Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7075212" data-attributes="member: 42582">This question seems like it's meant to be rhetorical, but I don't quite follow. Isn't the GM plays in the sandbox, under the assumption that the GM authors the shared fiction that constitutes the "sandbox", equivalent to the GM writes a novel or the GM engages in solitaire rolling of dice?I'd always assumed that the main point of creating a world for RPGing is to engage the players (via their PCs) to find out what they do. As a GM, I don't "play in my world". I play a game with the other players, which has (as one of its goals, and one of its consequences) the creation of a shared fiction. The gameworld is a means to that end.If no player has a belief about demons, how does that engage a Belief?You keep talking about "Fronts". Do you play PbtA games? What is your experience with Fronts?I've played a bit of DW. My experience is that "Fronts" are nothing like the player declaring his/her PC goes to the militia HQ to be told (by the GM, playing a NPC) what possible stuff the PC might do to have some action in the game.From my point of view, questions about whether or not I want to play a game that is run in a certain way are not primarily questions about words. Or about logic, or concepts, or similar things.They're questions about actual experiences at a table of RPGers; about actual processes for introducing content into the shared fiction, and the results of those processes. When we look at those things, as articulated by various posters in this thread, we can see that the differences are not limited to set-up. [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] has told me several things about his game: (i) there are periods where the PCs (and thereby the players) are at a "loose end", ie have no inherent motivations that keep the game moving; (ii) that one important way (maybe the principal way?) of reactivating the game in those periods is for the players (via their PCs visiting the militia HQ or whatever) to learn, from the GM, what story elements and events are available for them to engage with (eg orcs raiding the farmsteads); (iii) that those plot elements are authored by the GM, who is - among other things - doing behind-the-scenes management of backstory, to ensure a "living, breathing" world; (iv) that in various circumstances where the players establish and pursue goals for their PCs that don't fit with those GM-authored story elements, the PC has to leave the party and become a NPC; (v) that the players might succeed at a check, yet find the result overall inimical to what they wanted (eg they succeed in helping the baron, but it turns out the baron is evil).A further thing has not, I think, been expressly stated, but is strongly implied by what Lanefan has posted: namely, (vi) that in narrating the consequences of failure, the GM's focus is on the internal logic of the gameworld (which will include backstory that is secret to the players), not on the goals, aspirations etc of the PCs (and thereby of the players).Those are not abstract logical propositions: they're rather concrete things that [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] has posted, in this thread, about his game (or implied, in the case of (vi)). Those are the things that lead me to label it "GM-driven".There are other aspects of Lanefan's game that have come out in this (and other) threads, like the multiple competing parties, and the player-vs-player elements, that don't seem to be GM-driven. If [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] were to elaborate on how those sorts of things interact with (i) to (vi) above, I would read those posts with interest.Given that Lanefan's game runs with 9-year campaigns for (I believe) multiple interacting parties, I'm guessing that those players enjoy it. I think that Lanefan enjoys it too - he posts with candour, with enthusiasm, and with witty signature sign-offs.I try to post with the same degree of candour and enthusiasm about my play, and what I enjoy about it. And in a series of posts over the last 100 or so posts in this thread, I've tried to give some very concrete examples of the techniques that I use. I think it's obvious how they're different from Lanefan's, and produce a different experience at the table from (i) to (vi) above. Whether or not that experience is less fun, as fun, or more fun, barely even makes sense to ask!, given that we're talking about two different groups of RPGers separated by 1000s of km of Pacific Ocean.</blockquote>

Verification