Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bawylie" data-source="post: 6307404" data-attributes="member: 6776133">I think we're getting into frameworks, here. Wherein the game world is a mimetic framework while an adventure might well be diegetic. That is, the train Depot offers a lot of rides to a lot of places. But when you finally pick and board, you're on that track until you reach a destination (alive or dead). I think so much is made of simulation, narrative, railroading, and meta game that we forget the very appropriate intersections between these elements. Consequently, we suffer rules debates (what's the appropriate % chance of surviving a 30 ft drop?) instead of trying to work out what's right for the game & the circumstances. As if systems & mechanics hold the answer to "how do I play this game?"Luke chooses death rather than joining up with Vader. In choosing, he drops - fully knowing the outcome is death. Interesting character choice. And in a "consistent" world, he'd die. But then we get a diegetic deus ex machina that spares him. This happened instead of that. The author or narrator or whatever made something interesting happen out of that choice, even though what was interesting wasn't close to likely. I think we should do this more often. Not turn to system to adjudicate every action, but find a way to make these big decisions interesting. Switch between mimesis and diegesis to subvert expectation. It's more exciting, anyway.</blockquote>