Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7338921" data-attributes="member: 16814">Not had a lot of time to respond lately, and I'd like to get back to a few posts, but, for now:I think another part of the continued disconnect is that [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] isn't really adverse to pre-authored material so long as it's presented as framing and not as part of action resolution.  Prepping an encounter map or a villain (his naga and the elf in the desert come to mind) are perfectly fine, so long as their introduction is open and such things are not used to negate action declarations.  He's not ever been clear on this, though, so I might misunderstand him once again.To your main point, I'm much better at running a game that engages player actions with at least a framework to rely on.  A few notes about main points usually suffices.  I can usually predict what my players will do (within reasonable boundaries) so I can aim my prep at making sure I have a backbone of possibilities to model my resolutions on.  Quite often I go very far "off script" due to play, but I find I'm much better at doing so if I have a framework in place than if I'm just winging it altogether.  Providing consequences that hang together and have coherent impacts are easier for me if I have put some thought into the general shape of things beforehand. [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] seems to espouse a gaming philosophy that is much in line with the concepts of improv acting:  don't negate another's input, build on it.  "Yes, and" is the touchstone.  [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]'s approach differs really only in the use of mechanics to adjudicate some actions, those that touch directly on the stated focuses of the characters, but, even then, the "Yes, and" holds some water as the action is always validated, it's always employed, with the results adding to that action rather than moving away from it.And, much as with improv, this isn't something everyone likes or is good at.  Many actors use improv as a technique to improve their craft, but then go on to primarily do scripted parts.  This is because scripted parts do a better job of being coherent and impactful on average.  Not to say improv can't do this, it certainly can, often in surprising ways, but scripts are usually better for this impact.  It's a bit different in RPGs, as all RPGs have improv traits, but [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] advocates a style that skews much more heavily towards that end of the spectrum.  I think the problem with most of the threads that this comes up in is that [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] looks at everything from the lens of improv being better at getting to what he likes and that means that he has trouble looking at games with more scripting (prep, worldbuilding, secret backstory, whatever) and figuring out what people get from that.  This is apparent in his responses, especially those that drift towards blanket statements that everyone can play his way and that players will come around to liking it if they try it.  That's not so, just as not all actors like improv, or can even do it well.  There's a reason improv theaters aren't the majority, and it's not the inherent superiority of improv.I guess the wrap up is that players can be both actors in the game and the audience for the game.  And how the story unfolds can appeal to different players according to where players fall in those camps.  Some players love being the actor, being the focal point of the story and having everything engage them and nothing that constrains that engagement.  Other players are more situated on the audience side -- yes they act, but they're mostly there to be entertained, to be part of an entertaining story, and they're not nearly as interested in acting on that story as having the story act on them (as audience members do).  Neither is better or worse.  Both can be fun.  But it's important to realize the difference as it answers the OP question of what worldbuilding (prep, secret backstory, scripting, whatever) is for -- it's to engage a player type that is different from the type of player [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] is.</blockquote>

Verification