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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="chaochou" data-source="post: 5724063" data-attributes="member: 99817">If you, as a DM, have taken that decision and are intent on retaining the authority to make that decision, that's a playstyle choice. As far as I can tell, this thread is about exploring alternatives to that playstyle choice.The question in the thread, though, is whose narrative is it at any given point? It tends not to work like that. Groups tend to move from a dictatorship to a democracy. Stuff gets talked about, ideas get thrown into the mix. Some happen, some don't. Stuff gets resolved, between friends, concessions get made, deals get done, like the way it does if two people want to see a different movie. Really? Is this from experience? If so, our experiences differ massively. In my experience, as I said in a previous post, players don't do this.I don't think balance in games like FATE come from 'compels' or limits to narrative power in the way you seem to describe. For example, in FATE, if I want to be a jerk I can write really dull aspects like 'I am aweseme at everything' and 'I win'. FATE requires players to write nuanced aspects with both positive and negative connotations, but nothing in FATE forces you to. But if you don't you short-change yourself of all the fun. FATE players know this.In my experience, players who want narrative control also understand how to use it to make the game more fun. They don't use it for a lame instant counterspell for the evil curse, they use it to say the curse can be broken by the mystical hermit on Dragon Peak who was rumoured to have died 200 years ago.Clearly if you've already decided 'how the narrative goes' then this is a problem. But this isn't about 'good' or 'bad' or 'should' or 'shouldn't'. It's to say it need not be a problem, if it's how you aim to play.</blockquote>

Verification