Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 9032582" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I'm going to start with this as it engages with your top statement below; "story-weaving is my strength."So the question above is about my statement "I just never think about the overall shape of the fiction."So there are two locations that I can cite where I have some care for the shape of the fiction:* At the level of situation where there are conflict resolution mechanics which mediate gamestate/win & loss and attendant rising action/climax.  It borders on the impossible (and would be irresponsible) to not have care for the shape of the fiction there.  So D&D combat, Dogs in the Vineyard, D&D 4e, Cortex+, BW/MG/TB, Blades in the Dark etc.* System-based breakpoints or phases like Mouse Guard's Winter, Torchbearer's Respite, D&D 4e's Heroic/Paragon/Epic, My Life With Master's Endgame Confrontation with the Master, The Between's Dawn/Day/Dusk/Night/The Unscene/Threat Confrontation, Blades Info Gathering/Score/Downtime, or Stonetop's Seasons.  Again, here the game imposes a structure upon play to be observed and resolved.But focus on situation and observance/resolution of structural phases are quite different than what I'm calling the overall shape of the fiction.  Not thinking about the overall shape of the fiction means lack of overarching curation, lack of metaplot imperatives or imposition, lack of story-weaving.  It means letting the throughline of play emerge from play fundamentals + focus on situation & character + observance of system inputs (which includes structural phases or whatever).  Whatever story emerges from that process will be what it is.I should also note that I'm separating overall shape of the fiction from the continuity and integrity of what has been established through play.  That latter is an input that must always be observed/respected for downstream situation-framing, consequence-handling, and any/all game layer interactions.Alright (alright, alright).So I'll just be straight-forward.  The type of GM curation/story-weaving/big reveal that you're depicting above entail a form of GM content-authority that doesn't play well with both my answer to your question above and what I discussed in the prior post you responded (very well) to.  A statement like "the player doesn't know his character is suffering from PTSD after <situation resolution>" isn't a statement that would ever be made.  You're quite correct that there is extreme (complete?) tension between keeping the game part of the RPG foregrounded and transparent and GM inserting extra-system narrative dynamics (whether it be at the character level or situation level or setting level) that require veiling in order to facilitate Big GM Reveal TM.A few random thoughts:* I'm working under the assumption that this is D&D 5e, yes?  I'm assuming that this "Marilith conflict-driven PTSD" wasn't an outgrowth of a post-conflict Saving Throw?* I'm assuming the PTSD isn't a (lets call it) GM-facing or veiled mechanical widget that has an input to action resolution in which the player isn't aware of?* If all true, my concern with this dynamic is two-fold.  The first is that (a) its just relegated to background color (no mechanical engagement that interestingly impacts the player's experience of their decision-space) and (b) , following from and relating to (a), only the GM may be in on the secret because the nature of the color is obfuscated to such a degree that both the experience of the PTSD and the impact of the reveal on the player is muted or isn't as potent as hoped for.Now (b) following from and relating to (a) above is an outgrowth of a few things; (i) the autobiographical cognitive space of the participants (how does various forms of technique and overall play impact the idiosyncratic immersion of the individual participants) and (ii) the GM's ability to do the thing (which includes a lot of little things that need to add up to the overall experience and finality of the thing).* Here is how I might consider easing the tension of the bolded/italicized above if I was running 5e.  Are you familiar with the Abyssal Corruption, Beast Transformation, and Vile Transformation mechanics in the 5e DMG?  You might consider an iteration of them coupled with the Paint the Scene process of The Between.  As follows:1)  Player rolls Charisma Saving Throw after conflict.  On failure, the GM gives the player a new Flaw or Trait which clearly depicts the state of the character (the thematics, the mental duress, et al) and invites the player to describe the PC's cognitive orientation to the event based on that new Flaw or Trait.2)  GM can either veil the mental duress/illness Transformation mechanics or share them with the player (my guess is you would be veiling them).3)  At the next Long Rest (or whatever appropriate time), the player makes another Charisma Saving Throw (perhaps this is progressive or perhaps its the same DC as the initial).  On a failure, the PC gains 1 level of Exhaustion.  The GM briefly describes an object or an event in the imagined space (a flower that seems to reach to bees but never gets attention while other flowers do, an inkeep looking forlorn as they absent-mindedly mop the same area of floor to no affect for minutes) and invites the player of the character to vignette their character's thoughts on this object/event and relate it back to the events of (1).4)  Same deal as (3) except a final failed Saving Throw cements the thematic and mechanical situation which can only be resolved via Remove Curse or some mechanical + fictional process (I'm thinking <a href="https://www.dungeonworldsrd.com/classes/paladin/" target="_blank">Paladin's Quest move</a> or <a href="https://www.dungeonworldsrd.com/classes/wizard/" target="_blank">Wizard's Ritual move</a> in DW or Make a Plan in Stonetop where the player and GM "ask questions and use the answers" to come up with requirements/conflict resolution Win Cons and related fiction to resolve the dramatic need).So here, if you (a) veil the overall situation/journey of the condition but (b) involve the player thematically while (c) introducing decision-space & gamestate altering consequences, you might get a result that both lets everyone experience the reveal (you included as the player is letting you in on their character's cognitive state and attendant interpretation of thematic touchstones) and it might be impactful to the player of the character (either the same but in a different way or perhaps even more impactful).[HR][/HR]So those are some thoughts on your conundrum (as it pertains to what I wrote upthread) that lands nicely in the "why do RPGs have rules" area!  Do with them as you will (including drop them in the dustbin asap!)!</blockquote>

Verification