Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8995899" data-attributes="member: 6785785">It depends on how you look at it. Exploration, to me, implies the unknown. I have limited knowledge of something until I experience it in some way. Experiencing it for the first time is the key. Also, whatever is there to explore when we're talking about RPGs is invented. So they're not opposites. I can invent something for you to explore. Your focus seems to be about when I choose to invent it, but I don't think that contradicts invention or exploration as you're stating. But everyone who's talked to you about this over many posts has always said this is never really an issue. When players are allowed to offer lore in some way, it's never done in a way that contradicts what's been established, nor is it in a way that creates a solution to all their problems! These are the typical counter arguments offered and there's just not really any truth to them. This is valid. Although I'll add, as I expect is the case with you based on past conversations, your take on what a GM needs to create before play may give the impression of great effort, and so that may reduce the chances players want to contribute. But if instead, this was incorporated into play in some way, it would probably appear far less onerous to some folks.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 8995899, member: 6785785"] It depends on how you look at it. Exploration, to me, implies the unknown. I have limited knowledge of something until I experience it in some way. Experiencing it for the first time is the key. Also, whatever is there to explore when we're talking about RPGs is invented. So they're not opposites. I can invent something for you to explore. Your focus seems to be about when I choose to invent it, but I don't think that contradicts invention or exploration as you're stating. But everyone who's talked to you about this over many posts has always said this is never really an issue. When players are allowed to offer lore in some way, it's never done in a way that contradicts what's been established, nor is it in a way that creates a solution to all their problems! These are the typical counter arguments offered and there's just not really any truth to them. This is valid. Although I'll add, as I expect is the case with you based on past conversations, your take on what a GM needs to create before play may give the impression of great effort, and so that may reduce the chances players want to contribute. But if instead, this was incorporated into play in some way, it would probably appear far less onerous to some folks. [/QUOTE]

Verification