Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8448462" data-attributes="member: 42582">Three thoughts in response:(1) Do you think I kept the premise you identify hidden, or am incapable of discussing it? I thought I stated it or strongly implied it pretty clearly. (Except that I would refer to players' interests or player-authored PC priorities; not PCs' interests.)(2) I don't fully agree with your characterisation of RM texts. I posted some quotes from Campaign Law (1984) recently in another thread and won't repeat them here, but they make it clear that the GM is supposed to be engaging the players via the backstory. The same book also encourages prepping a detailed backstory. It doesn't explain how to reconcile the tension between that can arise, in play, between these two instructions.(3) I posted in reply to a question from [USER=6795602]@FrogReaver[/USER] about how drawing a certain contrast - backstory-first and situation-first - might help someone improve their RPGing. I think I answered the question. Now if your response is that someone who is following backstory-first advice and isn't worried by the outcomes of that may not gain anything from noting that distinction, fair enough. But I didn't assert that everyone will improve their play by drawing such a distinction.On another recent thread, I made a post that I think 5e can be played situation-first, because I have played situation-first AD&D and 5e doesn't seem wildly different from AD&D in the relevant respects. FrogReaver asked me to elaborate, and I did. As part of the elaboration I explained what I take to be the contrast between prioritising backstory in framing and adjudication, and subordinating backstory to situation in play. Now if someone doesn't want to play situation-first AD&D or 5e, that's obviously their prerogative. But having been asked to provide the elaboration, I'm not sure why it's objectionable to do so.EDIT:When you ask questions, and people answer, it seems odd to attack them for their answers.I've never asserted that any set of preferences is universal. Or that any set of principles should be universally adopted.I think the analysis of backstory vs situation is highly applicable, though. Clearly beyond just my own case, given that there are a very large numbers of RPGs built more-or-less deliberately to exploit the various ways these can be related.It also lets me understand others' play. Eg I can infer from your posts that you prefer backstory-first play. That comes through in many of your posts, particularly one in the last week or so where you talked about the sorts of spontaneous backstory-introduction that you could or could not accept. Also in your discussion of how to establish and adjudicate a living sandbox.</blockquote>

Verification