Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 9040001" data-attributes="member: 85870">It's completely unrelated to realism, as [USER=82106]@AbdulAlhazred[/USER] and [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] have pointed out.It's the notion that because a GM's processes for introducing fiction include 1, 2, and 3, it means they can pretend that the fiction is no longer arbitrary--i.e., it's no longer &quot;make believe&quot; but something else.That the fiction is somehow categorically transformed into some other non-fictional ur-reality. That there is now a &quot;purity of gamestate&quot; or &quot;living world&quot; or &quot;externality of the game reality&quot; that exists in its own dimension, has become its own objective, observable thing.That the arbitrariness of all past &quot;makings up&quot; is now gone.It's an insidious notion, that fiction made up 10 weeks or 10 years ago --- but never shared with anyone who is now being brought into that fiction via play --- naturally and forever assumes primacy, no matter if it serves no interest of the game other than perceived &quot;realness&quot;.When it's still nothing more than the composite of all the GM's &quot;made up stuff&quot;, regardless of how long ago the &quot;making up&quot;, plus whatever inputs the players have had upon it.*Edit --- 5 years ago I would have been arguing the exact opposite point. I would have denied the arbitrariness of &quot;sim&quot; GM-ing. I would have vehemently argued that GM decisions based on adherence to &quot;naturalism&quot; and &quot;the living world&quot; and &quot;the exigent externalities&quot; are of a different nature/design/character than just &quot;making stuff up.&quot; That &quot;maintaining realism&quot; and &quot;fidelity to the game world&quot; are categorically different from &quot;GM fiction authoring.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 9040001, member: 85870"] It's completely unrelated to realism, as [USER=82106]@AbdulAlhazred[/USER] and [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] have pointed out. It's the notion that because a GM's processes for introducing fiction include 1, 2, and 3, it means they can pretend that the fiction is no longer arbitrary--i.e., it's no longer "make believe" but something else. That the fiction is somehow categorically transformed into some other non-fictional ur-reality. That there is now a "purity of gamestate" or "living world" or "externality of the game reality" that exists in its own dimension, has become its own objective, observable thing. That the arbitrariness of all past "makings up" is now gone. It's an insidious notion, that fiction made up 10 weeks or 10 years ago --- but never shared with anyone who is now being brought into that fiction via play --- naturally and forever assumes primacy, no matter if it serves no interest of the game other than perceived "realness". When it's still nothing more than the composite of all the GM's "made up stuff", regardless of how long ago the "making up", plus whatever inputs the players have had upon it. *Edit --- 5 years ago I would have been arguing the exact opposite point. I would have denied the arbitrariness of "sim" GM-ing. I would have vehemently argued that GM decisions based on adherence to "naturalism" and "the living world" and "the exigent externalities" are of a different nature/design/character than just "making stuff up." That "maintaining realism" and "fidelity to the game world" are categorically different from "GM fiction authoring." [/QUOTE]

Verification