Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5840554" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't understand the notion of "consequences" as it is frequently used. And there is often confusion between ingame and metagame.For example, the consequences of completely fleeing in this situation - the mercenary just riding off into the wilderness and never coming back - seems to be zero from the point of view of the fiction - the GM has no great plans afoot for redemption or karmic retribution or "To Kill a Mockingbird" with swords and goblins. But the metagame consequence - of spoiling the game and losing the PC - was enough to prompt a posting to ENworld seeking advice/commentary.It's as if the crappy metagame consequence is somehow meant to be internalised by the participants in the game, so they can see some deep thematic resonance in surrendering oneself to authority (as a protagonist) in order to avoid being hosed (not as a protagonist, but as a player of a game).In my book, given that it is a game, the only worthwhile metagame consequence is "I get to play more of this cool game with my friends." Whereas thematic consequences should derive from the power of the fictional events. Which, in this particular medium, derives in part from the fact that they were not pre-scripted, but the result, in part, of audience participation. Which relies upon the GM not railroading.Just some thoughts.</blockquote>