Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8651407" data-attributes="member: 42582">What does players work things mean? Either at some point a player gets to set stakes and succeed; or at some point the GM exercises their authority to declare that the players have "worked it enough".Likewise for "having done nothing at all" or "having no clues". What do those mean? Either we're talking about a process of the players learning what is in the GM's notes, and/or satisfying the GM that they have done enough; or else at some point the players get to establish and resolve some stakes.In my last Torchbearer session, a whole arc played out between a PC and a NPC - they met, formed an instant dislike, the NPC one-upped the PC and had him black-balled from the town market, and then the PC tracked down the NPC (taking the hit to his lifestyle check) for the sole purpose of making a fool of him in front of his (the NPC's) ladyfriend - which he did! That happened over probably half-an-hour to an hour of play and took maybe fifteen minutes in itself. The meeting was a Town Event roll; the one-upping was a vs check on Scholar that the player of the PC failed; the black-balling was a failed Resources check by the same player; the tracking down of the PC was me "saying 'yes'" (in TB that is a "Good Idea"); and the revenge was a vs check on Oratory.Had the player "done enough" to be entitled to have his PC confront his NPC in a battle of words? How much is "enough"? The whole idea of gating stakes-resolving checks behind "doing work", "working things", "doing nothing at all", "having no clues", is exactly the sort of GM-as-glue that Harper is depicting in his non-story-now diagram.Trust has nothing to do with it. I've played with GMs whose ability to deliver a satisfying CoC session is unparalleled. I absolutely trust them to have tight scenarios, compelling characters and amazing narration of insanity results.That doesn't mean it's not high concept sim. It just means it's good high concept sim.Baker and Harper aren't talking about trust. They're talking about who authors the fiction, and in accordance with what principles.</blockquote>

Verification