Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What is the point of GM's notes?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 8245680" data-attributes="member: 5142"><p>Your final sentence in bold does sound like you ascribing a high concept descriptor of a "living world" campaign to me. This is not say that "elusive" applies, but it does sound fairly high concept. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I think that it is less elitism and more about trying to advocate in favor of a minority, fringe perspective in gaming hobby that is dominated by the D&D (and its ilk) hegemony. I don't think that mainstream perspectives in gaming need <em>any</em> white knights defending it from forum nobodies like us. D&D and its ilk have overwhelmingly won. So what does rushing in to emotionally defend these perspectives actually achieve, especially since the goal of many of these threads is, more often than not (IMHO), about trying to analyze and understand core, basic gaming differences from more analytical perspectives? It is not as if [USER=6993955]@Fenris-77[/USER] or [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER] always agree with [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] on his positions, yet they can push back and criticize without getting into the sort of heated arguments that others do with him. Insanity is trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. So maybe it's worth considering whether your purposes would be better served by a change in tact that is more conducive to constructive discussion. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Part of the issue, which has been brought up numerous times before, is that a number of the main critics have played and do enjoy playing numerous, different games, but that same diversified perspective is not necessarily shared by others who are fighting for their preferred "doctrine." So the whole "both-sides-ism" is clearly something of a false equivalence. </p><p></p><p></p><p>IMHO, the vast bulk of [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER]'s posts (or an oft recurring underlying motif) has mainly been challenging related ideas pertaining to GM vs. player authorship in sandbox play in regards to creating a consistent or living world. He (and others) has been trying to get you to think more critically about your games and elucidate on them in more concrete (and less abstracted) ways. It is not that GM-authored is bad, but, rather, that player-authored is equally valid. He is primarily "hostile" about anything that questions the validity of his own player-driven play, particularly coming from more traditional GM-fiat perspectives, which often has its fair share of mainstream plus OSR defenders. I think that if you (and a fair share of others) learned how to read "pemertonese," particularly without reading unwarranted hostility or elitism, these threads would be a LOT less prone to needless squabbling. Learn to be as a stream rolling over stones.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 8245680, member: 5142"] Your final sentence in bold does sound like you ascribing a high concept descriptor of a "living world" campaign to me. This is not say that "elusive" applies, but it does sound fairly high concept. I think that it is less elitism and more about trying to advocate in favor of a minority, fringe perspective in gaming hobby that is dominated by the D&D (and its ilk) hegemony. I don't think that mainstream perspectives in gaming need [I]any[/I] white knights defending it from forum nobodies like us. D&D and its ilk have overwhelmingly won. So what does rushing in to emotionally defend these perspectives actually achieve, especially since the goal of many of these threads is, more often than not (IMHO), about trying to analyze and understand core, basic gaming differences from more analytical perspectives? It is not as if [USER=6993955]@Fenris-77[/USER] or [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER] always agree with [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] on his positions, yet they can push back and criticize without getting into the sort of heated arguments that others do with him. Insanity is trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. So maybe it's worth considering whether your purposes would be better served by a change in tact that is more conducive to constructive discussion. Part of the issue, which has been brought up numerous times before, is that a number of the main critics have played and do enjoy playing numerous, different games, but that same diversified perspective is not necessarily shared by others who are fighting for their preferred "doctrine." So the whole "both-sides-ism" is clearly something of a false equivalence. IMHO, the vast bulk of [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER]'s posts (or an oft recurring underlying motif) has mainly been challenging related ideas pertaining to GM vs. player authorship in sandbox play in regards to creating a consistent or living world. He (and others) has been trying to get you to think more critically about your games and elucidate on them in more concrete (and less abstracted) ways. It is not that GM-authored is bad, but, rather, that player-authored is equally valid. He is primarily "hostile" about anything that questions the validity of his own player-driven play, particularly coming from more traditional GM-fiat perspectives, which often has its fair share of mainstream plus OSR defenders. I think that if you (and a fair share of others) learned how to read "pemertonese," particularly without reading unwarranted hostility or elitism, these threads would be a LOT less prone to needless squabbling. Learn to be as a stream rolling over stones. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What is the point of GM's notes?
Top