Many GM's want to tell a story about an event, or more simply put: an Adventure.
In it's typical form, this is what I would describe as GM-driven, low player agency, RPGing.
you ONLY like pure player stories lead by pure player actions with near zero input from you. You sure have never said that as a GM you EVER want to tell YOUR story. And I'd ask: why not? You sure roll out the red carpet for player stories....so why not GM stories?
To quote <whomever>, if I wanted to tell a story, I'd write a novel.
As to "near zero" input: in the post to which you replied, I set out in some detail the ways I have been working through my ideas about Dark Elves and Petty Dwarves over multiple games, and in both GM and player roles, over nearly a decade. That is my input. I want to put my ideas out and see what my fellow participants make of them, how they respond to them, how they might challenge them. For me, that's the point of RPGing.
As a game is just you and some players.....I guess your saying here the players are the ones to decide everything? How do you see it as a dialogue?
I've posted examples. Many of them. In reply to you, I unpacked an episode of 4e D&D play in great detail (post 3809). If you're not interested in reading what I post, that's your prerogative, but I'd be grateful if you'd refrain from empty conjecture about my RPGing.
you type, right above, that it's not YOUR job to decide anything.
Just for anyone following along, here's what I actually typed:
It's not my job to decide, for instance, whether Megloss's killing of Gerda means that he deserves death. Or whether the sacrifice that Fea-bella made in order to be purged of her lust for the Elfstone (that is, letting Gerda plunge her spear into her heart, which would have been fatal had Fea-bella not had the will to live) was worthwhile.
In that episode of play, I as GM decided that Megloss (a NPC) killed Gerda (another NPC) by conjuring the Flames of the Shroud. This was after (i) the PCs had persuaded him to join them to help deal with Gerda, (ii) had agreed to let him have first pick of her gems, and (iii) had been defeated by her in melee (mostly due to her unexpected plate armour).
This is me, as GM, doing my job of framing scenes, and narrating consequences for failure.
This is yet another example of a player altering reality. And I just don't get how this is so great.
The character just randomly wanders onto "their land" somewhere. The character then just stands there....and the player makes a "circle check" to see if any of his family is around. The play makes the check. The GM looks at the rules and says "Yup, some of your family members ARE JUST RIGHT THERE" as the GM alters game reality at the REQUEST of the player(so really it's the player doing it, as the GM is just the 'yes middle man'). I GET that as a GM you can ENDLESS hide behind The Rules and say "you did not alter anything whatever the player just asked for was JUST THERE as they make an offical rules roll and made it.
How would I do this in D&D? Well....I would NEVER just have family members just 'pop' in right next to a PC when the player asks "so is my family around?" And D&D has no realty altering rules for this so...no rules here.
I don't understand why you can't accept my account of my play.
Thurgon did not "just stand there" -
as per the actual play post,
the two character's wanted to continue more-or-less due east on the other side of both streams. This was heading into the neighbourhood of Auxol, and so Thurgon kept his eye out for friends and family.
And "the two characters came upon Thurgon's older brother Rufus driving a horse and cart."
This is not the player "altering reality". It's a declared action being resolved.
Most often I, alone, as the GM would make the characters family all by myself. Names, descriptions, who they are, where they are and such. And I would make a "player handout" of "your family" for the player and give it to them.
This is all typical for low-player-agency RPGing.
Once in a while a good player might want to make up their own family...though just about always the bare bones of like 'name, what they do and a sentience about them'. Then they will give me a copy and I will utterly do whatever I want with the information no matter what the player wrote....though chances are I will keep the player made names. And the player has no choice but to accept whatever I do, if I choose to do anything.
This is also low-player-agency RPGing, although maybe a bit more extreme than is typical.
In ANY case, just about the ONLY way the character could EVER meet a family member is if they were to go to wherever the family member is and meet them in gameplay.
You mean like what I described?