NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 7644568" data-attributes="member: 16586">I do not know what Luke Crane's intent was there, but it does not necessarily follow that because dice are involved that the players are competing. The relationship between what is happening in the fiction and the attitude of the players towards each other may not correspond one to one. As audience members we could be loving it. Like on one level we're feeling what our characters are feeling, but we step out of every time a die is rolled or there's a break in the action and we're loving what's going on like a good TV show. We can't wait to find out where this goes. Or not.Like that's just how I think about it.  That dance between audience and author and actor is really compelling to me.In this thread I did not plan to go on such a long tangent about one of the ways I like to play role playing games. I made a throw away comment about how I did not like stake setting mechanics, and things snowballed. I never meant to imply it was the way or even the best way to play role playing games. I will maintain that playing Sorcerer, Apocalypse World, or Masks according to the techniques laid out in the texts facilitate an experience that is hard to replicate with a different set of expectations and techniques, They excel at helping us create and experience deeply personal stories about the main characters as people in motion. They have unique risks not found in mainstream games too. Their not like objectively better games. I never meant to imply that. For one thing they are near useless for adventure stories. The villains in Masks are not salient. They are only there to serve as reflections on the heroes struggle.I should clarify I don't like seek out character conflict in my play. I just do not like shy away from it, but mostly just when I play or run this sort of game. I like other games too. I love a good gamist romp. I don't care if it's more focused on skilled play of the fiction or the mechanisms of the game although I really want the fiction salient or might as well be playing a board game. With a good group firing on all cylinders appreciating each others play cooperative gamist play is wonderful. Combining the two is even better sometimes. That's why I love Blades in the Dark. Simple mechanisms that promote skilled play of the fiction while the rewards systems promote exploring the characters. Chocolate and peanut butter.At the end of the day I know what these techniques have to offer because I have experienced them first hand. Other sets of techniques offer their own advantages like the fun of being surprised by the GM or module writer's story. I get that's fun for a lot of people and I legitimately do not begrudge them that. I also get that you can filter in some character exploration, but in my experience something has to take priority in any given moment of play. I know I experienced that in my attempts to combine gamist fun with character exploration fun. I mean a lot of it comes down to me just really enjoying the tension of no one at the table knowing how things will turn out and everything coming down to our decisions and the dice. That's really compelling to me on both sides of the screen in a way that's hard to explain. Like I don't think it's wrong to not enjoy that or to want to manage it. I just do not think it's required for a good game.</blockquote>

Verification