Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 8254987" data-attributes="member: 85870">So it's sort of become clear to me that this hangup over the phrase, &quot;the fiction,&quot; really is the key point, or lynchpin, in the whole mindset of &quot;dynamic campaign&quot; (***) play.Without the core conceit of there being some true, pure, ur-state &quot;objective model&quot; from which all further inferences about the shared imaginary &quot;stuff&quot; / shared imaginary space (SIS) is derived, the entire conception of &quot;dynamic campaign&quot; play ceases to be relevant.I think Bedrockgames has alluded to this already a couple of times, with the &quot;I might as well just show the players my notes&quot; comment around running adventure paths.And I think I finally caught a glimpse as to why in the Actor Stance / Immersion / &quot;Playing as my character&quot; thread.Would you say, [USER=6698278]@Emerikol[/USER] and [USER=85555]@Bedrockgames[/USER], that one of the reasons you prefer players to only &quot;play as their character&quot; is that it necessarily---and purposefully---limits the quantity and scope of mental modeling they do?Something like, &quot;If I can just keep the players from trying to do all of the scene and history extrapolating, and keep that behind my curtain, it will make it easier for them to mentally envision/enmesh/insert their consciousness into the world. They're not having to jump out from their segmented character mindset to worry about the 'dynamism' of the setting, or feel pressure to make things work. Furthermore, it's too easy for external inputs that I-as-GM haven't envisioned to disrupt the balance/harmony of the ur-state 'external model' I've already spent so much time building.&quot;If we can just keep the characters immersed 'playing as their character', I can more fully enable and maintain the fine balance of managing the verisimilitude of the SIS, while also having the secondary benefit of reducing distractions in getting the players into our desired 'immersion flow.'&quot;Is there any accuracy to this?*Side note: I've mentioned it already, but the biggest paradigm shift (and I mean that in the absolute, literal sense of the world) for me came when I finally let go of the notion of there being an &quot;objective external model&quot; of the SIS. As soon as I could lay that conceit aside, and recognize that the &quot;objective external model&quot; was just as much a constructed fiction as everything else, my entire mindset changed.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 8254987, member: 85870"] So it's sort of become clear to me that this hangup over the phrase, "the fiction," really is the key point, or lynchpin, in the whole mindset of "dynamic campaign" (***) play. Without the core conceit of there being some true, pure, ur-state "objective model" from which all further inferences about the shared imaginary "stuff" / shared imaginary space (SIS) is derived, the entire conception of "dynamic campaign" play ceases to be relevant. I think Bedrockgames has alluded to this already a couple of times, with the "I might as well just show the players my notes" comment around running adventure paths. And I think I finally caught a glimpse as to why in the Actor Stance / Immersion / "Playing as my character" thread. Would you say, [USER=6698278]@Emerikol[/USER] and [USER=85555]@Bedrockgames[/USER], that one of the reasons you prefer players to only "play as their character" is that it necessarily---and purposefully---limits the quantity and scope of mental modeling they do? Something like, "If I can just keep the players from trying to do all of the scene and history extrapolating, and keep that behind my curtain, it will make it easier for them to mentally envision/enmesh/insert their consciousness into the world. They're not having to jump out from their segmented character mindset to worry about the 'dynamism' of the setting, or feel pressure to make things work. Furthermore, it's too easy for external inputs that I-as-GM haven't envisioned to disrupt the balance/harmony of the ur-state 'external model' I've already spent so much time building. "If we can just keep the characters immersed 'playing as their character', I can more fully enable and maintain the fine balance of managing the verisimilitude of the SIS, while also having the secondary benefit of reducing distractions in getting the players into our desired 'immersion flow.'" Is there any accuracy to this? *Side note: I've mentioned it already, but the biggest paradigm shift (and I mean that in the absolute, literal sense of the world) for me came when I finally let go of the notion of there being an "objective external model" of the SIS. As soon as I could lay that conceit aside, and recognize that the "objective external model" was just as much a constructed fiction as everything else, my entire mindset changed. [/QUOTE]

Verification