Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7094380" data-attributes="member: 42582">Literally speaking, this is impossible in a typical RPG: the player is dependent upon the GM presenting the fictional situation, narrating the actions of NPCs present in that siutation, etc.In the example you provide, here is the framing:The difference between this - as you present it - and my preferred approach is that the action seems to be being driven by the GM's concerns and interests in the fiction, rather than the players'.From my point of view, that's one way of getting at the distinction between GM-driven and player-driven play. As I said, the approach you favou seems to mean that it is the GM's conerns and interests that underping the GM's framing and narration.Well, you're the one who described an angry owlbear protecting its cubs - which seemed to suggest conflict. And I didn't say anything about combat. The only two times the PCs in my 4e game encountered a bear, they tamed it. Based on your account, your - non-4e game -seems to be the one in which the players lean towards combat.I don't see any connection between this, and the question of whether or not the GM is "going where the action is". Unless one is assuming that the action doesn't involve the normalcy of the world and considerations of humanity - but what is the basis for such an assumption?</blockquote>