Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 9008996" data-attributes="member: 6787650">This is true. Ultimately there's no fundamental distinction between canonizing information at the point where it's known to two people (No Myth) and canonizing it earlier, perhaps before it's known even to one person (blorb). Neither is objectively superior, but it's fine to prefer one or the other.Quoting <a href="https://idiomdrottning.org/realism-and-blorb" target="_blank">Realism and blorb</a>The blorb and the gloracle are game components (another word for game components is “ludemes”). The blorb is the make-believe world we play in, the gloracle the set of rules, prep, principles and die rolls we use to give us answers about that blorb world.A subset of the game’s make-believery is known to two or more participants. Let’s come up with a word for it, the SIS maybe. (Stay in school!)If you think of this No Myth style SIS as the entirety of the “game state” and then a blorb DM starts talking about their more wider, blorby definition of “game state”, you are gonna have a hard time.In No Myth, the SIS is a very important ludeme. The act of telling makes it real. To bring it back to the example of the hunt for criminal above, once the players have learned where the criminal is, then that location becomes fixed and real. That’s all fine in a No Myth game, that’s just how a No Myth game works.In a blorby game, the rules for fixing/canonizing the location of the criminal (or any other entity) happens earlier, that’s all. There are some principles to follow. Why anyone would want to play blorby instead of No Myth?I can’t explain why.I just love it.</blockquote>

Verification