Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arilyn" data-source="post: 7412434" data-attributes="member: 6816042">In Classical play, world building, whether homebrew or published gives the players a place to adventure in. The GM creates stories, or develops adventure areas and the players explore or work through the story. It's advantages are there is a less likely chance for the session to fizzle, because the GM comes prepared. The adventure in a skilled GM's hands will feel satisfying as it will hit narrative beats resulting in a climax. For many players, they will feel that there is an actual world outside their own little sphere.The disadvantages are that players might not really care about this week's story about the missing duke. If it is more sandbox, there could be a sense that there is no story, just a string of events. The players could very well have agency to pursue whatever goals they wish, but it is still the GM's world.In Story Now, there is no or very little in the way of world building. It gets created through play as a collaboration between GM and players. There are no pre-set notions whatsoever on the direction the story will take. It is driven by player drives and goals. Having the history of the Elven people written down ahead of time is immaterial. The history of the elves will only come up if it's tied to a particular player or goal of the group. It avoids the pitfalls of GM preference. I have a soft spot for running ghost stories, for example, but maybe my players are beginning to roll their eyes when I introduce yet another phantom...Story Now games also have a real sense of immediacy and drama. I like that. There is a thrill when it all comes together and nobody had any plans when you started.On the other hand, Story Now games have a greater risk of ending in a chaotic mess. Participants have to be on their toes. There is no coasting tonight, cause I'm tired, so I'll just show up and hit things. As a GM it's a little intimidating because you are operating without a safety net. It's trickier and more demanding. The world is more centred around the pcs, and drama trumps world solidity. For a lot of players, this is not what they are looking for in a rpg.Personally, I enjoy both. I think as a GM, I feel more comfortable with a more traditional style, but encourage player Input. "You are approaching the Swamp of Dread. Has anyone been here before? Yes? Fill us in please." I roughly sketch out the world, and let it get filled in through player choices and input. If I'm doing a historical setting, however, I'll do lots of research to get it as accurate as possible. My table enjoys different styles and games, thus our dip into Story Now. I haven't been GMing it, however, because I was a little chicken. Maybe next time.</blockquote>

Verification