Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Story Now, Skilled Play, and Elephants
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8300780" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I'm not sure it's helpful to frame a discussion of <em>skilled play</em> in terms of <em>artful GMing</em>, at least until a bit more has been said about the asymmetry of participant roles in a RPG. <a href="http://lumpley.com/hardcore.html" target="_blank">Here's one way into that</a>, presented under the heading "Doing Away with the GM":</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">You need to have a system by which scenes start and stop. The rawest solution is to do it by group consensus: anybody moved to can suggest a scene or suggest that a scene be over, and it's up to the group to act on the suggestion or not. You don't need a final authority beyond the players' collective will.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">You need to have a system whereby narration becomes in-game truth. That is, when somebody suggests something to happen or something to be so, does it or doesn't it? Is it or isn't it? Again the rawest solution is group consensus, with suggestions made by whoever's moved and then taken up or let fall according to the group's interest.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">You need to have orchestrated conflict, and there's the tricky bit. GMs are very good at orchestrating conflict, and it's hard to see a rawer solution. . . . In our co-GMed Ars Magica game, each of us is responsible for orchestrating conflict for the others, which works but isn't radical wrt GM doage-away-with. It amounts to when Emily's character's conflicts climax explosively and set off Meg's character's conflicts, which also climax explosively, in a great kickin' season finale last autumn, I'm the GM. GM-swapping, in other words, isn't the same as GM-sharing.</p><p></p><p>A GM may artfully frame scenes and manage the pacing within and between them. The GM may artfully manage the process whereby <em>suggested fiction </em>becomes <em>established fiction </em>- a lot of this is about action resolution, but not all of it: sometimes its just adding colour to a scene (eg the GM frames a situation, resolution is moving along, and then the player asks of a NPC "Is she tall or short?" and the GM stipulates an answer to the question). The GM may artfully orchestrate conflict (as in your example of deciding which player's PC comes under pressure in a fight scene).</p><p></p><p>But noticing this doesn't take us any closer to analysing <em>skilled play</em>, I don't think. That is about <em>how players constrain the shaping and pacing of scenes </em>(see eg [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER]'s thread about skilled play earning a long rest); how players <em>oblige</em> the GM to make <em>X</em> rather than <em>Y</em> part of the fiction (eg in my Green Knight game, the PCs were able to shed Dishonour points at the end of Encounters by having made choices that established this rather than this other outcome of the situation); and often the previous two things will be fallout of <em>how the players respond to conflict</em>. (Not always, I think - a lot of dungeon crawling might rely on relatively low-conflict scenes, like the gelatinous-cube-in-a-pit trap discussed in the recent "fair trap" thread - but often.)</p><p></p><p>Certain approaches to how GM's frame scenes, establish fiction and orchestrate conflict are not really compatible with skil;ed play, because they make it hard for players to constrain and oblige, and they tend to make the fall out from conflict independent of the choices the players make when responding to it. Roughly speaking, these are the approaches that [USER=16814]@Ovinomancer[/USER] has called "Force" not too far upthread; and these are the approaches that [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] has called "participationism" or (perhaps a bit less neutrally) "rudderless system setting tourism".</p><p></p><p>So I don't think there is any rift. I think that Ovinomancer and Manbearcat (and most other posters in this thread) are well aware that RPGing requires people to make suggestions about the fiction, and requires a process to make these "true" (ie part of the shared fiction) - I don't think anyone dissented from Vincent Baker's remarks to this effect upthread. The point they are making is that not all GM-side processes of this sort are consistent with the exercise of skill on the player side.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8300780, member: 42582"] I'm not sure it's helpful to frame a discussion of [I]skilled play[/I] in terms of [I]artful GMing[/I], at least until a bit more has been said about the asymmetry of participant roles in a RPG. [url=http://lumpley.com/hardcore.html]Here's one way into that[/url], presented under the heading "Doing Away with the GM": [indent]You need to have a system by which scenes start and stop. The rawest solution is to do it by group consensus: anybody moved to can suggest a scene or suggest that a scene be over, and it's up to the group to act on the suggestion or not. You don't need a final authority beyond the players' collective will. You need to have a system whereby narration becomes in-game truth. That is, when somebody suggests something to happen or something to be so, does it or doesn't it? Is it or isn't it? Again the rawest solution is group consensus, with suggestions made by whoever's moved and then taken up or let fall according to the group's interest. You need to have orchestrated conflict, and there's the tricky bit. GMs are very good at orchestrating conflict, and it's hard to see a rawer solution. . . . In our co-GMed Ars Magica game, each of us is responsible for orchestrating conflict for the others, which works but isn't radical wrt GM doage-away-with. It amounts to when Emily's character's conflicts climax explosively and set off Meg's character's conflicts, which also climax explosively, in a great kickin' season finale last autumn, I'm the GM. GM-swapping, in other words, isn't the same as GM-sharing.[/indent] A GM may artfully frame scenes and manage the pacing within and between them. The GM may artfully manage the process whereby [I]suggested fiction [/I]becomes [I]established fiction [/I]- a lot of this is about action resolution, but not all of it: sometimes its just adding colour to a scene (eg the GM frames a situation, resolution is moving along, and then the player asks of a NPC "Is she tall or short?" and the GM stipulates an answer to the question). The GM may artfully orchestrate conflict (as in your example of deciding which player's PC comes under pressure in a fight scene). But noticing this doesn't take us any closer to analysing [I]skilled play[/I], I don't think. That is about [I]how players constrain the shaping and pacing of scenes [/I](see eg [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER]'s thread about skilled play earning a long rest); how players [I]oblige[/I] the GM to make [I]X[/I] rather than [I]Y[/I] part of the fiction (eg in my Green Knight game, the PCs were able to shed Dishonour points at the end of Encounters by having made choices that established this rather than this other outcome of the situation); and often the previous two things will be fallout of [I]how the players respond to conflict[/I]. (Not always, I think - a lot of dungeon crawling might rely on relatively low-conflict scenes, like the gelatinous-cube-in-a-pit trap discussed in the recent "fair trap" thread - but often.) Certain approaches to how GM's frame scenes, establish fiction and orchestrate conflict are not really compatible with skil;ed play, because they make it hard for players to constrain and oblige, and they tend to make the fall out from conflict independent of the choices the players make when responding to it. Roughly speaking, these are the approaches that [USER=16814]@Ovinomancer[/USER] has called "Force" not too far upthread; and these are the approaches that [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] has called "participationism" or (perhaps a bit less neutrally) "rudderless system setting tourism". So I don't think there is any rift. I think that Ovinomancer and Manbearcat (and most other posters in this thread) are well aware that RPGing requires people to make suggestions about the fiction, and requires a process to make these "true" (ie part of the shared fiction) - I don't think anyone dissented from Vincent Baker's remarks to this effect upthread. The point they are making is that not all GM-side processes of this sort are consistent with the exercise of skill on the player side. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Story Now, Skilled Play, and Elephants
Top