Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8995376" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Can't every player be &quot;exploring&quot; what the other players are providing? That is, this again seems to be predicated on the notion that it is impossible to explore unless one, singular, other person has already perfectly nailed down everything to be explored, as Pemerton said. That seems a pretty narrow conception of &quot;exploration&quot;--almost to the point of circularity. Why is it impossible for the whole group to be collectively exploring together? It seems perfectly reasonable that you &quot;contribute&quot; (and thus do not &quot;explore&quot;) say, 10-15% of the world for each PC player, and the GM player contributes the remaining 25% to 50%. Everyone--including the GM!--is heavily or primarily exploring, and the players are overwhelmingly exploring. I don't see how the small amount of contributing nixes the feeling of exploration. Indeed, at least in my experience with the games I've run and played, I have seen significantly more exploration. Players act more boldly in a story-and-performance sense. They do more creative and unexpected things. Much as some folks complain about certain games causing players to simply scan their character sheets rather than play, I find &quot;trad&quot; gaming encourages players to simply become passive receivers of DM dictation. Sure, they'll accept quest hooks or whatever, but they won't engage any further because there's no need--the DM is there to narrate it to them, so let the DM do the narration, heck, it could even be rude to rob the DM of the stuff they've prepared. Passively receive the story, because as long as you follow the bread crumbs, the story will always come to you.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8995376, member: 6790260"] Can't every player be "exploring" what the [I]other[/I] players are providing? That is, this again seems to be predicated on the notion that it is impossible to explore unless one, singular, other person has already perfectly nailed down everything to be explored, as Pemerton said. That seems a pretty narrow conception of "exploration"--almost to the point of circularity. Why is it impossible for the whole group to be collectively exploring together? It seems perfectly reasonable that you "contribute" (and thus do not "explore") say, 10-15% of the world for each PC player, and the GM player contributes the remaining 25% to 50%. Everyone--including the GM!--is heavily or primarily exploring, and the players are overwhelmingly exploring. I don't see how the small amount of contributing nixes the feeling of exploration. Indeed, at least in my experience with the games I've run and played, I have seen significantly [I]more[/I] exploration. Players act more boldly in a story-and-performance sense. They do more creative and unexpected things. Much as some folks complain about certain games causing players to simply scan their character sheets rather than play, I find "trad" gaming encourages players to simply become passive receivers of DM dictation. Sure, they'll accept quest hooks or whatever, but they won't engage any further because there's no need--the DM is [I]there[/I] to narrate it to them, so let the DM do the narration, heck, it could even be [I]rude[/I] to rob the DM of the stuff they've prepared. Passively receive the story, because as long as you follow the bread crumbs, the story will always come to you. [/QUOTE]

Verification