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: 8023351" data-attributes="member: 42582">I understand the point of OSR/"skilled play" dungeon crawls.But if the point of the game isn't skilled play (eg instead of mapping and poking and prodding, dungeoneering actions are resolved via skill checks) then if we're still using GM maps-and-notes I think that is going to limit player agency over the shared fiction. Much of what happens will be determined by the GM's decisions, made in preparing those maps and notes.Well I'm not 100% sure what it means for the story to belong to the PCs. But if the main action is checking out where the PCs are and if the resolution of all that is in the stuff the GM has prepped to the door-hinges then I think the fiction will "belong" - I would say, will be authored by - the GM for the main part.If the action isn't checking out where the PCs are but rather is about something else - such that where the PCs are is just a backdrop - then it might be different, but in that case why worry about prepping it? Eg in the episode of Burning Wheel play I described upthread it makes no difference whether I've mapped out the Hardby market or not. If I did that would just be me having fun on my own, but wouldn't be any sort of contribution to play.There's a whole legacy of associating prep with maps-and-notes that comes out of the histor of D&D but can sometimes seem like it has no clear rationale any more. Apocalypse World is interesting in this respect for showing how prep can look quite different from that.A game where the GM just makes up whatever s/he likes on the spot will likely not be one where the players exercise a lot of agency over the share ficiton. But that's what mechanics are for!Upthread there has already been quite a bit of discussion about how to resolve questions of fictional positioning. Where it's in doubt it can be made a matter of table consensus.But we also need to talk about techniques for introducing fiction. Eg, to pick up on the canyon-that-can't-be-jumped: suppose that that has been narrated by the GM as a consequence of failure in the attempt to flee across country, then it may be fair game to establish it as un-jumpable. The effect of the failure is to shift the arena of conflict to something other than jumping prowess. The same thing could be true for the escape car. (See also the quotes upthread from John Harper, about when to make a soft move - He's going for his car - what do you do? - and a hard move - He's in his car and half-a-mile down the road.)Deciding how hard to make one's moves as a GM, and what arenas of conflict to rule in or out, is part of the skill of GMing. Doing it as a failure consequence generally allows for more hard-ness than framing. If the player has lost the check, they know that their preference for the fiction is not coming to pass.</blockquote>

Verification