Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cruentus" data-source="post: 8994391" data-attributes="member: 7034645">I don't know if I'm that interested in 'collaborative fiction writing&quot; as it might apply to RPG's.&nbsp; I find that I have to really work at being creative when I DM.&nbsp; I tend to overorganize, always look for that next cool thing, do too much research and grab too many resources, and then blank when it comes to what is interesting or might make for a fun game.&nbsp; So some might then say &quot;See!&nbsp; A perfect opportunity to share the game world creation!&quot; to which I would reply, yes, and I do do that.&nbsp; But then if the shared world thus created isn't interesting to me as a DM/Referee to run, then I'm less likely to be on my A game.&nbsp; Its a rough cycle.&nbsp; However, I also find that many of the players in our group want to come to the table, hang out, and play in whatever game/campaign the GM/Referee has built.&nbsp; They don't want to DM, they don't want to add things to the world (even when asked or prompted), etc.&nbsp; And I'm going to guess that this varies widely from table to table.&nbsp; I think people can take as much control over the narrative as they want (at least in my&nbsp; games), but find it doesn't really work out that way.&nbsp; When I play, the campaigns are a journey, and if I'm adding in what I want into the journey, then its not something that is discovered, or potentially full of surprise, because I added it.&nbsp; Its also different strokes.&nbsp; We tried a sort of sub-game called Microscope, where you collaboratively world build around the table, role play &quot;scenes&quot; of major historical plot points, and are allowed to add (or subtract), or redirect someone else's addition, all in a collaborative manner.&nbsp; It ended up building a world that I in particular didn't want to play in, even though I was interested in playing the game, so I opted out.&nbsp; That collaborative world was uninteresting to me as it developed.&nbsp; So again, it keeps coming back to both personal preference, and what the group you play with is interested in - in both a world building perspective (who does it, how much can it be altered by players), and DM/Referee control and authority (how much, how is it expressed, how does it allow or hinder player choice).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cruentus, post: 8994391, member: 7034645"] I don't know if I'm that interested in 'collaborative fiction writing" as it might apply to RPG's. I find that I have to really work at being creative when I DM. I tend to overorganize, always look for that next cool thing, do too much research and grab too many resources, and then blank when it comes to what is interesting or might make for a fun game. So some might then say "See! A perfect opportunity to share the game world creation!" to which I would reply, yes, and I do do that. But then if the shared world thus created isn't interesting to me as a DM/Referee to run, then I'm less likely to be on my A game. Its a rough cycle. However, I also find that many of the players in our group want to come to the table, hang out, and play in whatever game/campaign the GM/Referee has built. They don't want to DM, they don't want to add things to the world (even when asked or prompted), etc. And I'm going to guess that this varies widely from table to table. I think people can take as much control over the narrative as they want (at least in my games), but find it doesn't really work out that way. When I play, the campaigns are a journey, and if I'm adding in what I want into the journey, then its not something that is discovered, or potentially full of surprise, because I added it. Its also different strokes. We tried a sort of sub-game called Microscope, where you collaboratively world build around the table, role play "scenes" of major historical plot points, and are allowed to add (or subtract), or redirect someone else's addition, all in a collaborative manner. It ended up building a world that I in particular didn't want to play in, even though I was interested in playing the game, so I opted out. That collaborative world was uninteresting to me as it developed. So again, it keeps coming back to both personal preference, and what the group you play with is interested in - in both a world building perspective (who does it, how much can it be altered by players), and DM/Referee control and authority (how much, how is it expressed, how does it allow or hinder player choice). [/QUOTE]

Verification