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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="soviet" data-source="post: 9629276" data-attributes="member: 6925338">I mean, it exists as an objective thing in the GM's notes. I'm not quite sure it's the same thing. The setting does not exist as an entity independent of the GM's notes and any further ideas that participants in the game might add to it. This discussion reminds me of discussions around social conflict rules. Some people feel that because diplomacy or intimidation or whatever involve talking, and players and GMs can talk, that in-character roleplay is a close enough approximation to the real thing that we can resolve things organically and no social conflict rules are necessary. Personally I think that in-character conversation misses out a lot of the pressures and consequences of real life social interactions, and I don't think it's a good replacement for effective social mechanics at all. BUT, I do also think that in-character conversation is fun, and adds a lot to the game, and so I use the two things in parallel (one impacting the other). Now I know that no-one is talking about replacing all interaction with a 'solve mysteries' roll. The analogy isn't perfect. But what strikes me is that there is a similar approximation issue. I think that yes, a GM can create a fun puzzle to solve within their notes that has an objective solution, and that through interacting with the GM's notes and characters etc the players can feel a real sense of satisfaction in solving that puzzle. But I take the point also that this is an approximation of a real mystery, in the same way I think that a roleplayed conversation is an approximation of a real social conflict. There is a lot of depth, nuance, frustration, etc in a real life mystery that cannot possibly be present in a roleplayed mystery, including (as has been pointed out) the frustration that many real life mysteries do not have a detectable solution, and do not have further clues that can conveniently emerge if the assigned mystery-solvers seem to be hitting a brick wall. Just food for thought. I don't have a strong opinion on this. I'm not even sure which 'side' I'm on, to the extent there are 'sides'. I've only ever played these scenarios in games where the identity of the murderer etc is a pre-authored fact. I've never read Brindlewood Bay or the like, although I am interested to know more about how these games work.</blockquote>

Verification