Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 8244558" data-attributes="member: 5142">...as a living world. I think that you prefer viewing how you run the game in terms of its aesthetical ends rather than its aromantic nitty gritty process. If you don't have a good word for it, then I would advise trying to come up with one, because &quot;living world&quot; isn't cutting the mustard.I can't see how imagining the NPCs as characters with personal volitions and motives of their own is distinctly &quot;living world.&quot; This falls fairly squarely in how one of the chief duties of GMing is commonly described - i.e., controlling and giving life to the NPCs - in more bog standard TTRPG play. Making the pieces move on the board is basically just &quot;leveling-up&quot; the pre-existing toolkit for GMs.Listening to you describe your &quot;living world process,&quot; I (and likely others) feel about like Ricky Gervais listening to <a href="https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2oe0ag" target="_blank">Sir Ian McKellen in Extras</a> describing how he can act so well.But I get it. You want a world that fees vibrant, organic, and alive. You want a world that feels like it's in motion independent of the PCs. However, it is abundantly clear to me that the &quot;living world&quot; is an aesthetic goal of play rather than the actual process of how it unfolds. I think it's fine to say &quot;the GM decides what's believable.&quot; They may be deciding based upon the constraints of their ideas in a given moment, their notes, their preconceptions of &quot;realism&quot; or the NPCs, or the actions of the PCs. The wholistic approach to describe what's fundamentally going on isn't &quot;living world,&quot; but, rather, &quot;the GM decides (based upon their desire to cultivate a particular aesthetic of play).&quot; There is nothing wrong with this, as I and others who have also run sandbox games have told you numerous times before. Even if &quot;living world&quot; helps you understand what you do, I just don't think that mystifying &quot;living world&quot; helps anything for everyone, as evidenced by [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER]'s own experiences.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 8244558, member: 5142"] ...as a living world. I think that you prefer viewing how you run the game in terms of its aesthetical ends rather than its aromantic nitty gritty process. If you don't have a good word for it, then I would advise trying to come up with one, because "living world" isn't cutting the mustard. I can't see how imagining the NPCs as characters with personal volitions and motives of their own is distinctly "living world." This falls fairly squarely in how one of the chief duties of GMing is commonly described - i.e., controlling and giving life to the NPCs - in more bog standard TTRPG play. Making the pieces move on the board is basically just "leveling-up" the pre-existing toolkit for GMs. Listening to you describe your "living world process," I (and likely others) feel about like Ricky Gervais listening to [URL='https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2oe0ag']Sir Ian McKellen in Extras[/URL] describing how he can act so well. But I get it. You want a world that fees vibrant, organic, and alive. You want a world that feels like it's in motion independent of the PCs. However, it is abundantly clear to me that the "living world" is an aesthetic goal of play rather than the actual process of how it unfolds. I think it's fine to say "the GM decides what's believable." They may be deciding based upon the constraints of their ideas in a given moment, their notes, their preconceptions of "realism" or the NPCs, or the actions of the PCs. The wholistic approach to describe what's fundamentally going on isn't "living world," but, rather, "the GM decides (based upon their desire to cultivate a particular aesthetic of play)." There is nothing wrong with this, as I and others who have also run sandbox games have told you numerous times before. Even if "living world" helps you understand what you do, I just don't think that mystifying "living world" helps anything for everyone, as evidenced by [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER]'s own experiences. [/QUOTE]

Verification