What is the point of GM's notes?

[pemerton]

@Maxperson, there's nothing you're describing about your play goals that would differ if the GM had no notes at all. You're not describing the same sort of thing as @Emerikol.

 

[Emerikol]

The two of you seem to assume that these describe the same thing that @Emerikol described. Why? To me they seem to be describing something quite different. Emerikol says I want to learn about a new world and explore it. Maxperson says I'm not playing to discover what's going on with those tribes. Those look like contradictory descriptions, not synonymous ones.

It seems relevant to this that Emerikol's approach depends upon there being pre-authored notes, where Maxperson's does not and seems like it would be equally well-served by "no myth" RPGing.

Let me help out here. I like science fiction and fantasy novels. Part of that is learning about a new world. The way it works, the peoples, etc.... I do still like a plot. I still want suspense. Of course if my players just wanted to be bird watchers that would not be a satisfying campaign for me or them.

I will still say that given an equal plot and character depth, I am going to choose speculative style fiction or historical fiction. Why? Because I want to learn about a world I don't know about. I enjoy the discovery as part of the game. So "as I go" in my roleplaying a major payoff for me is the world I am discovery as I achieve what you might call my normal character objectives.

So I wouldn't even call exploration for explorations sake to be an in game motive all that much. It's more an explore because we are looking for some specific thing. So this is a PLAYER payoff and not a CHARACTER payoff. My character lives in that world so he is not as fascinated with it as I am.

Hope that helps clarify.


Edit:
I just thought of another analogy. I'm a southerner so bear with me.

A good world is like good gravy. It's great but no one wants it by itself. You need some meat or some biscuits to put that gravy on top of before the full enjoyment of the gravy takes place. I love gravy though and it makes almost any meal better.

 

[Bedrockgames]

You're starting a new game as a Fighter in a BECMI/RC or AD&D Sandbox or Hexcrawl game.

You were beseeched (and paid) by the last surviving member of a caravan (a merchant) to explore a ruin to the SE. The merchant believes their guards and goods were taken there by the ambushers.

You go.

You uncover some horrible truth with grave implications in the delving.

You return and head directly to the palace to request an audience with the king. After earnestly parleying with the Chamberlain, you're rebuffed (no dice are rolled).

---

The city where you meet the merchant = GM Notes.

The merchant and his/her story = GM Notes.

The parley with and acceptance of the merchant's pleading/offer = Player decision-point.

What equipment or hirelings is/are available for purchase when you loadout for the delve = GM Notes.

How you spend your available coin = Player decision-points.

No Random Encounters on the road to the ruin = GM Notes

The map and key of the ruin/delve itself = GM Notes.

The players' loadout and execution of character and party moves during the delve = Player decision-points.

The ruin/delve's response to the PCs' delving = GM Notes.

Random Encounter on the road back from the ruin = GM Notes.

The player's execution of character and party moves during the Random Encounter = Player decision-points.

The circumstances/orientation of the city when you return from the delve = GM Notes.

Go see the king = Player decision-point.

The Chamberlain receiving you = GM Notes.

The parley with the Chamberlain = Player decision-point.

The Chamberlain rebuffing you (the GM "saying no") with no dice being rolled = GM Notes.

---

Agree or disagree with this formulation above? If so, where and why?

How do the below constituent parts of the above manifest as subservient to the players' goals (I have some ideas on a few of them, but not all)?

* The city.

* The merchant and his/her story.

* The equipment/hirelings available.

* The Random Encounter frequency/table for the road.

* The map and key of the ruin.

* The Wandering Monsters for the ruin and the ruin's response to the PCs' delving.

* The situation in the city when the PCs return.

* The nature of the Chamberlain and logistics of reception.

* The Chamberlain rebuffing you without action resolution mechanics being invoked.

You're starting a new game as a Fighter in a BECMI/RC or AD&D Sandbox or Hexcrawl game.

You were beseeched (and paid) by the last surviving member of a caravan (a merchant) to explore a ruin to the SE. The merchant believes their guards and goods were taken there by the ambushers.

You go.

You uncover some horrible truth with grave implications in the delving.

You return and head directly to the palace to request an audience with the king. After earnestly parleying with the Chamberlain, you're rebuffed (no dice are rolled).

---

The city where you meet the merchant = GM Notes.

The merchant and his/her story = GM Notes.

The parley with and acceptance of the merchant's pleading/offer = Player decision-point.

What equipment or hirelings is/are available for purchase when you loadout for the delve = GM Notes.

How you spend your available coin = Player decision-points.

No Random Encounters on the road to the ruin = GM Notes

The map and key of the ruin/delve itself = GM Notes.

The players' loadout and execution of character and party moves during the delve = Player decision-points.

The ruin/delve's response to the PCs' delving = GM Notes.

Random Encounter on the road back from the ruin = GM Notes.

The player's execution of character and party moves during the Random Encounter = Player decision-points.

The circumstances/orientation of the city when you return from the delve = GM Notes.

Go see the king = Player decision-point.

The Chamberlain receiving you = GM Notes.

The parley with the Chamberlain = Player decision-point.

The Chamberlain rebuffing you (the GM "saying no") with no dice being rolled = GM Notes.

---

Agree or disagree with this formulation above? If so, where and why?

How do the below constituent parts of the above manifest as subservient to the players' goals (I have some ideas on a few of them, but not all)?

* The city.

* The merchant and his/her story.

* The equipment/hirelings available.

* The Random Encounter frequency/table for the road.

* The map and key of the ruin.

* The Wandering Monsters for the ruin and the ruin's response to the PCs' delving.

* The situation in the city when the PCs return.

* The nature of the Chamberlain and logistics of reception.

* The Chamberlain rebuffing you without action resolution mechanics being invoked.

These are word games. All you are trying to do is take a common tool in pretty much any play and tie anything that happens to it to force this argument that players are playing to discover the GM's notes. Take the chamberlain rebuffing the players: that isn't in the GMs notes. The Chamberlain rebuffs the players is something that emerges naturally once the chamberlain is introduced (and the existence of a chamberlain may not even be in the GMs notes at all, that may be a figure who organically emerge's as the players interact with the palace and the GM has to think more clearly about who is there. And this exploration is a combination of the players making choices, deciding where to go, as they explore and push against the world the GM created. They are not playing to discover the GM's notes, they are playing to explore and interact with the GM's world, and the notes are just a tool for helping to track what he or she has created. Again, these are word games, in service to denying the value of play styles you don't like or that you think are lower than other types of play styles. This is extremely obvious and it is extremely questionable rhetoric.

 

[pemerton]

Let me help out here. I like science fiction and fantasy novels. Part of that is learning about a new world. The way it works, the peoples, etc.... I do still like a plot. I still want suspense. Of course if my players just wanted to be bird watchers that would not be a satisfying campaign for me or them.

I will still say that given an equal plot and character depth, I am going to choose speculative style fiction or historical fiction. Why? Because I want to learn about a world I don't know about. I enjoy the discovery as part of the game. So "as I go" in my roleplaying a major payoff for me is the world I am discovery as I achieve what you might call my normal character objectives.

So I wouldn't even call exploration for explorations sake to be an in game motive all that much. It's more an explore because we are looking for some specific thing. So this is a PLAYER payoff and not a CHARACTER payoff. My character lives in that world so he is not as fascinated with it as I am.

Hope that helps clarify.

Thanks. I would say it was already very clear.

 

[pemerton]

It doesn't matter if the world is made up of the DM's notes.

This claim clearly isn't true. If it was true, then no one would think there's any difference between (say) no-myth-ish Dungeon World or Burning Wheel and (say) notes-heavy D&D or CoC.

 

[Bedrockgames]

@Maxperson, there's nothing you're describing about your play goals that would differ if the GM had no notes at all. You're not describing the same sort of thing as @Emerikol.

The notes still matter in max persons example, or more accurately, the world that was created still matters. He is just explaining to you why it isn't simply about discovering what is in the GMs notes. This is what we've been telling you thread after thread, and post after post. These things are just as much about what the players decide to do, what the living NPCs in the setting decide to do, etc. There is an energy arising in these games, a chemistry, and that is totally ignored in the 'playing to discover the GM's notes' insult (and it is an insult)

 

[Aldarc]

They are not playing to discover the GM's notes, they are playing to explore and interact with the GM's world, and the notes are just a tool for helping to track what he or she has created.

This strikes me as almost a difference without a distinction.

 

[Bedrockgames]

This strikes me as almost a difference without a distinction.

It is enormously different. And failing to understand the difference is why people are regularly failing to understand this playstyle. Like I said, words are dead on a page. A living world that the GM made is not

 

[Aldarc]

It is enormously different. And failing to understand the difference is why people are regularly failing to understand this playstyle. Like I said, words are dead on a page. A living world that the GM made is not

"I think you think you are describing something accurately but not seeing how your bias is shaping your analysis."

 

[pemerton]

The notes still matter in max persons example, or more accurately, the world that was created still matters.

In what @Maxperson describes, it seems to be of no matter when the world is created, or what methodology is used.

This is quite different from @Emerikol, who has clearly described a methodology. With express comparison to learning what has been written in a novel.