Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 9032842" data-attributes="member: 5142">So unlike a lot of the prior &quot;no myth&quot; talk, Stonetop does lean into myth. However, it's not &quot;high myth.&quot; It's more akin to &quot;incomplete myth.&quot; It reminds me a lot of the Nentir Vale. In true Dungeon World fashion, it creates a sketched-out setting with a lot of blanks that are left blank or filled-in through play, whether by the players or GM. It gives you by-products of the setting's history but it doesn't give you answers. Instead of providing detailed explanations of world history, Stonetop forces the players and GM, and, by extension, the PCs to make assumptions about parts of the world and its history. In this way, it aligns the players and PCs in the history and mysteries of the setting.Honestly, if I were to run a PbtA game for you, it would probably be Stonetop. Not only because I happen to like it, but also because I suspect that it would be a PbtA game that would be closer to your liking. The world feels real. More real than I have felt than in the worlds of many of the most hardcore sim GMs with whom I have played. There are GM move suggestions connected to places, creatures, and items in the setting. These moves are more like &quot;here is some possible crap that could go wrong with X that you can use&quot; rather than &quot;you must do these moves.&quot;This was kinda my issue as well. There were some settings that sim-oriented GMs threw their entire selves into making a simulated world, only to end up like the bold and my character (and those of the rest of the party) forgotten in the shuffle. Like it didn't really matter what character I had made for the game or how I roleplayed them. It would have mostly ended up the same.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 9032842, member: 5142"] So unlike a lot of the prior "no myth" talk, Stonetop does lean into myth. However, it's not "high myth." It's more akin to "incomplete myth." It reminds me a lot of the Nentir Vale. In true Dungeon World fashion, it creates a sketched-out setting with a lot of blanks that are left blank or filled-in through play, whether by the players or GM. It gives you by-products of the setting's history but it doesn't give you answers. Instead of providing detailed explanations of world history, Stonetop forces the players and GM, and, by extension, the PCs to make assumptions about parts of the world and its history. In this way, it aligns the players and PCs in the history and mysteries of the setting. Honestly, if I were to run a PbtA game for you, it would probably be Stonetop. Not only because I happen to like it, but also because I suspect that it would be a PbtA game that would be closer to your liking. The world feels real. More real than I have felt than in the worlds of many of the most hardcore sim GMs with whom I have played. There are GM move [I]suggestions[/I] connected to places, creatures, and items in the setting. These moves are more like "here is some possible crap that could go wrong with X that you can use" rather than "you must do these moves." This was kinda my issue as well. There were some settings that sim-oriented GMs threw their entire selves into making a simulated world, only to end up like the bold and my character (and those of the rest of the party) forgotten in the shuffle. Like it didn't really matter what character I had made for the game or how I roleplayed them. It would have mostly ended up the same. [/QUOTE]

Verification