What is the point of GM's notes?

[Imaro]

They are as not different as cats and dogs are not different.

We are discussing what GM notes are for. To that end, the differences between AP and sandbox GM notes exist, in that one will usually include notes on required outcomes while the other will not, but in the aspect of a major aspect of play being to learn about the GM's concept of the world (informed by the GM's notes but not limited to) there's not really any difference.

You seem to think that saying cats and dogs are both four legged animals removes any ability to otherwise distinguish them. I'm not sure why this is.

Nope. I'm saying that if we choose to refer to both groups as "four-legged animals" as opposed to cats and dogs... it hinders discussion.

When you do comparisons, or analysis, of different approaches, you are not limited to only discussing differences. Similarities are also very important. Otherwise, saying a dog is a four legged animal is serves no purpose because it's a shared trait with cats, which seems to ignore that it's still an important descriptor of dogs.

No one claimed you did. but in a general discussion of comparison between cats and dogs... you refer to them as cats and dogs (difference) not the four legged animals in comparison to the four legged animals.

 

[hawkeyefan]

You do realize that reasons they are different, especially as it pertains to that particular descriptor have been posted throughout this thread for pages now, right?

I don't recall a comparison between Sandbox play and Adventure Path play, to be honest. Was that comparison specifically already discussed?

But overall, sure, there has been a ton of repetition. Like complaining about the phrase "GM's notes" which seems to be okay to bring up without end.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Nope. I'm saying that if we choose to refer to both groups as "four-legged animals" as opposed to cats and dogs... it hinders discussion.

In what way? If we ONLY allow that descriptor, then, sure, you have a point, but that's not at all what's happening. Instead, the descriptor deployed does accurately categorize a shared element of play between these approaches. It doesn't, at all, prevent anyone from pointing out differences. Heck, I did that quite easily in the post you just quoted.

No one claimed you did. but in a general discussion of comparison between cats and dogs... you refer to them as cats and dogs (difference) not the four legged animals in comparison to the four legged animals.

So, I cannot ever point out similarities between cats and dogs in a comparison of cats and dogs? What an odd assertation!

 

[Imaro]

I don't recall a comparison between Sandbox play and Adventure Path play, to be honest. Was that comparison specifically already discussed?

But overall, sure, there has been a ton of repetition. Like complaining about the phrase "GM's notes" which seems to be okay to bring up without end.

So really your point was to imply I should accept what I feel is an incorrect/confusing/inaccurate descriptor and just get on with it. Thanks, noted.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I don't recall a comparison between Sandbox play and Adventure Path play, to be honest. Was that comparison specifically already discussed?

But overall, sure, there has been a ton of repetition. Like complaining about the phrase "GM's notes" which seems to be okay to bring up without end.

I mean, the thread topic is about GM notes, so this isn't weird, right? When did the thread become a comparison of only AP and sandbox play?

 

[Imaro]

In what way? If we ONLY allow that descriptor, then, sure, you have a point, but that's not at all what's happening. Instead, the descriptor deployed does accurately categorize a shared element of play between these approaches. It doesn't, at all, prevent anyone from pointing out differences. Heck, I did that quite easily in the post you just quoted.

It's being used as a reference/characterization for the entire playstyle... not as one of many descriptors...

So, I cannot ever point out similarities between cats and dogs in a comparison of cats and dogs? What an odd assertation!

Sure you can but again using that similarity as the main term/phrase to characterize something in a general manner runs into the four-legged animal issue I talked about previously.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Yeah. I suppose putting my description of why I don't like the style before my statement of strongly not liking the style could make it seem as though I'm slagging people for liking the style. That certainly wasn't my intent.

As I said before, I could probably make it clearer I'm describing my own experiences of a playstyle I haven't ever enjoyed.

No, that's fine. I don't think that you should tailor your view on AP style play to match the opinion of others. It should reflect your opinion. If you feel that such adventures are largely railroads, you shoudl say so. If others feel differently, then they should explain how APs are not railroads, not ask you to stop using the term railroad and instead use "sequential scenario depiction" just so they feel better about themselves.

That's fair, but if I were to get a lot of pushback about my description/s of AP-style play, I might consider that there's some problem with my description/s, not the people pushing back.

Perhaps. My point is that there isn't really a problem. You will have made your opinion known. I can now engage with it and discuss my opinion, and we can compare and contrast.

Or I can question your use of one specific phrase for dozens of pages.

I prefer the former. There have been some bright spots in this discussion. None of them have been about the challenge of that phrase.

I don't think it's wildly inaccurate, but I think it undersells A) the extent to which the GM has any interest in finding out about either the characters or the world and B) the extent to which authoring something at the table is different from doing so at one's desk (it's the difference between being the sole author and being a co-author).

I don't think anyone took "GM's Notes" to be all done before play and then never added to or revised based on play. It's an ongoing process.

I think you've described your play as never prepping more than one session ahead. I largely do that myself when I run 5E D&D; I have a good idea of what will be next, and I make sure I'm ready for that. Those are how I use notes to help run the game.

Do my players sometimes surprise me? Do they sometimes end one session with a plan "here's what we'll do next week" and then we get to next week and they scrap that idea and go with something else entirely? Of course.

It doesn't change the fact that a large part of play is about what I as GM have crafted, right?

 

[Ovinomancer]

It's being used as a reference/characterization for the entire playstyle... not as one of many descriptors...

Not by anyone using it, I assure you.

Sure you can but again using that similarity as the main term/phrase to characterize something in a general manner runs into the four-legged animal issue I talked about previously.

This is a thread about how GM notes are used. As such, it is a theme in describing games. At no point is this a primary or sole descriptor -- it's only talking about how GM notes are used. You have a misconception about the topic and scope of this discussion.

 

[Imaro]

Not by anyone using it, I assure you.

This is a thread about how GM notes are used. As such, it is a theme in describing games. At no point is this a primary or sole descriptor -- it's only talking about how GM notes are used. You have a misconception about the topic and scope of this discussion.

So then why does it start..."Playing to find out..." Seems what we are really doing is defining the purpose of play not GM notes with the descriptor.

 

[hawkeyefan]

So really your point was to imply I should accept what I feel is an incorrect/confusing/inaccurate descriptor and just get on with it. Thanks, noted.

No, my point is that @pemerton has used that phrase. It has been challenged. You and several others don't like the connotations. @pemerton has even offered several different alternatives to the phrase.

This has all been established.

I was asking about notes in Adventure Path games versus Sandbox because it seemed like you might have something to say there. I'd rather have a conversation about gaming than to endlessly have a conversation about a conversation about gaming.

I mean, the thread topic is about GM notes, so this isn't weird, right? When did the thread become a comparison of only AP and sandbox play?

Well, how a GM's notes are used in one style versus another would seem to be up for discussion in the thread, no? Especially since the "play to find out what's in the GM's notes" horse has not just been beaten to death, but it's been burned, hanged, stomped, and then nuked from effing orbit.