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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8804588" data-attributes="member: 42582">Just to build a bit on these responses to [USER=85555]@Bedrockgames[/USER]:Apocalypse World (to pick an example) doesn't use a formalised "scene" structure in the way that (say) Marvel Heroic RP does, or the way that 4e D&D does. But the rulebook still addresses many of the matters I mentioned in post 7 upthread: how and when to elide, or to home in on, time and movement; when and how the players get to contribute information about the immediate situation (including but not limited to buildings and environs); and how players and GMs can go about contributing to the aesthetic logic. It also talks about how functional logic is established, although what counts as "functional logic" in AW can be quite different from (say) D&D or Torchbearer.AW is certainly based around the idea of a fluid gameplay process, and its answers to these questions are all in support of that fluidity.I don't think that a rulebook not addressing these matters makes fluidity or "naturalness" more likely. I think it makes a particular approach - the one I called out in the OP - more likely. Participants may of course impose a different approach, but that can equally happen when a rulebook is clear. For instance, it seems obvious from posts and threads on these boards that some people play Dungeon World using processes quite different from the ones the book itself sets out (and closer to what I describe in the OP); and I was not the only person to use Gygax's AD&D rulebooks to play a game that did not stick especially closely to the play processes that he sets out in his PHB and DMG.</blockquote>

Verification