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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 9112239" data-attributes="member: 82106">Well, quibble how you want, I played through basically the whole gamut of these '6 cultures', though I might describe a few things slightly differently. I'd also point out that a lot of variation exists within what is called 'trad' here. It is NOT necessarily railroad or linear in the way you would describe that. It can be a pure sandbox, what matters in this taxonomy is who is building and driving the fiction, where it leads, and what it ends up being about. Trad, in 6C nomenclature, is GM-driven play. The fiction, the story, is ABOUT what the GM wrote. It is set in the GM's scenes and setting, the characters are either authored directly by the GM or their backstories and relationships, and what they know, is approved by said GM. Players may well contribute elements to the story, and which scenes get played out may depend in varying measure on what choices the players make. As the quoted piece says, this is exactly the sort of fiction that was espoused by DL and RL. It really first materializes in a form in, to my recollection, the A Series of modules. There's a story, its very linear, and its also not something that the players set up, AT ALL, though their exploits, pretty much dictated by the situation, are the subject material. They can even make a few choices here and there. IIRC in A2 there are a couple of paths through the module, and A4 definitely offers a couple options (though they all end with the Big Bang). We can debate whether 2e was more intended to foster trad or neo-trad play. I would say neo-trad was a bit of an accidental outgrowth of bad attempts to do trad storytelling that got co-opted by players, but late era 2e definitely provides the sorts of options that work well with it. Anyway, I'd say most play after about 1982 aimed at 6C trad.</blockquote>

Verification