Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 9317338" data-attributes="member: 4937">What I did required no &quot;heavy lifting&quot;.&nbsp; I wasn't fighting against the system in any way.&nbsp; 1e AD&amp;D was a smooth vehicle for the story I was creating along with the player, stories that often went in directions I didn't anticipate.&nbsp; For example, I anticipated that the 1st level M-U would recognize the bad guys and not want to cooperate with them.&nbsp; That was the story as I originally had it in my head.&nbsp; In fact, the player neither recognized the bad guys or was able to reason out that they murdered his former master, nor was in any way unwilling to cooperate with them provided they gave him access to the power that he wanted.&nbsp; The player ended up allying with the faction that I thought would be the antagonists of the story.&nbsp; And that was fine.&nbsp; The system didn't get in the way of that at all.&nbsp; Had play continued for longer I would have just reversed the factions and maybe later tested the player on the question again at a later point.This is just so freaking vague.&nbsp; Every single RPG in existence has mechanics to give players the ability to determine the outcome, and to help ensure that narrative authority is shared between all participants (including the GM, if a GM even exists in that system).&nbsp; You're not functionally distinguishing &quot;game designed as narrative&quot; from anything with this vague description.This is what is driving me nuts about this thread is that so much of it is just tautological assertions.&nbsp; How? Just by telling them to do it?&nbsp; I mean, I grant you that you are hitting on one of the problems have I with certain games that have a pretense of being &quot;nar&quot;.&nbsp; But really, I think you are missing the point entirely here.&nbsp; The hardest part about running a nar game and the reason that real nar games are so relatively unpopular compared to something like DW or Blades, is that to run one you need relatively skilled players.&nbsp; The more narrative authority you put on the players, and the more the players have to be involved in premise and conflict creation and the more they have to be the narrators, the bigger burden you are putting on them.&nbsp; GMs are used to doing that sort of thing, and most players don't want to do those sort of things because among other things they are relatively speaking &quot;heavy lifting&quot;.&nbsp; You have to have players that have the same sort of story telling skills as a GM and who are engaging at more of a level than just deciding &quot;What would my character do?&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 9317338, member: 4937"] What I did required no "heavy lifting". I wasn't fighting against the system in any way. 1e AD&D was a smooth vehicle for the story I was creating along with the player, stories that often went in directions I didn't anticipate. For example, I anticipated that the 1st level M-U would recognize the bad guys and not want to cooperate with them. That was the story as I originally had it in my head. In fact, the player neither recognized the bad guys or was able to reason out that they murdered his former master, nor was in any way unwilling to cooperate with them provided they gave him access to the power that he wanted. The player ended up allying with the faction that I thought would be the antagonists of the story. And that was fine. The system didn't get in the way of that at all. Had play continued for longer I would have just reversed the factions and maybe later tested the player on the question again at a later point. This is just so freaking vague. Every single RPG in existence has mechanics to give players the ability to determine the outcome, and to help ensure that narrative authority is shared between all participants (including the GM, if a GM even exists in that system). You're not functionally distinguishing "game designed as narrative" from anything with this vague description. This is what is driving me nuts about this thread is that so much of it is just tautological assertions. How? Just by telling them to do it? I mean, I grant you that you are hitting on one of the problems have I with certain games that have a pretense of being "nar". But really, I think you are missing the point entirely here. The hardest part about running a nar game and the reason that real nar games are so relatively unpopular compared to something like DW or Blades, is that to run one you need relatively skilled players. The more narrative authority you put on the players, and the more the players have to be involved in premise and conflict creation and the more they have to be the narrators, the bigger burden you are putting on them. GMs are used to doing that sort of thing, and most players don't want to do those sort of things because among other things they are relatively speaking "heavy lifting". You have to have players that have the same sort of story telling skills as a GM and who are engaging at more of a level than just deciding "What would my character do?" [/QUOTE]

Verification