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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 8437081" data-attributes="member: 6795602">That can happen in a number of ways.  A non exhaustive list of examples<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The DM uses a behind the scenes mechanic to determine what world information the PC's learn and then picks an appropriate NPC conduit to disseminate that information (behind the scenes mechanics)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The players approach a member of said faction where that member tells them about the war (trigger event)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">They are witnesses to a battle between the factions breaking out right before their eyes (this could be either dm fiat or behind the scenes mechanics depending how the dm decided to place that scene there).</li> </ul>In any event, within this sandbox the players can take a side, ignore the war, attempt to leverage the war to gain something they want, etc.  It's up to them how they handle this information and this situation.  IMO this means that the method of GM fiction creation matters a lot less in this style of play - as regardless of the method that some particular detail is created and disseminated to the players they have full control over whether that becomes a focus of play or a background element of play. Typically via the PC's experiences with said factions and the players deciding "screw this faction" and "let's help this faction".  Typically they will have had past in game experiences with said factions, but they need not.  Upon learning of the faction war they may take that as the opportunity to explore the factions and decide which if either they will help.Presumably that was either decided in the DM's notes or via some behind the scenes process he created.the player also could have included the identity of the individual in his backstoryThe dm might decide the identity after asking the player a few in game prompts - allowing the player to improv the details he knew of the killer.*Maybe?  But doubtful.  It's just not how living sandboxes typically work.  DM's don't dictate to players their goals in these games.  They provide a world for the players to move around in and explore where the players can puruse their own goals.I think you are fairly smart and should be able to fill in the blanks.  Maybe you are soo unfamiliar with the concept that you can't.  That's fine.  But railroading doesn't align with the key principles of living sandbox play.  In a living sandbox the players are allowed to craft their own story within the GM's world.I'm not sure what you are trying to say hereDoesn't that depend on scope though?  It's only in the most immediate context that the outpost raid becomes the focus of play.  But zoom out to the next level and you clearly see the outpost raid was a means to an end about what the player is driving play to focus around - avenging his brother.What is your criteria for determining which has priority then?  It seems at this point that you are declaring one to be the priority by sheer fiat.It doesn't make sense to talk about priority of play and then talk about situation first flowing out of as opposed to into something.  Those are 2 different concepts that you are using the same word to describe.In any event the main point is that there’s not an explicitly well defined process for most of this stuff as there is in story now play. That’s part of the reason that when examples with this kind of detail is asked for that it is shrugged off because there’s always a number of ways this kind of fiction can get generated (and yet it always seems like the most railroady method is assumed by story now advocates)</blockquote>

Verification