Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8572984" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Again, though, this is why the thread is unproductive, except for those who are already talking about the thing that they wanted to talk about.Look, 5e can be run in a variety of ways- both from the RAW, as well as because there is a &quot;tradition&quot; or &quot;culture&quot; in D&amp;D. One way that it can be run is, for lack of a better way of putting it, the &quot;Strong Simbalist&quot; approach. In other words, having the DM strongly script the narratives (whether through illusionism or meta-gaming buy in or other techniques) so that the players experience something resembling a narrative arc.This is in contrast to another, old school (call it the &quot;Strong Pulsipher&quot; approach)&nbsp; where there is no thumb on the scale, and players can do what they want- and story or narrative is accidental and emergent. That's pretty well-trod ground, and not really about &quot;metagaming,&quot; or profoundly interesting regarding framing in non-5e games. Which is, AFAICT, the real topic to be discussed. No, not really. Look, if you're playing BiTD (for example) and the players are decide that the characters don't want to do scores, don't want to be in that city, and think heists are lame, you're going to run into problems. But because of the narrow(er) focus, we often overlook the necessary buy-in and metagaming that has already occured.Or maybe it's just not productive to use the term &quot;metagaming&quot; for that discussion, because regardless of how many times someone might say, &quot;I view it neutrally,&quot; it's no more neutral than &quot;railroading&quot; or other terms with significant baggage - especially when it seems to be deployed as it is here.Jus' sayin'. I'll bow out, have fun.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8572984, member: 7023840"] Again, though, this is why the thread is unproductive, except for those who are already talking about the thing that they wanted to talk about. Look, 5e can be run in a variety of ways- both from the RAW, as well as because there is a "tradition" or "culture" in D&D. One way that it can be run is, for lack of a better way of putting it, the "Strong Simbalist" approach. In other words, having the DM strongly script the narratives (whether through illusionism or meta-gaming buy in or other techniques) so that the players experience something resembling a narrative arc. This is in contrast to another, old school (call it the "Strong Pulsipher" approach) where there is no thumb on the scale, and players can do what they want- and story or narrative is accidental and emergent. That's pretty well-trod ground, and not really about "metagaming," or profoundly interesting regarding framing in non-5e games. Which is, AFAICT, the real topic to be discussed. No, not really. Look, if you're playing BiTD (for example) and the players are decide that the characters don't want to do scores, don't want to be in that city, and think heists are lame, you're going to run into problems. But because of the narrow(er) focus, we often overlook the [I]necessary buy-in[/I] and [I]metagaming [/I]that has already occured. Or maybe it's just not productive to use the term "metagaming" for that discussion, because regardless of how many times someone might say, "I view it neutrally," it's no more neutral than "railroading" or other terms with significant baggage - especially when it seems to be deployed as it is here. Jus' sayin'. I'll bow out, have fun. [/QUOTE]

Verification