Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 9220959" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I'm imagining more than GM clarifies map/key or prepped &lt;whatever&gt; here.&nbsp; You accepted my last one as a form of play that you're comfortable depicting as &quot;negotiation.&quot;&nbsp; Well what I'm imagining in the other examples is a form of that:* A player proposes an action that the rules haven't firmly encoded and now we have to sort out how to mechanically resolve or why to say &quot;yes/no&quot; (etc).&nbsp; * The imagined space is features spatial relationships that need firming up or possibly features items that can be interacted with which the GM hasn't canvassed or considered. * The player has a PC build feature that requires in-situ consideration and mediation by the participants at the table to determine if it applies here (consideration and mediation about the fiction, about the mechanics, about the implications of resource scheduling if its an &quot;at-will contingent upon fiction x/y&quot; ability) and a simple &quot;no&quot; (rather than an explanation as to the GM's factors of consideration that have led to the &quot;no&quot;) is damaging to downstream player decision-space because how are they going to successfully build out their prospective lines of play if they can't draw coherent user-interface-driven inferences.+++++++++++++And in all of these the GM is not impervious to shortcomings that harm play (along any number of axes).&nbsp; Sometimes the GM needs to be reminded of something (about the fiction, about the rules, about what has been communicated) or needs to understand the intuitions of the player or the mental model of the player to make a functional, coherent, game-facilitating ruling.&nbsp; This isn't &quot;Rules Lawyering&quot; or &quot;Pixel Bitching&quot; all the way down.&nbsp; Most of the time its just &quot;playing the game.&quot;&nbsp; I've run as much map and key D&amp;D as anyone and what I'm talking about here is broadly no different than running The Between or another game that features a complex decision-space, a complex game engine, and a complex board state all coinciding persistently.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 9220959, member: 6696971"] I'm imagining more than GM clarifies map/key or prepped <whatever> here. You accepted my last one as a form of play that you're comfortable depicting as "negotiation." Well what I'm imagining in the other examples is a form of that: * A player proposes an action that the rules haven't firmly encoded and now we have to sort out how to mechanically resolve or why to say "yes/no" (etc). * The imagined space is features spatial relationships that need firming up or possibly features items that can be interacted with which the GM hasn't canvassed or considered. * The player has a PC build feature that requires in-situ consideration and mediation by the participants at the table to determine if it applies here (consideration and mediation about the fiction, about the mechanics, about the implications of resource scheduling if its an "at-will contingent upon fiction x/y" ability) and a simple "no" (rather than an explanation as to the GM's factors of consideration that have led to the "no") is damaging to downstream player decision-space because how are they going to successfully build out their prospective lines of play if they can't draw coherent user-interface-driven inferences. +++++++++++++ And in all of these the GM is not impervious to shortcomings that harm play (along any number of axes). Sometimes the GM needs to be reminded of something (about the fiction, about the rules, about what has been communicated) or needs to understand the intuitions of the player or the mental model of the player to make a functional, coherent, game-facilitating ruling. This isn't "Rules Lawyering" or "Pixel Bitching" all the way down. Most of the time its just "playing the game." I've run as much map and key D&D as anyone and what I'm talking about here is broadly no different than running The Between or another game that features a complex decision-space, a complex game engine, and a complex board state all coinciding persistently. [/QUOTE]

Verification