What is the point of GM's notes?

[Fenris-77]

Again, eh. The "say" the GM has is different in Blades than the say they have in D&D. So, when we say that the GM has final say in Blades, we're still talking about a different thing than when we say the GM has final say in D&D. I'm looking for clarity here, and I think that this statement is introducing a lot of hidden information in the words "final say." Does the GM in Blades have the final authority? Sure, but it's very tightly constrained, and not at all the same authority the GM has in D&D.

I'm keenly aware that the say is different, but that's not the same as me thinking I need I different word to descibe that state of affairs, especially to people who dont play Blades. I agree with your description of the constraints involved.

 

[Emerikol]

Sure and the living adventure/living world way of managing this is to focus on the goals of the characters who inhabit (perhaps the major ones, but also the minor ones if you want), allow not just the overall situation to adjust if the players come back, but making decisions based on the NPCs as if they are characters (which could allow for example for an intelligent resident of the dungeon to leave, and even go after the PCs). Nothing is preventing you from doing this is you begin with the freeze approach, but a lot of GMs do treat it as static, and living world/living adventure is a reminder for the GM to make things more active and responsive (and to treat them more like objective entities in the setting). If it doesn't answer an issue you want to solve, if it runs up against some other playstyle or system thing you are interested in, then you don't have to do it. All I can say is this principle has made a night and day difference in my sessions.

One of the things that keeps my players from abusing the five minute workday is the fact the monsters are always a lot more prepared the second time around. So pressing on has a high value because you still have the element of surprise.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I'm keenly aware that the say is different, but that's not the same as me thinking I need I different word to descibe that state of affairs, especially to people who dont play Blades. I agree with your description of the constraints involved.

Whereas I think this allows people familiar with one to make incorrect assumptions about the other. Honestly, I very much think a lot of our past interactions have dealt with exactly this kind of thing. You use a term that I see as easily confusing the issue because it allows people to import concepts that you're not talking about. Like saying that the GM has the final say in Blades, where that's a pretty different ball of wax from a standard D&D game, where I'd say the same thing meaning that there's extremely few constraints on the GM. Or the "living world" disagreement we had (and never did see that specifically defined). I think that you're fine with these because you know what you mean, but it's not helpful to communication to others because we're not on your page.

 

[Fenris-77]

See, I'd rather tell someone who doesn't play Blades, yeah, the GM is still in charge of setting stuff, but there are some differences and constraint. I proceed from the known to the unknown, rather than explaining the thing de novo. I am proceeding by analogy as it were. So yeah, it's absolutely helpful communication.

 

[Emerikol]

Hitpoints are absolutely dissociated. They have no defined meaning in the game rules, they just abalate with no fiction attached to them. You can describe hitpoint loss in 100's of different ways, and they all are equally valid. I've even described them as completely dissociated in a plot coupon manner, and they still work exactly the same way. You are confusing your habitual gloss on hitpoints with how they actually function.

Armor class is the same way. If I fail to roll a success on my attack, what happened? Doesn't matter to the game, it can be anything the players want to describe. You can even do the same treatment I do with hitpoints and invoke armor class as plot coupon to force a miss.

And spells, oh, those lovely spells. These are exactly what you claim to hate. Take the secret door example, where you're absolutely against any concept where players searching for a door causes a door to exist. Totally bogus, right? You're even against the players spending a plot coupon to say a secret door is here -- dissociative! Do not like! But, you're absolutely perfectly fine with a player spending a plot coupon to open a door on command, so long as that plot coupon is a "spell slot" and it's used on "passwall" (I believe you're an older edition player, so this is still a spell for you). This does exactly, exactly, the thing you dislike, but it's okay, because it's lampshaded behind magic and you're used to plot coupons as spells.

And, to get in before the inevitable, this isn't dismissive, it's stripped -- stripped of the patina of long familiarity and cast in a stark light where these things can't hide in the shadows of what we're used to.

You just can't resist. You are wrong. Very wrong. Leave it at that.

 

[Ovinomancer]

See, I'd rather tell someone who doesn't play Blades, yeah, the GM is still in charge of setting stuff, but there are some differences and constraint. I proceed from the known to the unknown, rather than explaining the thing de novo. I am proceeding by analogy as it were. So yeah, it's absolutely helpful communication.

Except, that's not what happened? You just said that GM in Blades has final say on the setting? Did I miss something, more than willing admit I did, but I didn't see the further explanation.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I can read Emerikol's posts. The post I quoted in my post that you replied to was not a reply to @Manbearcat (or anyone else).

It was a post about "his style" vs boardgaming.

My mistake, for some reason it went to the other post when I first clicked the arrow

 

[Ovinomancer]

You just can't resist. You are wrong. Very wrong. Leave it at that.

You mean with you issuing a blanket dismissal? I thought that's not what was happening in this thread? I get it's a hard pill to swallow -- you've got a lot of inertia here, and it's challenging to redirect. I had the same issue. But, ultimately, what counts as "dissociative" isn't really a baked in feature of the mechanic, but rather whether or not it fits into the paradigm we already have. Viewing hitpoints as dissociative is a hard ask, especially if you've spent a lot of time with a specific (to you) explanation of them. But, they are dissociative -- they're utterly disconnected from anything in the fiction and do not require any fictional changes until and unless you're out of them. I mean, there's huge numbers of threads arguing what hitpoints actually are, so I fail to see how you can state that they are dissociative (if they weren't, there'd be many fewer arguments about what losing 10 hitpoints means in the fiction).

If you'd like to start a new thread on the topic, I'd be happy to. Would you discuss it there?

 

[Emerikol]

You mean with you issuing a blanket dismissal? I thought that's not what was happening in this thread? I get it's a hard pill to swallow -- you've got a lot of inertia here, and it's challenging to redirect. I had the same issue. But, ultimately, what counts as "dissociative" isn't really a baked in feature of the mechanic, but rather whether or not it fits into the paradigm we already have. Viewing hitpoints as dissociative is a hard ask, especially if you've spent a lot of time with a specific (to you) explanation of them. But, they are dissociative -- they're utterly disconnected from anything in the fiction and do not require any fictional changes until and unless you're out of them. I mean, there's huge numbers of threads arguing what hitpoints actually are, so I fail to see how you can state that they are dissociative (if they weren't, there'd be many fewer arguments about what losing 10 hitpoints means in the fiction).

If you'd like to start a new thread on the topic, I'd be happy to. Would you discuss it there?

I don't think this thread needs for us to completely derail it with a debate about what dissociative mechanics are or are not. Your example and your take is so far removed from the reality that anyone who really does know what they are is laughing at you. If you really insist at least start another thread or send me a private message. This topic will got hot fast and I don't want to ruin the GM notes topic by derailing it.

 

[Fenris-77]

Except, that's not what happened? You just said that GM in Blades has final say on the setting? Did I miss something, more than willing admit I did, but I didn't see the further explanation.

That part was me agreeing, twice, with your description of the constraints and differences. I didn't say it was exactly the same as D&D or whatever, that would be silly. In terms of GM responsibility and framing I think Blades is still far closer to traditional play than game like, say, Houses of the Blooded, where the players have some full on framing permissions. Anyway, I wasn't disagreeing with you about anything other than the usefulness of proceeding from analogy to define GM play in Blades, as opposed to making up some other word or whatever for 'in charge'.