What is the point of GM's notes?

[Maxperson]

Can I ask why this is so important to you?

EDIT: I mean it's a playstyle you don't particularly enjoy or advocate for so why is it so important that you get to name it?

And do so incorrectly. As I showed in my response to @Ovinomancer yesterday, even something critical to play can have nothing to do with why you play the game. See my response below, which I know you say, but am repeating for the sake of others here.

"It's the "play for" that's the problem. I don't play to find out what's in the DM's notes. Like at all. Zero. DM's notes are an important part of the game, but they are not any thing that I play for. I drive a hybrid car. Gas is a very important part of my driving experience. No gas. No go. I don't drive for gas. I don't drive to find gas. I drive for other reasons."

 

[Maxperson]

I'm not trying to force anyone to do anything. My point was that concern over the term "fiction" versus the term "living world" seems silly because when asked what I mean by fiction, I can very clearly say "make believe" or "definition 2 from the dictionary" and then we should be able to move on with that understanding.

By contrast, the term "living world" is open to all manner of interpretations and based on descriptions that have been offered, it's not always easy to define. As such, the term is much more prone to equivocation of the kind BRG has described.

Although, I'd also add that it's even more prone to another definition of equivocation, which is to use vague language in an attempt to conceal the truth or to avoid committing oneself.

I think that the issues with "living world" are due to people having slightly different ideas of what it entails. At its core, though, the primary thing that makes a word living or not is that some NPC activities, events, etc., happen offscreen and the PCs learn about those things after the fact. The world goes on outside of the view of the PCs.

 

[pemerton]

"It's the "play for" that's the problem. I don't play to find out what's in the DM's notes.

I don't understand why you think a reply to @Emerikol is relevant to how you play. Are you the same poster? Or playing in the same game?

 

[Bedrockgames]

But do you see how you're the only one who's actually done that? And that the conversation has become about that rather than anything else?

Now, I won't assume that was your intention....but that's what has happened. You have made the thing you were scared of happen! Like in classic works of fiction make believe!

Hawkeye, I am just responding to posts that were reactions to something I said about the term the fiction in passing (which lead to me defending a position about the fiction and equivocation, which I do think is a problem beyond this thread). But I have other objections to the term. I am not enjoying debating the equivocation of fiction either. But if people keep taking me to task, I am going to keep responding. This is natural: people go into back up behavior mode when they are on the defensive. I am happy to let the topic drop if others are

 

[Imaro]

Here's a crack at a definition for "Living World"

A "Living World Game" is a game in which the GM creates or changes the setting both independently of and in response to player influence.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Can I ask why this is so important to you?

I can answer for me: examining how people play games helps me better find ways I like to play. Talking frankly and critically about tools and approaches helps me get the best out of those tools and approaches.

EDIT: I mean it's a playstyle you don't particularly enjoy or advocate for so why is it so important that you get to name it?

I enjoy it, I'm running it right now -- full blown railroad AP where play is absolutely about finding out what's in the notes. I've also, in the last few years, run a pretty detailed sandbox hexcrawl 5e game, which was about finding out what's in the notes, just with a different emphasis. If enjoyment and advocation are the benchmarks, I pass, and I don't mind @pemeton's nomenclature at all.

EDIT 2: At this point it's starting to feel like a power or control thing vs. a seeking analyzation and understanding thing

Well, for me it absolutely isn't, but then I don't feel threatened or insulted by a frank expression of what's happening at the table. I don't think it's a bad thing at all to find out what's in my notes -- it's just an unromantic description. Totes fine with it, and, as we've established, I both enjoy and advocate for this kind of gaming.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Here's a crack at a definition for "Living World"

A "Living World Game" is a game in which the GM creates or changes the setting both independently of and in response to player influence.

I like the addition of "independently of," as I think that's a good point. However, this description still easily defines a railroad AP, which I do not think is the intent of the use of the term. Happy to be corrected, though.

 

[Imaro]

I like the addition of "independently of," as I think that's a good point. However, this description still easily defines a railroad AP, which I do not think is the intent of the use of the term. Happy to be corrected, though.

In a railroad AP the setting doesn't change, it's already been decided and mapped out. Players actions can't change it because they are along for the ride and the DM if running an actual railroad won't ever change it either.

 

[Ovinomancer]

In a railroad AP the setting doesn't change, it's already been decided and mapped out.

I disagree -- there are things the GM is set to determine in the setting. I have proof of this in Descent into Avernus. And, I'm to do this independent of the PCs in some cases, and dependent on them in others (well, dependent in the sense of quantum ogres).

 

[Imaro]

I can answer for me: examining how people play games helps me better find ways I like to play. Talking frankly and critically about tools and approaches helps me get the best out of those tools and approaches.

And that's why using a specific term is important to you??

I enjoy it, I'm running it right now -- full blown railroad AP where play is absolutely about finding out what's in the notes. I've also, in the last few years, run a pretty detailed sandbox hexcrawl 5e game, which was about finding out what's in the notes, just with a different emphasis. If enjoyment and advocation are the benchmarks, I pass, and I don't mind @pemeton's nomenclature at all.

I didn't assume you didn't enjoy it... the question wasn't directed at you. It's funny you're talking about AP railroads and that's decidedly not what those pushing back against the nomenclature are talking about or advocating for. Perhaps that's why you take to the nomenclature so easily.

Well, for me it absolutely isn't, but then I don't feel threatened or insulted by a frank expression of what's happening at the table. I don't think it's a bad thing at all to find out what's in my notes -- it's just an unromantic description. Totes fine with it, and, as we've established, I both enjoy and advocate for this kind of gaming.

Lol... I can dislike something and not feel threatened by it but good jab thrown there. You believe it's an unromantic description. I believe it's an incorrect description. I've yet to see anything that convinces me your belief is more correct than my own. And no we haven't established that, we've established you conflate the games we are talking about with AP railroads and you enjoy said AP railroads.