Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7376737" data-attributes="member: 42582">For my part, my interest is not really on how constrained the PCs are but how constrained the players are. There is no strict correlation between the two, and so I prefer to try to un derstand the process at the table, rather than extrapolate that from events in and elements of the fiction.Another way to describe &quot;inherent consequences&quot; is a story the GM tells the players, triggered by the players making moves that engage fictional positioning that the players themselves are unaware of.&nbsp;[MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION]'s example upthread of the NPC who is (unbeknownst to the players) an agent for the duke, and who therefore fails in her mission when the PCs charm her, is an example of the same thing but in NPC rather than location form.The essence of &quot;no myth&quot; is found in the examples I've given in the thraed: how do we (as players in the game) establish the properties of the feather? A player delcares an action for his/her PC and makes a check. How do we establish whether the map can be found in the study? A player delcares an action for his/her PC and makes a check.How do we learn that the Raven Queen's mausoleum is on a layer of the Abyss? Because the PCs find themselves on the Abyss as it is unravelling (because the PCs, some time earlier, sealing it off from its source of matter in the Elemental Chaos), and three of those PCs are Raven Queen devotees, and so the GM frames a scene in which a Demon Lord offers to tell them the location of the maosoleum in exchange for their chaos barge (which they are using to travel through the Abyss, hoping to make their own escape).Those are the two basic modes for establishing setting in no myth RPGing. A player makes a check. Or the GM frames a scene.Given that every work of fiction ever produced ever is, of necessity, no myth (because they are fictions, not atlases and biographies), I think it's obvious that there's no truth at all to the claim that &quot;no myth&quot; = no depth of setting.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7376737, member: 42582"] For my part, my interest is not really on how constrained the PCs are but how constrained the players are. There is no strict correlation between the two, and so I prefer to try to un derstand the process at the table, rather than extrapolate that from events in and elements of the fiction. Another way to describe "inherent consequences" is [i]a story the GM tells the players[/i], triggered by the players making moves that engage fictional positioning that the players themselves are unaware of. [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION]'s example upthread of the NPC who is (unbeknownst to the players) an agent for the duke, and who therefore fails in her mission when the PCs charm her, is an example of the same thing but in NPC rather than location form. The essence of "no myth" is found in the examples I've given in the thraed: how do we (as players in the game) establish the properties of the feather? A player delcares an action for his/her PC and makes a check. How do we establish whether the map can be found in the study? A player delcares an action for his/her PC and makes a check. How do we learn that the Raven Queen's mausoleum is on a layer of the Abyss? Because the PCs find themselves on the Abyss as it is unravelling (because the PCs, some time earlier, sealing it off from its source of matter in the Elemental Chaos), and three of those PCs are Raven Queen devotees, and so the GM frames a scene in which a Demon Lord offers to tell them the location of the maosoleum in exchange for their chaos barge (which they are using to travel through the Abyss, hoping to make their own escape). Those are the two basic modes for establishing setting in no myth RPGing. A player makes a check. Or the GM frames a scene. Given that every work of fiction ever produced ever is, of necessity, no myth (because they are fictions, not atlases and biographies), I think it's obvious that there's no truth at all to the claim that "no myth" = no depth of setting. [/QUOTE]

Verification