Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Starfox" data-source="post: 8885658" data-attributes="member: 2303">At this point I am trying to not be adversarial, just to understand.What I mean when I say &quot;force action&quot; is that the rules compel choices. Initiative rolls generally do not involve choices. Failed willpower rolls to stop reading an inscription do.Edit: Forcing the GM - more on that below.@Permeton refered to a post by [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER], I quote the original post directly.What I mean by &quot;manipulate game mechanics&quot; is that there are metagame elements (hero points, scene framing) that allow the player to determine the action rather than relying strictly on in-world factors such as character skill, tools, and the complexity of the lock to be picked. In certain games we use hero points, but it feels your style rely more on metagame elements?The way we play the results of&nbsp; a successful or failed action is outside the scope of the skill test itself. So the result could be (using secret GM resources now revealed) that behind the door the corridor just continues, empty, and nothing further happens. I guess that part of the reason we want to play like this is that it makes the game world more persistent and in a way more &quot;real&quot;. The heroes are not progressing through a story, they are exploring an actual place (even if it is just a map the GM sketched on a notepad). The place existed before the PCs came here and is only affected by their actions, not story needs. But my style of game can lead to a lot of &quot;nothing much&quot; and potential boredom.If I understand things right, in the type of game you are talking about, what is behind the door is determined by the check to open the door and to a degree on the scene framing done by the player, as well as the GM. In this way, the play is guaranteed to progress, there is no &quot;nothing much&quot; option. Or have I misunderstood?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Starfox, post: 8885658, member: 2303"] At this point I am trying to not be adversarial, just to understand. What I mean when I say "force action" is that the rules compel choices. Initiative rolls generally do not involve choices. Failed willpower rolls to stop reading an inscription do. Edit: Forcing the GM - more on that below. @Permeton refered to a post by [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER], I quote the original post directly. What I mean by "manipulate game mechanics" is that there are metagame elements (hero points, scene framing) that allow the player to determine the action rather than relying strictly on in-world factors such as character skill, tools, and the complexity of the lock to be picked. In certain games we use hero points, but it feels your style rely more on metagame elements? The way we play the results of a successful or failed action is outside the scope of the skill test itself. So the result could be (using secret GM resources now revealed) that behind the door the corridor just continues, empty, and nothing further happens. I guess that part of the reason we want to play like this is that it makes the game world more persistent and in a way more "real". The heroes are not progressing through a story, they are exploring an actual place (even if it is just a map the GM sketched on a notepad). The place existed before the PCs came here and is only affected by their actions, not story needs. But my style of game can lead to a lot of "nothing much" and potential boredom. If I understand things right, in the type of game you are talking about, what is behind the door is determined by the check to open the door and to a degree on the scene framing done by the player, as well as the GM. In this way, the play is guaranteed to progress, there is no "nothing much" option. Or have I misunderstood? [/QUOTE]

Verification