Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9673582" data-attributes="member: 6790260">I...question both of these assertions. That is, you can have a list of things you would like to have, but that's not a list of things you will buy--which, in this case, is what is actually needed when physically at the store. Desirables are not, in themselves, things you can just...take. That's something I think pretty much any style of GMing shares, even GM-less games--if we wanted pure freeform wish-fulfillment, we wouldn't be using the medium of a game to do so. (And, IME, very few people actually want totally unrestrained wish-fulfillment in a group context.)Further, the whole point is that you CAN'T have knowledge of what the store contains, here, until you actually go there. Because this is supposed to be analogy to a player joining a campaign. It is, literally, not possible for the player to know anything whatsoever about the campaign in a &quot;traditional GM&quot; sandbox-y game, because you literally do not know anything, at all, whatsoever, about what that campaign contains or entails until the GM tells you. That's....the whole point of the style. There is, flatly and simply, not ANYTHING known unless and until the GM opens their mouth, or constructs a model as robertsconley has done, or in some other way places evidence in front of the players. Unless and until that happens, then a priori the players know, genuinely absolutely, nothing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9673582, member: 6790260"] I...question both of these assertions. That is, you can have a list of [I]things you would like to have[/I], but that's not a list of [I]things you will buy[/I]--which, in this case, is what is actually needed when physically at the store. Desirables are not, in themselves, things you can just...take. That's something I think pretty much any style of GMing shares, even GM-less games--if we wanted pure freeform wish-fulfillment, we wouldn't be using the medium of a [I]game[/I] to do so. (And, IME, very few people actually want totally unrestrained wish-fulfillment in a group context.) Further, the whole point is that you CAN'T have knowledge of what the store contains, here, until you actually go there. Because this is supposed to be analogy to a player joining a campaign. It is, literally, [I]not possible[/I] for the player to know anything whatsoever about the campaign in a "traditional GM" sandbox-y game, because you literally do not know anything, at all, whatsoever, about what that campaign contains or entails until the GM tells you. That's....the whole point of the style. There is, flatly and simply, not ANYTHING known unless and until the GM opens their mouth, or constructs a model as robertsconley has done, or in some other way places evidence in front of the players. Unless and until that happens, then [I]a priori[/I] the players know, genuinely absolutely, [B]nothing[/B]. [/QUOTE]

Verification