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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 9629267" data-attributes="member: 16586">So right now, I am running a game of Blades, for a crew of hawkers (for an in-person group). We use what I would call moderate myth in that I prepare only what I feel I need for the next session. This prep is binding secret backstory meant to highlight the conflicts of interest that exist between factions and also internal to the factions (so the Circle of Flame is a house divided). We are to the point where our version of Duskvol is damn near unrecognizable. Setting elements that did not previously exist get added weak to weak based on what I feel needs additional depth and will make arranging sales more interesting. As a GM I treat this secret backstory similar to way Dogs in the Vineyard treats its towns, as secrets you cannot wait to tell. This is pretty similar to the way I tend to run more traditional games.I do not believe that because elements like Rodric, the former leader of the Crows, being the head of the Reconciled or Rosalyn Dimmer being housebound because she's looked in a decades long argument with ghost of a friend were established after the game began that the setting or moments of play are any less worthy of feeling like you are there in the moment or worthy of investigation. I do not feel like it's less real than a Call of Cthulhu scenario. These moments are not unearned or inauthentic. Play is not less coherent. I would definitely put our Duskvol up there with anything published on that level.I also do not consider it more real, coherent or tangible than say the Blades game [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] ran that had basically zero binding prep.I get there is a difference and a sort of fun of guessing who the murderer was before its revealed in a mystery novel, but that's not about how real (or coherent) the story is. It's just a fun game we play.</blockquote>

Verification