Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="niklinna" data-source="post: 9459528" data-attributes="member: 71235">Wait, why wouldn't you ask the player to elaborate on that rudimentary kicker? Or anybody in the group, if they're cool with that? Especially in Sorcerer, one of the early games to advocate minimal prep. You shouldn't have to go away, and you shouldn't have to create back story away from the table—it is expected to emerge through play, through inquiry and action, at the table. Ask the player what was weird about that piece of art. Ask who stole it—another player might even step in and say it was them! That's the sort of juice Sorcerer feeds lustily on. Ask other questions, like, what specific problems does the loss of this art piece cause, was the piece of art already sold to someone, who might that be, how might they react to its loss, etc. etc.The basic decision criteria in Sorcerer and similar games are, is this new thing compelling, and does it fit in with established fiction so far? Early on, established fiction will be minimal, so the latter is likely to be &quot;yes&quot;. As events unfold, your floating prep may need some adjustment, which is fine because Sorcerer is pretty low on crunchy detail. Anything not agreed to by the table as having happened is open to revision—and even some stuff that is agreed as having happened is open to revision (or perhaps reinterpretation, as an alternate explanation for how certain facts came to be).If you desperately want a particular arc, Sorcerer is not the game to be playing. You can play a character who desperately wants/hopes for redemption, but you can't force outcomes without the system pushing back, hard.Again, imagining desired outcomes is not the same as getting them. Sorcerer is not built for that, nor is Apocalypse World, nor is Blades in the Dark....</blockquote>

[QUOTE="niklinna, post: 9459528, member: 71235"] Wait, why wouldn't you ask the player to elaborate on that rudimentary kicker? Or anybody in the group, if they're cool with that? Especially in Sorcerer, one of the early games to advocate minimal prep. You shouldn't have to go away, and you shouldn't have to create back story away from the table—it is expected to emerge through play, through inquiry and action, at the table. Ask the player what was weird about that piece of art. Ask who stole it—another player might even step in and say it was them! That's the sort of juice Sorcerer feeds lustily on. Ask other questions, like, what specific problems does the loss of this art piece cause, was the piece of art already sold to someone, who might that be, how might they react to its loss, etc. etc. The basic decision criteria in Sorcerer and similar games are, is this new thing compelling, and does it fit in with established fiction so far? Early on, established fiction will be minimal, so the latter is likely to be "yes". As events unfold, your floating prep may need some adjustment, which is fine because Sorcerer is pretty low on crunchy detail. Anything not agreed to by the table as having happened is open to revision—and even some stuff that is agreed as having happened is open to revision (or perhaps reinterpretation, as an alternate explanation for how certain facts came to be). If you desperately want a particular arc, Sorcerer is not the game to be playing. You can play a character who desperately wants/hopes for redemption, but you can't force outcomes without the system pushing back, hard. Again, imagining desired outcomes is not the same as getting them. Sorcerer is not built for that, nor is Apocalypse World, nor is Blades in the Dark.... [/QUOTE]

Verification