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: 7099473" data-attributes="member: 42582">Further to this.Here is <a href="http://indie-rpgs.com/_articles/glossary.html" target="_blank">The Forge's definition of illusionism</a> - and in case the relevance of this definition is contested, well, that's where the term comes from:A family of Techniques in which a GM, usually in the interests of story creation, story creation, exerts Force over player-character decisions, in which he or she has authority over resolution-outcomes, and in which the players do not necessarily recognize these features.Here is the definition that I wrote when composing this post, before Googling up the above:Illusionism refers to a GMing technique (or maybe a family of techniques) whereby the GM covertly manipulates the resolution mechanics and/or the fiction to ensure that certain outcomes occur within the shared fiction, regardless of the players' action declaration.So I'm pretty confident that my understanding is on the same page as that of The Forge.Now, in the example of the GM not establishing, as part of the fiction, the motivation of an NPC until some appropriate moment of framing or adjudication: how is that illusionism, or anything like it? No control is being asserted over outcomes. Nothing is being done covertly. All the GM is doing is either framing - which is overt - or narrating a consequence in accordance with the procedures of the game in question - which is overt.What is the supposed resemblance?</blockquote>

Verification