Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 8936060" data-attributes="member: 85870">Sorry that this is going back a ways, but I had to bring this up. Before I finally read some of the Forge essays myself and tried (and mostly failed) to successfully run a few sessions of Dungeons World back in 2017, if we consider the &quot;Y talk&quot; to be narrative/non-trad discussions and &quot;X talk&quot; to be &quot;traditional&quot; approaches of D&amp;D, then prior to 2017 I&nbsp; would have told you that anything remotely involving &quot;Y talk&quot; was useless and borderline madness, because &quot;RPGs simply don't work the way this 'Y talk' nonsense claims.&quot;&quot;Y talk&quot; felt insulting because it felt like it was invalidating the only play style I knew existed. Well obviously the appearance of insult was on me, not the ideas being expressed. Just because I couldn't grasp or place the ideas into a workable context didn't mean I had to take umbrage.And the &quot;Y-talkers&quot; had a valid point---It's pretty difficult to have a valid discussion about the theory involved if&nbsp; one side doesn't even acknowledge the validity of the argument. I went the rounds multiple times with pemerton, chaochou, Abdul Alhazred, Manbearcat, and others and their firm stance was always, &quot;Your inability to comprehend these non-trad concepts neither invalidates your playstyle nor negates the validity of what we're describing, so please stop saying narrative techniques don't work and are impossible.&quot; And that's exactly the stance I now take myself, oddly enough. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60a.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":giggle:" title="Giggle&nbsp; &nbsp; :giggle:"&nbsp; data-smilie="27"data-shortname=":giggle:" />But I wanted to touch on this, too, talking about trad map and key approaches:What Campbell is expressing gets to the heart of the unease I began to feel in my own trad gaming back in 2016. Because I as a GM found it far too easy to justify modifying either the map, the key, or both to push events in the direction I wanted as a GM.And I realized that despite my best intentions, there were times I sacrificed the integrity of the map and key simply because it happened to please me as the GM. And I began to be uncomfortable with the ramifications. Was I being untrue to the group social contract? Would the players be upset if the found out? Would they have preferred to have more input into the world and what mattered to their characters? And I realized that whatever techniques I had innately gleaned over the years didn't answer those questions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 8936060, member: 85870"] Sorry that this is going back a ways, but I had to bring this up. Before I finally read some of the Forge essays myself and tried (and mostly failed) to successfully run a few sessions of Dungeons World back in 2017, if we consider the "Y talk" to be narrative/non-trad discussions and "X talk" to be "traditional" approaches of D&D, then prior to 2017 I would have told you that anything remotely involving "Y talk" was useless and borderline madness, because "RPGs simply don't work the way this 'Y talk' nonsense claims." "Y talk" felt insulting because it felt like it was invalidating the only play style I knew existed. Well obviously the appearance of insult was on me, not the ideas being expressed. Just because I couldn't grasp or place the ideas into a workable context didn't mean I had to take umbrage. And the "Y-talkers" had a valid point---It's pretty difficult to have a valid discussion about the theory involved if one side doesn't even acknowledge the validity of the argument. I went the rounds multiple times with pemerton, chaochou, Abdul Alhazred, Manbearcat, and others and their firm stance was always, "Your inability to comprehend these non-trad concepts neither invalidates your playstyle nor negates the validity of what we're describing, so please stop saying narrative techniques don't work and are impossible." And that's exactly the stance I now take myself, oddly enough. :giggle: But I wanted to touch on this, too, talking about trad map and key approaches: What Campbell is expressing gets to the heart of the unease I began to feel in my own trad gaming back in 2016. Because I as a GM found it far too easy to justify modifying either the map, the key, or both to push events in the direction I wanted as a GM. And I realized that despite my best intentions, there were times I sacrificed the integrity of the map and key simply because it happened to please me as the GM. And I began to be uncomfortable with the ramifications. Was I being untrue to the group social contract? Would the players be upset if the found out? Would they have preferred to have more input into the world and what mattered to their characters? And I realized that whatever techniques I had innately gleaned over the years didn't answer those questions. [/QUOTE]

Verification