Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9456436" data-attributes="member: 7023840">[USER=71699]@clearstream[/USER] That was some dense reading, and you're hearing that from me! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Have to say ... not sure you're going to be able to make "ludic fact" happen, but I understand what you're trying to do. Ludonarrative, however, might be a step too far.Substantively, I am going to key in on this-I've noticed TTRPG designers and play groups preparing all those sort of ludic facts without worries about railroading: they don't script what will happen in play, they preestablish a host of facts that may structure, colour, prompt and constrain the improvised play that will take place.I think that the distinction I make for myself is that if the game* has published information ("ludic facts") that all participants are aware of, that is fine. For example, if you're playing BiTD, everyone knows the game is in Dukvol. If you're playing The Witch is Dead, all the pre-known facts (the ludic facts) are on the single piece of paper.When it comes to prep, I am concerned (perhaps overly concerned) with the same thing that [USER=7044566]@thefutilist[/USER] is. To make this more explicit, I will delineate two different kinds of prep using a specific system as an example.Ten Candles is highly free form and a wonderful system for true tragic horror (I recommend purchasing it). For an Iron DM tournament, <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/iron-dm-2023-tournament-thread.700804/post-9180527" target="_blank">I wrote an adventure using the system</a>- although it is more of a scenario.When I ran the scenario I created for Iron DM later, the full scenario was provided to everyone- they had all the facts that I had. No other prep was done. And because of that, the gameplay went in weird, amazing, and tragically sad and horrific directions that I never could have imagined due to the player's authorship. That said, we all know how the game ends.Now, I could have done more prep. Designed out the areas of interest. Thought of specific encounters. And so on. But if I had done that, I would have wanted to use them in response to what the players were doing, instead of reacting to what they were doing.Which gets to what I think of as the salient distinction-When I am playing games like this, any prep I do is shared with the players. I don't have secret prep. If I create a "ludic fact," then everyone is aware of it before the game starts, because that's not just an issue on my end (wanting to use pre-made material) but also an issue if a player is authoring facts that clash with my "secret facts."I am not saying that people can't do this. I just approach these games differently, and worry about, as stated above, "railroading myself." *For this post, I am using "game" to refer to TTRPG games, whether rules-lite, FKR, PbTA, FiTD, or otherwise that incorporate elements of "improv" in the sense that the participants (GM and players) are authoring the fiction (and facts) during the game play.</blockquote>

Verification