Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7327204" data-attributes="member: 42582">The key question is, how does that interaction take place?Is it by the players making suggstions to the GM? That is what you seemed to imply in your description of &quot;illusionist&quot; GMing upthread, and is also what I take away from your suggestion that the GM tells a story in response to player input.Is it by the players negotiating with the GM? That is how kids play cops and robbers - mutual negotiation. At a certain point it makes a distinctive GM role redundant.Is it by action resolution mechanics? In my view, this is part of what makes RPGing distinctive, and different from other ways of a group generating a shared fiction together. In historical terms, it's also the key legacy from wargames.If action resolution is never binding on the GM (either because s/he can veto it, or secretly establish fictional positioning that leads to it failing), then action declaration, in practice, becomes the making of suggestions to the GM by the players. Which seems to make it the GM's story, but taking suggestions from friends.If action resolution is binding on the GM, then it's simply misleading to say it's the GM's story. The GM brings something to the table - some element of setting, say, like the study in the house where the PCs (and their players) are hoping to find the map - and the players bring something to the table - their PCs who decide to search the study in the hope of finding the map there - and then we learn what the story is by rolling the dice and adjudcating the outcome.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7327204, member: 42582"] The key question is, how does that interaction take place? Is it by the players making suggstions to the GM? That is what you seemed to imply in your description of "illusionist" GMing upthread, and is also what I take away from your suggestion that the GM tells a story in response to player input. Is it by the players negotiating with the GM? That is how kids play cops and robbers - mutual negotiation. At a certain point it makes a distinctive GM role redundant. Is it by action resolution mechanics? In my view, this is part of what makes RPGing distinctive, and different from other ways of a group generating a shared fiction together. In historical terms, it's also the key legacy from wargames. If action resolution is never binding on the GM (either because s/he can veto it, or secretly establish fictional positioning that leads to it failing), then action declaration, in practice, becomes the making of suggestions to the GM by the players. Which seems to make it the GM's story, but taking suggestions from friends. If action resolution is binding on the GM, then it's simply misleading to say it's the GM's story. The GM brings something to the table - some element of setting, say, like the study in the house where the PCs (and their players) are hoping to find the map - and the players bring something to the table - their PCs who decide to search the study in the hope of finding the map there - and then we learn what the story is by rolling the dice and adjudcating the outcome. [/QUOTE]

Verification