Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 9331733" data-attributes="member: 85870">And the thing I've bolded is what I'm absolutely naughty word sick of in regards to trad play.For reasons unknown, the GM's creative fiction created 6 seconds / 6 minutes / 6 hours / 6 days / 6 weeks / 6 years ago is seen as sacredly immutable, wholly not subject to the player's expressed desires to explore their character's deeper protagonistic drive.And furthermore, any attempts by players to bring fulfillment of their character stakes to the GM's table are met with derision, eye-rolling, and declarations of, &quot;Go play your computer games or stick with your bland, boring 5e easy mode if you want that crap. We do REAL roleplaying at my table!&quot;Even though the player has clearly expressed what they want the stakes to be. Has clearly expressed that they are pursuing in-character goals towards an end that speaks to the themes they want to explore. What possible value is it to completely negate the player's expressed (and well-earned by this point) stakes in the outcome?So that the GM can keep pretending that their made-up fiction is somehow more &quot;complete&quot; and &quot;whole&quot; and &quot;untarnished&quot; and &quot;verisimiltudinous&quot; and therefore more &quot;worthy&quot; than if the GM had modified the fiction? Even though the fiction was MADE UP COMPLETELY FROM THIN AIR, NO MATTER HOW LONG AGO IT WAS MADE UP?Why in the world does a single line of pre-written fiction negate the player's intent to speak with the duke's daughter?&quot;Hmm. Well, sorry, my pre-written fiction is more important than anything on the player side. Sorry, sucks to be you.&quot;Yeah. I'm done with that.The games I'm interested in playing now are games where the GM is asked implicitly and enforced by rule explicitly to honor player intent. Games where the GM is expected to keep their &quot;living world&quot; radically more open and malleable and work with the players to realize character intent.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 9331733, member: 85870"] And the thing I've bolded is what I'm absolutely [I]naughty word[/I] sick of in regards to trad play. For reasons unknown, the GM's creative fiction created 6 seconds / 6 minutes / 6 hours / 6 days / 6 weeks / 6 years ago is seen as sacredly immutable, wholly not subject to the player's expressed desires to explore their character's deeper protagonistic drive. And furthermore, any attempts by players to bring fulfillment of their character stakes to the GM's table are met with derision, eye-rolling, and declarations of, "Go play your computer games or stick with your bland, boring 5e easy mode if you want that crap. We do REAL roleplaying at my table!" Even though the player has clearly expressed what they want the stakes to be. Has clearly expressed that they are pursuing in-character goals towards an end that speaks to the themes they want to explore. What possible value is it to completely negate the player's expressed (and well-earned by this point) stakes in the outcome? So that the GM can keep pretending that their made-up fiction is somehow more "complete" and "whole" and "untarnished" and "verisimiltudinous" and therefore more "worthy" than if the GM had modified the fiction? Even though the fiction was MADE UP COMPLETELY FROM THIN AIR, NO MATTER HOW LONG AGO IT WAS MADE UP? Why in the world does a single line of pre-written fiction negate the player's intent to speak with the duke's daughter? "Hmm. Well, sorry, my pre-written fiction is more important than anything on the player side. Sorry, sucks to be you." Yeah. I'm done with that. The games I'm interested in playing now are games where the GM is asked implicitly and enforced by rule explicitly to honor player intent. Games where the GM is expected to keep their "living world" radically more open and malleable and work [I]with the players[/I] to realize character intent. [/QUOTE]

Verification