if the secret keeper knows something about the situation that would reconceptualize it, provided he establishes that secret prior to beginning the play loop so that he can be both consistent and unbiased.&nbsp; And it's OK for any participant to play inside the gray areas of the space to add details that aren't previously established provided they don't reconceptualize the situation.&nbsp; However, if the person doing this isn't the secret keeper, then you have to generally allow the secret keeper the opportunity to affirm or deny this addition to the fictional space, to avoid creating contradictions.&nbsp; I'm really skeptical of play styles that allow any participant to reconceptualize a scene once it has started, even if they are the GM.&nbsp; &quot;You kill the guards easily, but really, the cloaks the guards are wearing have actually been monsters all along!&quot; is to me just really lazy and bad GMing, as it basically feels like a GM throwing a temper tantrum that the particular scene wasn't as challenging as he wanted it to be.&nbsp; It would be way too easy to dominate the whole story and not share it with the other participants or to let your own personal feelings guide all of play if you did this.&nbsp; GMs with authorial power in the narrative really in my opinion need to be disciplined about, as you put it, &quot;maintaining the integrity of the play space&quot;.&nbsp; In fiction there are often scenes where a character learns of their new powers and then deus ex machina uses those new powers to solve whatever problem is at hand - &quot;You were the Chosen One all along.&quot; sort of thing.&nbsp; But you really have to be careful with that.&nbsp; In general, that needs to be telegraphed in some way before it is satisfying as a story.&nbsp; (A relevant good example is in &quot;Child of the Stargazer&quot; in the Dungeon's and Dragon's cartoon.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 8928235, member: 4937"] I agree with this is as a fundamental principle for almost every play style and aesthetic of play I can think of. It's OK if the secret keeper knows something about the situation that would reconceptualize it, provided he establishes that secret prior to beginning the play loop so that he can be both consistent and unbiased. And it's OK for any participant to play inside the gray areas of the space to add details that aren't previously established provided they don't reconceptualize the situation. However, if the person doing this isn't the secret keeper, then you have to generally allow the secret keeper the opportunity to affirm or deny this addition to the fictional space, to avoid creating contradictions. I'm really skeptical of play styles that allow any participant to reconceptualize a scene once it has started, even if they are the GM. "You kill the guards easily, but really, the cloaks the guards are wearing have actually been monsters all along!" is to me just really lazy and bad GMing, as it basically feels like a GM throwing a temper tantrum that the particular scene wasn't as challenging as he wanted it to be. It would be way too easy to dominate the whole story and not share it with the other participants or to let your own personal feelings guide all of play if you did this. GMs with authorial power in the narrative really in my opinion need to be disciplined about, as you put it, "maintaining the integrity of the play space". In fiction there are often scenes where a character learns of their new powers and then deus ex machina uses those new powers to solve whatever problem is at hand - "You were the Chosen One all along." sort of thing. But you really have to be careful with that. In general, that needs to be telegraphed in some way before it is satisfying as a story. (A relevant good example is in "Child of the Stargazer" in the Dungeon's and Dragon's cartoon.) [/QUOTE]

Verification