Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 8233759" data-attributes="member: 85555">I don't really have time tonight to dive into this, but I think this really presents a false choice between two extremes, and one of those extremes, isn't even a real playstyle (at least play to discover what is in the GM's notes isn't capturing me or Maxperson's approach as far as I can tell--Maxperson can weigh in if I am wrong). I would say there is a probably a bit of play to find out in a typical game featuring lots of prep. There also probably lots of what I would call situational adventure. And lots of living worlds going on. Your analysis keeps stopping at the notes on the page, which again are just there as a tool. A lot of times it is more like the GM has notes on what is presently going on and what the situation in the world is (i.e. so and so wants to get such and such, from this guy) and so it isn't even as much about the players discovering what is in the GM's notes when they arrive at location X: it is about the GM figuring out what is actually going on at location X when they get there, and figuring out what the actors at location X are up to. This gets even more complicated when the players start interacting with the NPCs. Ultimately, my experience is most of the sandbox campaigns I've run, really become about the NPCs and groups in the setting. It is a fluid, organic interaction between the world the GM built, the choices the players make and the actions they take, and the response of the NPCs. I think when you try to break that down into something like  a 'play loop' or procedure it fails to capture the nuances (because this is a very open type of play that is open precisely because you don't know what to expect in terms of how people are going to interact and when or why players might ask questions). And all the notes are are tools  in service to all the this. The emphasis is on the sense of a real living world. And that is just sandbox, there were lots of other styles of play that got hit with the play to discover what is in the GM's notes label. All the notes are really for is so the GM can have some kind of foundation for there being this world that exists outside the players (at least in the style I am describing, in a lot of things like adventure paths and meta plot play, those notes are probably a lot more flexible in that it isn't as important to create the sense of an objective world, as much as it is important to create a thrilling adventure or emotionally powerful plot---many of the adventure path and meta plot focused GMs I speak with seem more at ease with changing these details during play----and just want to say I think this is no the correct use of meta plot, but it seems to be meaning a style of adventure where the GM is weaving a story around the PCs, often conceived in advance of play. Others can weigh in, I think this really oversimplifies. Especially when the PCs themselves are going to be creating setting content through their characters. It is odd because it describes with some accuracy parts of what is going on, but seems to totally miss the point of it. Again, I feel like there is an arrogance in this analysis, where someone is viewing it from without, imposing a model of understanding that has zero connection to the way people who actually engage the style think about it. Just take the statement 'this is the significant bulk of content generation': I would argue most of the game content is generated during play through the interactions. I may make an NPC with goals, but I may have no idea what kinds of adventures that will itself create until play begins and until the players start doing things. Again, for me the proof is in the fact that if you took the "uncovering it > engaging it > resolving it > defeating it > reorienting" and tried to apply that in play, the game would fall flat on its face. It isn't that orderly. It isn't that neat. It isn't that rigid. And you are not just missing the spark, there are things missing here as well like the PCs generating content, the NPCs having agency of their own, emergent adventures and events, etc. Yes sometimes I may plan a mystery in a campaign. You can do that in this framework. But most of the time, it is a much more laid back, organic experience that is more like a chemical reaction than a set of procedures or bullet points.</blockquote>

Verification