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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6518494" data-attributes="member: 87792">There are very few games where the GM doesn't get a veto.This happens approximately as much as someone picking up the ball and running with it in a game of pick-up football (soccer) on the grounds there isn't a referee. Sure there's no referee to send you off but you're there to play football and if you try that sort of nonsense it's pretty clear you aren't there to play. If the players want to circumvent the entire adventure then there's an out of game problem somewhere.And I personally find that if I treat my players like adults they behave like adults. I've only seen this type of exploitative behaviour from players who had grown used to DMs (or normally Storytellers) who allowed them nothing and found it a huge change to be treated like adults and trusted with it.Honestly from the sound of it you wouldn't be making much of a change by allowing player authorship. The only major difference here is that rather than you being inclined to say yes you would by default say yes and only actually stop things (rather than build on them) when you needed a veto. It's a fairly major philosophical difference but not actually much of a practical difference than what you describe here.This is emphatically both untrue and ridiculous. You are claiming that immersion is never possible in games without explicit rules. You are claiming that immersion is impossible in freeform. Any single example of two kids playing in the playground is sufficient enough to disprove this claim. Or is immersion to you somewhere that only ever shows up in tabletop roleplaying and nowhere else?To expand, you're close to something true but not actually there. If as a player is exploiting powers they don't have then yes, it is true to say they aren't immersed. The two cases listed by Sadras above are good illustrations of people not being immersed.On the other hand my character has powers I do not have within the game world. The powers of scent and taste. The ability to look at a room and see details at a single glance. And that's before we've started. Your "You can not have any powers" issue is like taking a normally sighted person and saying "We are roleplaying and you're playing an old person with dim vision. Full sight means you have a power they don't- to see to the far end of the room. So I'm going to blindfold you. Because you can't possibly be immersed if you have powers they don't have but it doesn't get in your way at all if they have powers you don't."I'm immersed if my decisions are based on the same basis as my character's. If my emotional involvement is as close as it can be. If my knowledge of the world is as close as it can be. And either I can play effectively blindfolded with very limited knowledge of the world my character is a part of (which actively inhibits my character immersion) or I can fill out the details. The narrative power you oppose is not a power of my character to create, but one of my character to actually see rather than be blindfolded and given a tour guide.Oddly enough there's a whole lot less "active contributing to the story" in storygames than traditional RPGs. The games are set up so the story is an emergent property.On this we wholly and unequivocally agree.</blockquote>

Verification