Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 2650801" data-attributes="member: 1106">Nope, still think your comment is apropos to nothing as far as my point goes.&nbsp; Doesn't apply.&nbsp; Neither here nor there.&nbsp; Irrelevant backstory to the point I was refuting, if you like.&nbsp; Why?&nbsp; Because you're not saying the same thing as the point I was replying to!&nbsp; It's pretty simple really!Not necessarily bored...could be apathy, or whatever removal of story does to player's interest in the game.&nbsp; Probably makes it drop.Well, there's the key.&nbsp; &quot;Become clear in time&quot;.&nbsp; I'm not arguing against you then, just making the point that adventures that have backstory that the story doesn't make sense without also knowing, and which is either impossible for PCs to discover, or likely for them to miss, is usually poor adventure design, or poor DMing.I disagree - telling a story properly doesn't insult the intelligence of the audience.&nbsp; It's just the art of telling a good yarn, and not leaving the story equivalent of the punchline of the joke in the backstory, and never revealing it to the PCs.&nbsp; Sure, the DM &quot;gets it&quot;, but ideally the players should be entertained by the story too.I also dispute that it's a reflection of Hollywood-style dumbing down to have flashbacks; there are plenty of movies and TV &quot;whodunnits&quot; where you can't just guess at what happened ten years beforehand for the story to make any sense.&nbsp; Usually, for the writers to bother, it seems that it's the thing that makes the story go (such as a murder or a cause for revenge).&nbsp; Unless this sort of thing is revealed by some means, eventually (even murder mysteries get around to revealing all eventually), then the story isn't going to make a hell of a lot of sense, because you're presenting the effect without ever explaining the cause.Yeah, good on ya...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rounser, post: 2650801, member: 1106"] Nope, still think your comment is apropos to nothing as far as my point goes. Doesn't apply. Neither here nor there. Irrelevant backstory to the point I was refuting, if you like. Why? Because you're not saying the same thing as the point I was replying to! It's pretty simple really! Not necessarily bored...could be apathy, or whatever removal of story does to player's interest in the game. Probably makes it drop. Well, there's the key. "Become clear in time". I'm not arguing against you then, just making the point that adventures that have backstory that the story doesn't make sense without also knowing, and which is either impossible for PCs to discover, or likely for them to miss, is usually poor adventure design, or poor DMing. I disagree - telling a story properly doesn't insult the intelligence of the audience. It's just the art of telling a good yarn, and not leaving the story equivalent of the punchline of the joke in the backstory, and never revealing it to the PCs. Sure, the DM "gets it", but ideally the players should be entertained by the story too. I also dispute that it's a reflection of Hollywood-style dumbing down to have flashbacks; there are plenty of movies and TV "whodunnits" where you can't just guess at what happened ten years beforehand for the story to make any sense. Usually, for the writers to bother, it seems that it's the thing that makes the story go (such as a murder or a cause for revenge). Unless this sort of thing is revealed by some means, eventually (even murder mysteries get around to revealing all eventually), then the story isn't going to make a hell of a lot of sense, because you're presenting the effect without ever explaining the cause. Yeah, good on ya... [/QUOTE]

Verification