Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Judgement calls vs "railroading"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7086902" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I've responded to both these things in multiple posts, begining way upthread when I noted the same apparent category error in a post made by [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION].</p><p></p><p>I will do so again.</p><p></p><p>Taken at face value the claim that "the gameworld only reacts to the players" makes no sense to me. Adding in the adverb "as determined by the GM" doesn't help, because it's still the case that the gameworld doesn't react to anything. Apparently it's clear to you what is meant, but unfortunately that doesn't help me! (I know that you believe that noone "should need to clarify" these things. All I can do is apologise for my difficulty in making sense of the claim. The metaphor is not working for me.)</p><p></p><p>In a post following yours [MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION] refers to "the viewpoint being used to create the fiction". "Viewpoint" here is itself a metaphor - my best reading of it is as a reference to <em>purposes</em> or <em>considerations</em> that guide the authoring of the fiction. If I am misunderstanding what was meant, Ovinomancer no doubt will let me know once again!</p><p></p><p>So anyway, with that interpretation in mind, here is the nearest true thing that I can see in the general neighbourhood:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Player-driven</strong>: The GM authors the gameworld (i) having regard to consistency with the fiction already established in the course of play, (ii) having regard to the concerns/interests of the players as manifested through their creation and their play of their PCs (this is especially relevant when framing the PCs (and thereby the players) into challenging situations, when narrating consequences of failed checks, and the like), and (iii) bound by the outcomes of action resolution. It is worth noting that (iii) cuts both ways: if the players succeed, the GM is bound by that; if the players fail, the GM is bound by that - no retries is a fairly hard rule, whilr no softballing I would say is generally a softer but still important rule.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">(NB [MENTION=16586]Campbell[/MENTION] may disgree with my ranking of the importance of these rules - if so, I think that would reflect some of the differences in our preferences that have come out in this thread eg "scene-framing" vs "MCing".)</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>GM-driven</strong>: The GM authors the gameworld having regard to consistency with the established fiction, where this includes not only fiction already established in the course of play but also fiction authored secretly by the GM. This requirement of consistency can extend to rendering player action declarations for their PCs failures simply on the basis of fictional positioning that is <em>unknown</em> to the players because part of this GM's secret backstory. And a fortiori there is certainly no obligation on the GM, in authoring the gameworld, to have regard to the concerns/interests of the players.</p><p></p><p>I haven't gone back through the thread to see the first time I stated something along those lines, but I believe that it's implicit in most of my posts, and especially the discussion with [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] earlier in the thread.</p><p></p><p>Is this what you and [MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION] mean? As I've said, it's the nearest true thing in the neighbourhood that I can think of. But because it is basically a restatement of stuff that was already established hundreds of posts ago, I feel that it probably is not what you are saying.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7086902, member: 42582"] I've responded to both these things in multiple posts, begining way upthread when I noted the same apparent category error in a post made by [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION]. I will do so again. Taken at face value the claim that "the gameworld only reacts to the players" makes no sense to me. Adding in the adverb "as determined by the GM" doesn't help, because it's still the case that the gameworld doesn't react to anything. Apparently it's clear to you what is meant, but unfortunately that doesn't help me! (I know that you believe that noone "should need to clarify" these things. All I can do is apologise for my difficulty in making sense of the claim. The metaphor is not working for me.) In a post following yours [MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION] refers to "the viewpoint being used to create the fiction". "Viewpoint" here is itself a metaphor - my best reading of it is as a reference to [i]purposes[/i] or [i]considerations[/i] that guide the authoring of the fiction. If I am misunderstanding what was meant, Ovinomancer no doubt will let me know once again! So anyway, with that interpretation in mind, here is the nearest true thing that I can see in the general neighbourhood: [indent][b]Player-driven[/b]: The GM authors the gameworld (i) having regard to consistency with the fiction already established in the course of play, (ii) having regard to the concerns/interests of the players as manifested through their creation and their play of their PCs (this is especially relevant when framing the PCs (and thereby the players) into challenging situations, when narrating consequences of failed checks, and the like), and (iii) bound by the outcomes of action resolution. It is worth noting that (iii) cuts both ways: if the players succeed, the GM is bound by that; if the players fail, the GM is bound by that - no retries is a fairly hard rule, whilr no softballing I would say is generally a softer but still important rule. (NB [MENTION=16586]Campbell[/MENTION] may disgree with my ranking of the importance of these rules - if so, I think that would reflect some of the differences in our preferences that have come out in this thread eg "scene-framing" vs "MCing".) [b]GM-driven[/b]: The GM authors the gameworld having regard to consistency with the established fiction, where this includes not only fiction already established in the course of play but also fiction authored secretly by the GM. This requirement of consistency can extend to rendering player action declarations for their PCs failures simply on the basis of fictional positioning that is [i]unknown[/i] to the players because part of this GM's secret backstory. And a fortiori there is certainly no obligation on the GM, in authoring the gameworld, to have regard to the concerns/interests of the players.[/indent] I haven't gone back through the thread to see the first time I stated something along those lines, but I believe that it's implicit in most of my posts, and especially the discussion with [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] earlier in the thread. Is this what you and [MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION] mean? As I've said, it's the nearest true thing in the neighbourhood that I can think of. But because it is basically a restatement of stuff that was already established hundreds of posts ago, I feel that it probably is not what you are saying. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Judgement calls vs "railroading"
Top