Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AriochQ" data-source="post: 7728688" data-attributes="member: 6793324">my .02...I tend to refer to RPG sessions as a 'co-construction of reality' between the players and GM.&nbsp; I think the best GM's allow their players to influence the environment.&nbsp; It is never the case that the DM has worked out every single detail of the adventure, and the players often fill in those voids.&nbsp; For example, a critter is attacking a comrade at the bottom of a staircase.&nbsp; The player asks &quot;is there a bannister I can slide down?&quot;.&nbsp; The GM probably hadn't considered bannister location in their planning, but agrees there is a 'slidable bannister' in the moment. [You can easily find another example if you are the type of GM that ALWAYS considers bannister location when planning an adventure].This has two main advantages...1. It fully supports the Rule of Cool.&nbsp; 2.&nbsp; It adds detail to the setting independent of the GM (although they still have final say).&nbsp; The players have 'co-constructed' reality.&nbsp; If the GM were to later write a written account of the session, it would include the character sliding down the bannister to attack the baddie.&nbsp; Although the player obviously controlled the actions of the PC, they also influenced the construction of the campaign setting to some degree.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AriochQ, post: 7728688, member: 6793324"] my .02...I tend to refer to RPG sessions as a 'co-construction of reality' between the players and GM. I think the best GM's allow their players to influence the environment. It is never the case that the DM has worked out every single detail of the adventure, and the players often fill in those voids. For example, a critter is attacking a comrade at the bottom of a staircase. The player asks "is there a bannister I can slide down?". The GM probably hadn't considered bannister location in their planning, but agrees there is a 'slidable bannister' in the moment. [You can easily find another example if you are the type of GM that ALWAYS considers bannister location when planning an adventure]. This has two main advantages...1. It fully supports the Rule of Cool. 2. It adds detail to the setting independent of the GM (although they still have final say). The players have 'co-constructed' reality. If the GM were to later write a written account of the session, it would include the character sliding down the bannister to attack the baddie. Although the player obviously controlled the actions of the PC, they also influenced the construction of the campaign setting to some degree. [/QUOTE]

Verification