What is the point of GM's notes?

[pemerton]

almost every GM I play with, we talk shop. We discuss what the original plan was, what the original encounter was, how things were altered, where it came from, alternatives they had in mind but didn't use, etc.

This seems to assume a very specific point of the GM's notes: to describe imaginary events which will occur in the fiction. AD&D 2nd ed modules are full of notes of this sort.

As @Ovinomancer said, there are other RPGs that don't use this technique at all.

 

[pemerton]

My experience is when people coin a term to describe a playtstyle they dislike or don't want to engage in, their analysis of said playstyle is usually the thing that isn't very deep

Thanks for that powerful observation!

 

[Bedrockgames]

Like the thread title asks: what is the point of GM's notes?

GM's notes can be pretty varied in their content - descriptions of imaginary places; mechanical labels and categories applied to imaginary people or imaginary phenomena; descriptions or lists of imaginary events, some of which are imagined to have already happened relative to the fiction of play and some of which are imagined as yet to happen relative that fiction.

So there may be more than one answer to this question.

Also, it's obvious that GM's notes are not essential to play a RPG. So any answer has to be more precise than just to facilitate RPG play.

(This thread was provoked by some of what I read here: D&D 5E - Do You Prefer Sandbox or Party Level Areas In Your Game World?. But I thought a new thread seemed warranted.)

There isn't a single purpose to GM notes. The purpose varies from group to group, GM to GM, style to style. They can be things set in stone, they can be starting points, they can be things expected to take a shape of their own as the campaign unfolds, they can be placeholder until the GM gets a better idea of things during play. Totally depends on what people are at the table to experience and how the GM's mind (and memory) works

 

[Bedrockgames]

Thanks for that powerful observation!

You are welcome. I ate my spinach today

 

[pemerton]

There isn't a single purpose to GM notes. The purpose varies from group to group, GM to GM, style to style.

Yes. The OP notes this. As you quoted, it says there may be more than one answer to this question.

They can be things set in stone, they can be starting points, they can be things expected to take a shape of their own as the campaign unfolds, they can be placeholder until the GM gets a better idea of things during play. Totally depends on what people are at the table to experience and how the GM's mind (and memory) works

OK. The thread is about elaborating on some of these points.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Yes. The OP notes this. As you quoted, it says there may be more than one answer to this question.


OK. The thread is about elaborating on some of these points.

I was actually interested when I saw the thread, then the first post of yours I saw was you conduction the same playstyle attacks using a veneer of intellectual curiosity. You've taken your main critique of play styles you don't like and made a thread about it

 

[Manbearcat]

I was actually interested when I saw the thread, then the first post of yours I saw was you conduction the same playstyle attacks using a veneer of intellectual curiosity. You've taken your main critique of play styles you don't like and made a thread about it

I don’t see how you can pull that from the neutral framing of the lead post.

And I don’t see how you can pull that from the conversation that has since been generated by multiple participants.

Personally, I’ve discussed:

* How paucity of notes opens up the play space and leads to authority distribution in a “play to find out” game like Dungeon World.

* How map & key notes in Moldvay Basic Delving constrain the play space so Skilled Play can be derived.

* How Faction Clock notes focus and propel play and aid in authority distribution (in a way that is different than Dungeon Workd) in Sandbox Play like Blades in the Dark.

* How PC build cues that focus on dramatic need are effectively “GM notes” such that they trigger the GM to make moves and frame conflicts that provoke/engage with those PC dramatic needs.


That is a lot of variety in the ways notes orient play (triggered by the lead post).

 

[Bedrockgames]

I don’t see how you can pull that from the neutral framing of the lead post.

And I don’t see how you can pull that from the conversation that has since been generated by multiple participants.

The lead post wasn't what I was talking about, I was talking about the first post I responded to here, where it looked like the same old "gaming to discover what's in the GMs notes" critique Pemerton always leverages at people who play things like a more traditional sandbox or living world (it is a simplistic and reductive criticism: and it is a playstyle attack disguised as inquiry IMO).

 

[Bedrockgames]

Personally, I’ve discussed:

* How paucity of notes opens up the play space and leads to authority distribution in a “play to find out” game like Dungeon World.

* How map & key notes in Moldvay Basic Delving constrain the play space so Skilled Play can be derived.

* How Faction Clock notes focus and propel play and aid in authority distribution (in a way that is different than Dungeon Workd) in Sandbox Play like Blades in the Dark.

* How PC build cues that focus on dramatic need are effectively “GM notes” such that they trigger the GM to make moves and frame conflicts that provoke/engage with those PC dramatic needs.


That is a lot of variety in the ways notes orient play (triggered by the lead post).

I wasn't objecting to your points about notes.

 

[Manbearcat]

My experience is when people coin a term to describe a playtstyle they dislike or don't want to engage in, their analysis of said playstyle is usually the thing that isn't very deep

I've posted a lot of stuff in this thread, but I'm pretty confident this was another thing I posted about.

There are multiple forms of Adventure Path or Metaplot-driven play.

Two of those forms are, in fact, Railroads. The point of play is for it to be a Railroad. We (the cultural "we" here) would do ourselves a service if we just admitted what it is and that (a) its not a degenerate form of play in and of itself (its only degenerate if its represented as something else and/or the participants are expecting a different form of play), (b) therefore calling it a "Railroad" is not pernicious, (c) it is (in fact) desirable for a large number of players, (d) so therefore it would behoove us to talk plainly about it so GMs can improve their craft.

One of those two forms is basically a passive, theatrical experience for the players where funneled play triggers prescripted exposition dumps. In this case, GMs need to be good at (i) funneling toward that prescription, (ii) knowing when the prescripted exposition dump is triggered, and (iii) theatrically delivering the triggered exposition dump.

The second of those two forms is Adventure Path as Skilled Play (similar to Gloomhaven or a CRPG). Teams play through the AP in basically a "keep score" fashion (even if they're just "keeping score" with their expectation of self). In this form of play the GM needs to be good at (i) - (iii) above though the expectation of theatricality is comparatively muted. Less important than theatricality in exposition is (iv) the ability to deliver the puzzle/obstacle information sufficiently (revealing enough but not leading in a way that impacts Skilled Play) and (v) play "Team NPC" aggressively but fairly. (iv) and (v) become even more important if this is a tourney-esque scenario (like at a Hobby Shop) where you're going to run multiple Teams through it and they can compare and contrast their success (their "Score").


These are two discrete forms of play that are very "reveal what is in the GM's notes"-intensive.

Not all notes are like this or for this...but these two forms of play are orthodox D&D (there are other forms of D&D, but these aren't remotely deviant forms of D&D...they're everywhere).