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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9253878" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Alzrius... again, the fisking and constant back and forth isn't getting anywhere. I've said what I said, you've said what you said. I don't think your criticisms of collaborative world building are all that relevant beyond your own group. You don't like that... fine. I can't do anything to change your mind. If you want to ask questions about my experiences, please feel free. But I'm not going to continue this back and forth because it's not getting us anywhere. I explained how each one was used for collaborative world building and how suited the game was for that to happen. That's what makes the examples relevant. If it helps, I'll offer some more details about Heart. As I said, the game utterly relies on collaboration. The environment into which the PCs delve in the game adapts to their subconscious... their wants and desires, their loves and fears. So you really cannot prep a whole lot for play until you have PCs already created. Or at least, already sketched out. You then take those details from the PCs and you craft challenges based on their fears and desires. The game is very player driven, so it eschews traditional prep. It's not prep free, but most of what you prep will be in response to the players and what the characters do and want. A big part of play... the part that character advancement relies upon... is Beats. These are like XP triggers. The player selects two prior to play, and then if they manage to do those things in play, they get an advance.... either a new ability or a stat boost, what have you. So in order for characters to advance, the GM has to work these things into the game. If they ignore the beats, the characters will never advance, and the players will be dissatisfied. Additionally, there are static world elements in the setting as well. The Heart may be constantly changing, but that doesn't mean everything is. Many of the characters will have connections to existing organizations or NPCs in the world. These organizations, locations, and NPCs are loosely defined, with lots to be developed during play by the GM and the players. For instance, the Hounds are an organization of soldiers, the 33rd Regiment, that braved the Heart, and mostly been lost. However, there are some that have survived and resurfaced. What caused them to vanish? What happened to them? Why are some back? These questions have no canonical answers. They're left up to the group to decide.  There is nothing about Heart that I would say is more difficult than most RPGs. It's simply different. Instead of crafting maps and monster status and NPCs before play begins, you introduce these things during play, based on prompts from the players. There's great advice and guidance on how to do so in the book. They even break it down into three sections: new to RPGs overall, new to narrative RPGS, and new to Heart. The setting is totally viable and holds up on its own. It doesn't suffer from players wanting the spotlight... in fact, it's very much tailored to the specific characters by design. The setting doesn't break down in any way because it has multiple people actively contributing to its creation. The fact that it's designed specifically to deliver that kind of experience really helps. Other games that don't actively promote this kind of play may fall short in that regard. Again, I don't know if you're familiar with this game at all or not, but feel free to ask any questions. I think talking about specific games and examples is the only way forward, so please comment on this or share your own examples.</blockquote>

Verification