NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7074523" data-attributes="member: 16814">A world in motion doesn't make it GM driven.  An example of this kind of mechanic is the Fronts mentioned previously - defined threats that have agendas and advance those agendas over time or due to player action.  So long as this information is available to players (available doesn't always mean apparent, though) then it still can fully meet the concepts of player driven.  The players choose to engage the front or not, but the knowledge is always there that choosing to do either is engaging a facet of the game and up to the players.You once again seem to assume a worst case example for the other side to compare/contrast against.  This seems odd, given that the posters you support in this thread are presenting mechanics that do essentially the same thing (Fronts).  I can agree that a DM can abuse this and have a story going on that the players can't engage or alter, but that doesn't mean that the concept requires or even implies this outcome.  Having movement in the sandbox that isn't entirely dependent on the players doesn't mean that the game is now DM-centric as opposed to player-centric.  To go to an actual sandbox reference, just because you stopped building your sand castle in this corner to go play with the shovel and funnel in the other corner doesn't mean that the sand castle's going to be exactly as you left it if you come back -- other kids might play with it.  If you're told, up front, there are other kids in the sandbox, and you see them playing with things, doesn't restrict your ability to drive your own story in the sandbox, as a player.  Especially if the other kids are there for you to play with if you want.</blockquote>

Verification