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: 8973478" data-attributes="member: 6785785">I think saying that you value your prep over the rules of play speaks volumes. What distinction are you making between “product of play” and “result of play”? I’m not following that at all. Maps and monster stats are needed to play D&D. They’re elements of play that are foundational. You can get away without them from time to time, especially maps, but generally speaking, you need to have this stuff. Armor class, hit points, saves, abilities… how does D&D work without that stuff? You need to determine what monsters are where and have this information at hand for play. That need to prepare influences how play can go. Actually, many games explicitly provide procedures of play. They tell you exactly how they’re meant to be played and why, and of the potential impact if you choose to change something. And I’m not talking about table rules like dice off the table and that kind of stuff… I mean as fundamental as establishing how difficult a proposed task will be and essential things like that. Sure, I’m not advocating for predetermine elements. That’s why I only mentioned the first film. We only know the backstory we need to know for Luke’s journey to be meaningful.My mentioning of Beats was in relation to the Heart RPG. They’re player chosen goals. They’re generally pretty broad, either in description or in applicability. I’m not talking about a player writing their character’s whole story arc ahead of time. I don’t know where you get your figures from… they sound like you’re just making them up. Many players want play to focus on their characters. Many games set out to do exactly that. If you don’t like it, that’s fine. But you don’t get to say that it’s impossible. I mean, I’ve done it… many people have done it. That you choose not to believe it doesn’t make it untrue. Why would improv contradict anything? Certainly having a detailed 40 pages or more means there’s more to contradict? It seems self evident to me. Here’s me saying exactly that:No one is suggesting that players craft an entire story for their characters, start to finish. No one is suggesting that the GM won’t have to contribute. I’ve clearly been saying it’s about the three elements come together… the players, the GM, and the rules. Well as I said, if the player said they wanted to be cold-blooded, then testing how cold-blooded seems appropriate. There has to be some risk in this type of game. If everyone gets to decide beforehand exactly who their character is and always will be, then I don’t know what’s left to be discovered in play. Taking the things the players indicate they want to focus on and making them central to play is what I’ve been talking about. I’d say trad is more prone to it. Or, at the very least, more prone to being utterly indifferent about what’s important to the players. I mean that they are actually fields on the character sheet. You have to fill them out just as you do the other attributes of your character. Backstory isn’t required in many games. Hit points, alignment, skills… those are required. Backstory is usually optional. In the three games I mentioned, the players mist provide those details. I’m sure. I’m having trouble following yours. Is it that player driven play is not possible? Or that it’s only possible through traditional play? How so? I can’t comment on your play since you’ve not said what game you’re playing. So I need to rely on you to explain the difference. I’m not speaking about your game. My stance is simply that there are games that allow for the players to be the primary driving factor. It’s not an arbitrary distinction at all. I don’t have a strong say about what goes on in my D&D game. That doesn’t make it bad… I’m fine with it. I didn’t sign up for it expecting to really drive play. The story of the game, such as it is, is not about my character. It’s not about any of the characters, really… it’s about the threat of the Temple, and trying to stop it. That goal was set before we began play, and that’s what the game will be about for the duration. It’s very specific. I think this depends on the game. Many games offer specific principles for the GM to follow that would make this kind of thing against the rules, or at least against the expectations of play. Other games don’t comment on that one way or the other. I know which type of game would leave me more concerned about it.</blockquote>

Verification