Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8937626" data-attributes="member: 71699">In my phrasing I used &quot;common&quot; rather than &quot;shared&quot; purposefully, so that it would include games like Ironsworn when played solo. There is a fiction common to the players, even where the number of players is one.That mistakes what I am proposing. I'm saying that for the participant(s) in the play covering the map and key invention (it need not be solo, as in the case of multi-GM campaigns) they can be drafting and revising a common fiction. A fiction they know others will revise, and that they will redraft (and revise, etc), on an ongoing basis.I hadn't supposed there were spectators, and I hadn't supposed that the purpose of the play was to please them. I think you must mean here - turned up at T0 or T2 by mistake, thinking the session was to be that at T1.Suppose you prepare a map and key for your TB2 campaign, and then you play a session with others. The shared fiction and negotiated imagination takes place in those latter moments. Ordinarily, they do not take place in the former moments. If that works there, why the objection here? What forbids a GM from being playful when developing their map and key?Ugh, I hope I do not sound fractious! One thought - looking at your theory of RPG (and changing shared to common as I have) - can you say why adjusting the number of participants and what they are inventing at different moments is excluded?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8937626, member: 71699"] In my phrasing I used "common" rather than "shared" purposefully, so that it would include games like Ironsworn when played solo. There is a fiction common to the players, even where the number of players is one. That mistakes what I am proposing. I'm saying that for the participant(s) in the play covering the map and key invention (it need not be solo, as in the case of multi-GM campaigns) they can be drafting and revising a common fiction. A fiction they know others will revise, and that they will redraft (and revise, etc), on an ongoing basis. I hadn't supposed there were spectators, and I hadn't supposed that the purpose of the play was to please them. I think you must mean here - turned up at T0 or T2 by mistake, thinking the session was to be that at T1. Suppose you prepare a map and key for your TB2 campaign, and then you play a session with others. The shared fiction and negotiated imagination takes place in those latter moments. Ordinarily, they do not take place in the former moments. If that works there, why the objection here? What forbids a GM from being playful when developing their map and key? Ugh, I hope I do not sound fractious! One thought - looking at your theory of RPG (and changing shared to common as I have) - can you say why adjusting the number of participants and what they are inventing at different moments is excluded? [/QUOTE]

Verification