Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 8340519" data-attributes="member: 16586">The Impossible Thing Before Breakfast was brought up a few pages back. I think it's important to also consider Jesse Burneko's Second Impossible Thing Before Breakfast.I consider both of these to be true :<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">It is impossible for the GM to control of the trajectory of the story while the other players control the protagonists/main characters.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">It is impossible for the player of a PC to control the story while the GM controls the adversity they face.</li>
</ol>There are a couple of ways we can skin this cat (if we are interested in narrative/story)<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Embrace the things we each control and play to find out what happens when they both meet. Players of PCs play their characters like stolen cars and simply protagonize. GMs provide honest adversity. Lots of tension. Lots of risk.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Embrace the principles of improv theater. Lots of &quot;Yes, And&quot; and &quot;No, But&quot; style of collaboratively telling a story together.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Players subvert their play of their characters to the story the GM is trying to tell and the GM might weave in elements of their backstory, character concepts, desires for story arcs, etc.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Illusionism</li>
</ol>None of these strategies gets away from the impossible things. They are just ameliorate the tension that exists between our narrative desires and the realities of gaming.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Campbell, post: 8340519, member: 16586"] The Impossible Thing Before Breakfast was brought up a few pages back. I think it's important to also consider Jesse Burneko's Second Impossible Thing Before Breakfast. I consider both of these to be true : [LIST=1] [*]It is impossible for the GM to control of the trajectory of the story while the other players control the protagonists/main characters. [*]It is impossible for the player of a PC to control the story while the GM controls the adversity they face. [/LIST] There are a couple of ways we can skin this cat (if we are interested in narrative/story) [LIST=1] [*]Embrace the things we each control and play to find out what happens when they both meet. Players of PCs play their characters like stolen cars and simply protagonize. GMs provide honest adversity. Lots of tension. Lots of risk. [*]Embrace the principles of improv theater. Lots of "Yes, And" and "No, But" style of collaboratively telling a story together. [*]Players subvert their play of their characters to the story the GM is trying to tell and the GM might [I]weave in[/I] elements of their backstory, character concepts, desires for story arcs, etc. [*]Illusionism [/LIST] None of these strategies gets away from the impossible things. They are just ameliorate the tension that exists between our narrative desires and the realities of gaming. [/QUOTE]

Verification