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="clearstream" data-source="post: 8497239" data-attributes="member: 71699">So that is a substantial difference between us. To me it's all imaginary: all fictional. A fictional character has fictional motives for opening a fictional door to resolve a fictional conflict. To me the game is symbolic: an imaginary creature is a symbol not just a simulation. A barrier is a barrier in the mind. The best wall I ever designed was my Wall of Tongues. A low wall easy to chamber over, but your tongue will leave your mouth and appear carved on the wall.The player fictional positioning I think of is everything the player says or commits to that can bear on the what happens next. I know the stakes - dramatic and ludic - when I know the player's intended fictional positioning. I usually allow some redrafting, as the facts in play are clarified. And besides, characters can hesitate, think things over, look closer.In a mode where some facts are known by DM and not players, we sometimes say "no." In any mode we say "no" or expand in response to declarations that are blind-to-fiction or limited by mechanics. To other declarations, we say "yes" or "roll" when we have settled on stakes and characters commit. Where procedure can matter - as in D&D - we considered in-world circumstances and character approach: possibly leading to a different response.To me, fictional must be broad and is too broad. Perhaps we should say dramatic-positioning and ludic-positioning? (Ludic =  game-world circumstances + character approach + more or less effective use of mechanics.)[EDIT: Found the word I wanted.]</blockquote>

Verification