Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9039390" data-attributes="member: 42582">I described it as narrow because it describes just one way of doing RPGing.For instance, perhaps the players establish the setting. Or perhaps all the participants do so together. Perhaps setting is emergent upon action declarations. Or perhaps there is no setting established beyond what is inherent in the game itself (Traveller can be approached like this. So can Prince Valiant and Cthulhu Dark.)Alternatively, the focus may be on situation rather than setting, and again the players might play the key role here. And when it comes the the circumstances in which the characters find themselves, maybe the referee has the key role here, or maybe someone else does - eg a successful Circles check in BW lets the player describe the circumstance (ie as one in which their PC meets the person they were hoping to meet). Classic Traveller Streetwise (1977 edition) is similar to this.Not all declared actions involve GM adjudication. Eg in Marvel Heroic RP and variants, sometimes the player can spend a &quot;plot point&quot; to establish a resource; in Prince Valiant sometimes a player can spend a Storyteller Certificate and narrate a desired effect.The authority structure you set out in your post doesn't describe a good chunk of the RPGing I've done over the past decade.This statement does not entail &quot;the referee describes a setting&quot;. It also uses &quot;genre&quot; as equivalent to setting.I've started Burning Wheel games in which the players build their PCs, establish relationships and reputations and the like, and then the setting has flowed from that.I've started Cthulhu Dark games in which we all agree on a place and time (eg Boston between the wars).These are not examples of &quot;the referee describes a setting&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9039390, member: 42582"] I described it as narrow because it describes just one way of doing RPGing. For instance, perhaps the players establish the setting. Or perhaps all the participants do so together. Perhaps setting is emergent upon action declarations. Or perhaps there is no setting established beyond what is inherent in the game itself (Traveller can be approached like this. So can Prince Valiant and Cthulhu Dark.) Alternatively, the focus may be on situation rather than setting, and again the players might play the key role here. And when it comes the the circumstances in which the characters find themselves, maybe the referee has the key role here, or maybe someone else does - eg a successful Circles check in BW lets the player describe the circumstance (ie as one in which their PC meets the person they were hoping to meet). Classic Traveller Streetwise (1977 edition) is similar to this. Not all declared actions involve GM adjudication. Eg in Marvel Heroic RP and variants, sometimes the player can spend a "plot point" to establish a resource; in Prince Valiant sometimes a player can spend a Storyteller Certificate and narrate a desired effect. The authority structure you set out in your post doesn't describe a good chunk of the RPGing I've done over the past decade. This statement does not entail "the referee describes a setting". It also uses "genre" as equivalent to setting. I've started Burning Wheel games in which the players build their PCs, establish relationships and reputations and the like, and then the setting has flowed from that. I've started Cthulhu Dark games in which we all agree on a place and time (eg Boston between the wars). These are not examples of "the referee describes a setting". [/QUOTE]

Verification