Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8732788" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I don’t know how you read it, but I intended it exactly as as I wrote it.1) There is a play that exists where GMs have preconceptions and they intend to map those preconceptions onto the gamestate and fiction by imposition.2) There is a play whereby the process of (1) (the imposition of a GM’s preconceptions upon gamestate/fiction) is neither transparently codified in the text of play nor inferable by the players. The experiential quality of this for the players is “arbitrary GM fiat.”[HR][/HR]Let’s come at this another way. Any given conflict is an obstacle course with a starting point + an endpoint + an array of intervening obstacles.  What is an easy analogue for this in life? A hole of golf.Alright. A hole of golf has:* A tee box (starting point).* A pin location on a green (an endpoint).* An array of intervening obstacles (fairways, rough, sand traps, out of bounds, burs, trees, etc).Now you can configure the realization of this “hole of golf” in TTRPG terms in a myriad of ways. But someone or some system process is deciding on each element…and they’re doing it at some time (pre-play or during play):STARTING POINT* The GM can preconceive and prescribe the starting point before play.* A non-GM player can prescribe the starting point (either via GM prompt or system procedure) during play.* The play itself can naturally evolve from one end point to generate a new, emergent starting point during play.ENDPOINT * The GM can preconceive and prescribe the endpoint before play.* The GM can pronounce that the conflict has reached its endpoint “by feel” and declare a winner.* System declares that the conflict has reached its endpoint by codified Win/Loss condition and declare a winner by following its procedures to their conclusion.OBSTACLE COURSE* The GM can preconceive and prescribe the array of obstacles before play.* The GM can move through an improvised array of obstacles “by feel” without budgetary/procedural constraint.* System procedures and budgetary constraints guide and bind a GM in their improvised generation of the array of obstacles.[HR][/HR]I would hope that the following matrix of construction of Tee Box > Fairways + Rough + Bunkers + Trees + Dogleg or not (FRBTD for short) etc > Green and Pin Placement…* The GM preconceives and prescribes Teebox before play + GM improvises array of FRBTD “by feel” without budgetary/procedural constraint + GM  pronounces when the Green is hit and how close to the Pin the player is and calls the hole done with a “close enough.”is VERY different from:* A prior holed out Pin leads naturally to a new Teebox + System procedures and budgetary constraints guide and bind a GM in their improvised generation of FRBTD + System declares that the conflict has reached its endpoint because (a) we’re at the green and (b) someone has hit the pin placement and hold out.The generation of those two golf courses (“the play of the TTRPG”) are very different things functionally (as a matter of course -“I’ll be here all week…don’t forget to tip your waiter”) and in the experience of the play.Yes?</blockquote>

Verification