Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="soviet" data-source="post: 9772743" data-attributes="member: 6925338">That is completely false. A player in such a 'modern' game has at least the same type of agency to 'force an outcome' as a player in a more traditional game does - through making choices and declaring appropriate actions for their character.The difference is that in a trad game the resolution of conflicts is determined by either a GM's decision, potentially having reference to (and being bound by) detailed pre-existing notes, or a dice roll that is also subject to a GM's potential veto or manipulation, and then also subject to further GM framing/contextualisation of what that means. In a 'modern' game with transparent and immutable conflict rules, that may or may not include negotiated stake setting, and may or may not include further player capacity to add elements directly into the fiction, when we roll to resolve a conflict the GM has no ability to veto or reframe the outcome, and may not even have authored all the elements being brought to bear on it, and so all parties can be surprised by the outcome. We are spinning the roulette wheel and agreeing to stick to the outcome we can all see on the table.</blockquote>