Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8570001" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I agree that what pemerton is referring to is binned in your # 4.However, I don't agree that this players is such a small slice of the metagame aversion Venn Diagram pie that its not a worthwhile conversation to be had.&nbsp; Also, I think there is more of the people in that slice that overlap with other slices than you might be giving it credit for.I think there is another component of this metagame conversation that is either a # 5 or should be binned in your # 4 (therefore increasing the size of your #4...because this one is pretty big both in terms of the number of times the consideration of it comes up in play and its affect upon play if its observed or if its disregarded).&nbsp; Some folks would call this &quot;The Will Wheaton Rule (Don't be a dick)&quot; and likely say that it shouldn't even be in this metagame conversation.&nbsp; I'm not so sure about that because I'm 100 % certain that there can be very healthy, game-enriching instances of (for instance):* Splitting the party* Two (or more) players aggressively advocating for and mechanically resolving opposing dramatic needs (PvP)Its not simply cut-and-dried that players who engage in this stuff are failing to observe metagame conventions around spotlight-sharing, party-splitting, and PvP.&nbsp; It may be the opposite.&nbsp; It may be that metagame conventions want the party to split when it seems fun/interesting or want PvP when it seems a fun/interesting direction for play to go.However, players who are against splitting the party and PvP are well-represented on ENWorld and I've seen it plenty in meatspace so this isn't a tiny constituency.And then where would you bin &quot;dutiful bread crumb following&quot; or &quot;we've all signed onto the GM's Adventure Path/Metaplot so we'll gladly put aside any other interests and get the thing to do the thing to fight the guy and take his thing to do the thing?&quot;&nbsp; This is kindred with [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] 's lead post in some ways but also not in key ways (inciting events or even plot hooks don't necessitate a through line of bread crumb following and uptake...although they often ride together).&nbsp; So is this also #4?&nbsp; That #4 is growing, if so.You could probably call #4 &quot;the Ouija planchette.&quot;&nbsp; Something about both (a) willfully not noticing the actual nature of the planchette's volition and (b) consistently observing The First Rule of Ouija Planchette Club.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 8570001, member: 6696971"] I agree that what pemerton is referring to is binned in your # 4. However, I don't agree that this players is such a small slice of the metagame aversion Venn Diagram pie that its not a worthwhile conversation to be had. Also, I think there is more of the people in that slice that overlap with other slices than you might be giving it credit for. I think there is another component of this metagame conversation that is either a # 5 or should be binned in your # 4 (therefore increasing the size of your #4...because this one is pretty big both in terms of the number of times the consideration of it comes up in play and its affect upon play if its observed or if its disregarded). Some folks would call this "The Will Wheaton Rule (Don't be a dick)" and likely say that it shouldn't even be in this metagame conversation. I'm not so sure about that because I'm 100 % certain that there can be very healthy, game-enriching instances of (for instance): * Splitting the party * Two (or more) players aggressively advocating for and mechanically resolving opposing dramatic needs (PvP) Its not simply cut-and-dried that players who engage in this stuff are failing to observe metagame conventions around spotlight-sharing, party-splitting, and PvP. It may be the opposite. It may be that metagame conventions want the party to split when it seems fun/interesting or want PvP when it seems a fun/interesting direction for play to go. However, players who are against splitting the party and PvP are well-represented on ENWorld and I've seen it plenty in meatspace so this isn't a tiny constituency. And then where would you bin "dutiful bread crumb following" or "we've all signed onto the GM's Adventure Path/Metaplot so we'll gladly put aside any other interests and get the thing to do the thing to fight the guy and take his thing to do the thing?" This is kindred with [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] 's lead post in some ways but also not in key ways (inciting events or even plot hooks don't necessitate a through line of bread crumb following and uptake...although they often ride together). So is this also #4? That #4 is growing, if so. You could probably call #4 "the Ouija planchette." Something about both (a) willfully not noticing the actual nature of the planchette's volition and (b) consistently observing The First Rule of Ouija Planchette Club. [/QUOTE]

Verification