Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 7688875" data-attributes="member: 177">Okay, you're way off the mark on what "procedural" means, in terms of genre.  Genre name comes from TV cop shows, and the cops tend to follow a predictable procedure to get through a case.  In the RPG case, however, it isn't like the GM is making up a specific procedure the PCs will need to use to get through the scenario - as I noted before, laying out the mystery really isn't all that different from laying out a dungeon - the GM places stuff, and the characters interact with it.  The GM isn't dictating specific procedure any more than the DM with a dungeon is dictating how the players deal with the dungeon.  They get to approach it however they wish.  Will the players settle into a fiarly predictable procedure they find works for them?  Probably.  But then, in the dungeon, the players do the same - there's a marching order, general tactics the players use, and so on.  Thos eare determined by the players based on what's effective for them, not by the GM.Yes, it is assumed that the players *will* approach the scenario.  But that's not the GM playing the role of a vain, autocratic god - the GM has the player's buy in on the general premise before play begins.Well, if you have an issue with the mystery genre as a whole, that's not a critique of the game - that's a critique of the genre.Yes.  But then, since when in *any* game does the GM not know more about he scenario than the players?  The GM, of course, knows everything about what actually went down in the event.  They know who was present, they know what physically has happened, and where, and what evidence of the events remains behind.  Not an issue. This isn't old-school D&D, where in searching a room, the player is expected to tell the GM explicitly every single thing they look at, and the GM only gives information to very specific questions.  It is more like 3e - "I search the room" - and the player then gets *everything* they might get, without asking targeted questions.  If the player is in a place, and tries to use an investigative skill, they get the base information.  If they spend points, they get any bonus material available.  The player doesn't have to ask specific, pointed questions to get information, so the GM doesn't have to be ready with answers to specific, pointed questions.  The player expected that there'd be fingerprints?  So what?  Lots of times the universe defies expectations.  Again, like the dungeon - if the player sneaks into the room, and asks if there are goblins, the GM doesn't have to scramble to figure out if there are goblins - either the GM put the goblins there, or she didn't.This is very Holmesian, really.  Holmes doesn't speculate about what he might find, and search for specific pieces of information.  He takes in the entire space, and happens to notice some bits that are clearly relevant, and everything else is dross he may discard.  He doesn't continue probing because he expects some thing *should* be there - he finds what he finds, and is so good that he knows he didn't miss anything useful. Incorrect - it means that our detective isn't taking part in detective *reality*.  Detective reality is about the process of finding clues.  Detective fiction is about the process of dealing with clues once you have them, because the process of finding them is, in reality, tedious.</blockquote>

Verification