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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5467205" data-attributes="member: 957">And SCs use the mechanics to control the narrative so that the resposibility is distributed.When you call it "joint sovereignty" I just have to give up and admit that you don't get the point.  There is nothing "joint" about it.  The mechanics say the narrative must comply with this.  The narrative makes no obligation on the mechanics.  The mechanics say "your narrative must land between A and C."  There is no sovereignty in picking from 1,000 options between A and C. It is an illusion of power.  If the mechanics had decreed you must choose something between A and B, then your options would be reduced and you would be required to accept that.  If it was joint the story could negotiate back and still pick something outsie of A to B and force the mechanics to change to fit to it.  This does not happen.  The SC makes the rule and then you choose from what is left.  Calling this joint doesn't accurately describe the relationship.You have actively demonstrated my point, and yet you insist it isn't there.  So be it.In the first case, one could call it "pop quiz" since it is a highly open-ended term.  But it doesn't have the same point.  The reason is that you have to come up with a new narrative direction based on an unexpected narrative twist.  You could call that "pop quiz" and rather than being offended by the term, I'd reply "yeah, isn't it great."  Rolling with the STORY and unexpected "pop quiz" parts of the story are fun.Narrative forced pop quiz: Good (IMO)Now, your second case may have some differences from SCs, but I think it has the same "pop quiz" core.  Arbitrary mechanics are in control and you are forced to change your story to fit the mechanics.  That would not happen at any game I'm running because if I did have a mechanical result that contradicted the story, I'd throw out the mechanics.  If the setting is such a lone ogre could happen (and even better if it seems out of place) then excellent, lets enjoy this pop quiz and go.  But if isn't good, throw it away.  Re-roll, pick something, whatever.  And, if I was running a SC and someone came up with a solution in one action, I'm not going to be a slave to the mechanics and start coming up new narrative elements that exist because the mechanics need them.  I'm going to throw the SC out and move on with the story.  But the very point of SC is to not do that, so obviously I should just not use them.And, to be clear, I've never used a "10th level dungeon".  It ties back to the same root difference.  A location is what the narrative suggests the location is.  Mechanical expectations on how the location should be can behave themselves in line behind the story or they can get tossed out on their ear.  But, I guess I've been chasing a red herring here.  When I say "pop quiz" in this context, I mean changing the story because the mechanics require it.  And, yes, my opinion of that is negative.Mechanical forced pop quiz: Bad (imo)Saying that you "wanted there to be complications" does not change the fact that the SC mechanics forced the narrative to behave in a compliant manner.All you are telling me is you WANT the story to obey the mechanics.Neither of the two reasons you listed in ANY WAY answer "why is the genie grumpy"?  The answer to the question is: because the genie could solve the problem and the SC mechanics say that can not happen yet.  The players have not collected enough check marks yet so ANY solution is obligated to be incomplete.  The narrative control to complete the solution is prohibited by the mechanics.  (Again, you could always just throw out the SC, but that doesn't defend SCs.)I object to the claim that games based on SCs lead to the same Rome as games in which the narrative controls the mechanics.</blockquote>

Verification