Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7087946" data-attributes="member: 42582">By "backstory" in that passage, Eero Tuovinen means the gameworld.So bits of it are authored by the GM outside the context of play.I decided to set the game in Hardby, and hence decided that there is a Gynarch.Bits of it are colour, authored by the GM as part of the process of play.I decided that the merchants tell the PCs that the Gynarch is engaged to be married to Jabal of the Cabal.Bits of it are framing, authored by the GM as part of the process of play; some of that framing is the redeployment of past colour.The mage PC is at the docks hoping to meet a cleric who will cure his mummy rot. He thinks there should be clerics around, as a famous holy man is arriving to officiate at the Gynarch's wedding. [That's framing, and it draws on the previously-established bit of colour, namely, that some important personages are to wed.] I tell the player that, across the crowd of people waiting to greet the abbot's ship, he sees his brother, for the first time in nearly 16 years. [That's more framing.]Bits of it are authored by the players outside the context of play.As part of the build of the mage PC, the existence of his balrog-possessed brother, and of the sorcerous cabal, are both established.Bits of it are authored by the players as part of the process of the play.In the first session, the player of the mage PC declares a Circles check: in the fiction, the mage PC puts out feelers to the cabal, hoping for gainful employment. At the table, the player establishes a few more details about the cabal, including the existence of its leader Jabal.Bits of it are authored by the GM as part of the process of narrating failure.Early in the first session, a check made to study the magic of a newly-acquired angel feather failed; in the fiction, the mage PC's examination of it revealed it to be cursed. Later on, the Circles check described above failed. So I tell the players, "As you sit waiting in the tavern for word from Jabal, a thuggish-looking figure approaches you . . ." - and go on to explain how Jabal's servitor Athog brings them a message from Jabal, that they are to leave town immediately as they are bearers of a curse. [Note how the narration of the later failure weaves in the fiction established in the narration of the earlier failure.]There is no single person whose job it is to author all of the backstory. And there is no single time at which this is done: not in practice, and not in principle. Playing the game produces new fiction, and establishes new "facts" about the gameworld.I don't think it's wrong. It's just that it's pretty much the opposite of what I want out of RPGinWhat the players are doing here is trying to solve the mystery posed by the GM: I have something written in my notes - a bit of fiction that explains why the court rebuffed you. And now the players are doing stuff, and having their PCs do stuff, to try and learn that fiction. As I posted upthread in reply to [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION], it's puzzle-solving.I'm not interested in it.The players in the scenario just described aren't playing to find out in the salient sense. Here's the relevant passage from the DungeonWorld rulebook, p 161 (note that it's addressed to GMs):Your agenda makes up the things you aim to do at all times while GMing a game of Dungeon World: • Portray a fantastic world • Fill the characters’ lives with adventure • Play to find out what happens Everything you say and do at the table (and away from the table, too) exists to accomplish these three goals and no others. Things that aren’t on this list aren’t your goals. You’re not trying to beat the players or test their ability to solve complex traps. You’re not here to give the players a chance to explore your finely crafted setting. You’re not trying to kill the players (though monsters might be). You’re most certainly not here to tell everyone a planned-out story. Your first agenda is to portray a fantastic world. . . Show the players the wonders of the world they’re in and encourage them to react to it. Filling the characters’ lives with adventure means working with the players to create a world that’s engaging and dynamic. . . . Dungeon World adventures never presume player actions. A Dungeon World adventure portrays a setting in motion—someplace significant with creatures big and small pursuing their own goals. As the players come into conflict with that setting and its denizens, action is inevitable. You’ll honestly portray the repercussions of that action. This is how you play to find out what happens. You’re sharing in the fun of finding out how the characters react to and change the world you’re portraying. You’re all participants in a great adventure that’s unfolding. So really, don’t plan too hard. The rules of the game will fight you.Whereas in the scenarios that you (Lanefan) and Maxperson describe, the GM already knows what has happened. S/he hasn't worked with the players to create the world, but has authored this bit of it unilaterally. And s/he hasn't portrayed that bit of the world, either. S/he's kept it secret.As I said, it's not really something I'm interested in.</blockquote>

Verification