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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 9103256" data-attributes="member: 6795602">Yet capacity to do X means you can either do X or you cannot. There’s no degrees there.  And this is how your definition was phrased.Capacity itself isn’t scalar or binary of itself - the thing being capacitized determines the binary or scalar relationship.  So it may be scalar for certain things, but it need not be for all things.I don’t think that’s contentious at all.  It’s readily accepted by almost all that narrative games provide more player authorship. What you are saying here isnt really much different than that.I’ve mentioned scene framing before. I think scene framing and consequences for failed rolls are GM authorship and curation.  So I don’t think fully doing so without those things is accurate.That said if you modify the claim to ‘much less dm authorship and curation’ then I don’t that would be contentious either. There is a caveat that people new to the idea probably won’t get it right away. It also doesn’t help that the focus on agency to explain the differences is counterproductive to someone grappling with how this kind of game they’ve never played works. IMO of course.IMO. All rpg’s can be viewed as conch passing to some degree. Even D&D. It’s not a great criticism though it definitely has occurred toward narrative games much more. That said I remember many comments about conch passing were geared more toward exploring the limits of agency over the fiction and not as claims that narrative style games were played that way.I don’t think what’s typically been meant by ‘player narrative control’ is the same concept as conch passing.  It’s much more nuanced and meant to be short hand for the the kinds of things players get control over in PbtA or BitD that they don’t get control over in games like D&D.It’s strange. I see most people readily agreeing with 1.I’m not sure about 2 because how I’m using it is supposed to be identical to the things players can do in games like PbtA or BitD that you claim grant them more control over the shared fiction than the kinds of things D&D players can do.  In this context I don’t think you really want people to deny 2. In fact I think there’s broad agreement that player narrative control games do grant players control over the shared fiction in many ways without becoming just a game of conch passing. If that was so then the games you claim should have more of the form of agency you described should also be able to have more agency of the form I described and I think you agree this is clearly not the case.  Your games don’t really respect DM curated worlds.</blockquote>

Verification