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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fenris-77" data-source="post: 9845288" data-attributes="member: 6993955">I'm not actually contesting the idea that good prep by an experienced GM leads to internally consistent setting deployment. I was only pointing out that there is a lot more going on than just do prep, profit. Some GMs are wizards with their prep, while other end up mangling sessions as they try to keep everyone colouring inside the lines. The issue of what, exactly, 'good prep' looks like is an interesting question. I don't think that good GMing is simply a matter of having it, or not. I think that experience and a reflective approach to ongoing GM practice means a lot, and I think this includes prep.Another important point is that some games are purpose built to alleviate the need for deep prep, and their structures and systems all work to that end. Experience in running those systems, and what prep helps and what does not, is where the internal consistency comes from. Less and better prep is a perfectly reasonable item on the list you built.If I were to sum up my position here, it would be "just doing prep isn't enough." That doesn't make it bad of course. Frankly, I like prep, and I probably prep more for minimal prep systems than some folks, but part of that is I'm well aware of my own learning skills and GM skills, and I've found that writing stuff down often means I don't actually need to consult the prep during play. We all have our little differences and whatnot.</blockquote>

Verification