Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 9110909" data-attributes="member: 6801845">Right, but then you go on to state that &quot; Genuine, rich, joint creation of the shared fiction...That needs rules that will mediate everyone's efforts at contribution&quot;.&nbsp; You have to have joint creation.&nbsp; Therefore if you don't have joint creation you can't have genuine rich fiction.&nbsp; I don't really see a way around it.Either you have to have a narrative game, even if the rules don't directly support it, in order to have a &quot;worthy&quot; game or you don't and narrative games are just your preference.&nbsp; I'm perfectly fine with the latter, everybody has different preferences. Calling every D&amp;D campaign that doesn't involve direct player contribution to the fiction (assuming the character's actions alone don't count as those contributions) like you prefer, &quot;GM story time&quot; is what I take issue with.&nbsp; It's condescending.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 9110909, member: 6801845"] Right, but then you go on to state that "[I] Genuine, rich, joint creation of the shared fiction...That needs rules that will mediate everyone's efforts at contribution". Y[/I]ou have to have joint creation. Therefore if you don't have joint creation you can't have genuine rich fiction. I don't really see a way around it. Either you have to have a narrative game, even if the rules don't directly support it, in order to have a "worthy" game or you don't and narrative games are just your preference. I'm perfectly fine with the latter, everybody has different preferences. Calling every D&D campaign that doesn't involve direct player contribution to the fiction (assuming the character's actions alone don't count as those contributions) like you prefer, "GM story time" is what I take issue with. It's condescending. [/QUOTE]

Verification