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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6989190" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think that the contrast you frame in the first quoted sentence is open to question - LotR is a fairy tale, but to many readers the world also seems alive. Films like Excalibur and Ahses of Time, in my view, are also examples of this.The relatability to personal experience is also tricky. As a matter of historical sociology, there seems to be an increase in widespread alienation with the increase in scientific knowledge, not a decrease (see eg Weber's brilliant essay on Science as a Vocation). And speaking purely personally, I find an "Advanced Squad Leader" style of play - which is one upshot of "naturalism" in dungeon-style contexts - completely unrelatable to my personal experience, in part because the characters become purged of all the emotional life that, for me, seems to be part and parcel of human reality.That's narrower than what I had in mind.Classic dungeon exploratoin is not about character's emotions/psychology - its focus is almost entirely external, on beating the dungeon. But I think in its origins it rested on a fairy tale logic - of evil things in dark holes waiting to be found - and when it got naturalised it started to break down. For a practical example, look at Gygax's advice to players on p 107-9 of his PHB, then look at his advice to GMs (pp 104-5 of the DMG, written a year or so later) about "dynamic" dungeons. If a GM takes that latter advice to heart, and runs dungeons "naturalistically", then implementing Gygax's player advice becomes almost impossible, because the idea of "scout, while dealing with wandering monsters by flight or quick dispatch; then raid" won't work if the environment keeps changing in response to PC incursions.Roger Musson's "Dungeon Architect" series in very early 80s White Dwarf brings out a similar tension. He wants the dungeon to have a veneer of narrative and verisimilitude to it, but also wants it to be a largely static place where dungeoneering of the classic sort is feasibl. Here are two example problems he poses, that illustrate some issues that "naturalism" can cause, but also show how far the gap is between his conception of a dungeon and modern sensibilities:(1) In addressing the question "What happens if the PCs try to enter an as-yet undetailed part of a dungeon level" - and he is envisaging big levels, of 200-ish rooms - he suggests 15 ogres in the corridor having an impromptu union meeting, which will dissuade the PCs from continuing down it. But then he worries "What if the players think that the 15 ogres are a permanent feature, and hence never come back that way?" For most modern GMs, I don't think that is the first worry they would have about such a scenario!(2) In discussing "dynamic" dungeons, he wonders, "What happens if the PCs come back to the room where the ogre is torturing the kobold? Is it still going on?" These days, no one would set up a static "freeze frame" room - and so the question wouldn't need to be asked.The move from "fairy tale" - ogres having impromptu union meetings, a veneer of dynamism via "freeze frame" rooms - to genuinely naturalistic/dynamic dungeons, is the end of dungeoneering in the classic sense.I did make this point in the OP, yes. And obviously have just elaborated it above.I think this is not universally true.In my BW game, the wizard PC wants items to defeat his brother, who is possessed by a balrog. The player decided what the items were. And the logic of BW's GMing and resolution guidelines means that he will get a chance to find them.This can be equally true in a "naturalistic" game. One of the triggers for this thread was discussions, in some other threads, where posters are defending "unbeatable" encounters as part of the GM's repertoire for ensuring a "living, breathing" world.The issues of mechanical degrees of challenge, and of McGuffins, I think are orthogonal to narration vs naturalism (the latter can have McGuffins too - eg we need a +1 weapon to fight the gargoyle) and more about GM techniques and how they relate to player cues.</blockquote>

Verification