Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9040872" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think it's a fair statement, in the sense that what you're saying is that - in establishing the scene &quot;After the passage of 10 years, . . . . &quot; - a GM might apply different principles. I don't think one could infer, from the adoption of different principles, anything specific about the content of the fiction. Probably not even if one knew all the parameters of the established fiction. (Beyond trivialities that follow from genre.)How is the passage of fictional time (&quot;X days&quot;) established as a part of the shared fiction?One of the tightest games I know for this is Classic Traveller: jumping between worlds takes a week; time in port between jumps is a week; mortgages and crew salaries must be paid every month; the roll to meet a patron can be made once per week; etc.So Classic Traveller can unfold in a way rather like a &quot;clock&quot;.On the other hand, in Prince Valiant the GM declaring that something will happen in X days (say, a curse will come to fruition after a week, if it is not lifted in some fashion) is just colour. There are no resolution processes or framing processes that take ingame time as an input or generate ingame time as an output. The GM can narrate stormy weather that makes travel near-impossible, or a horse coming down lame, or the roads being clear of bandits such that travel is quick and peaceful, just as they have a mind to.In my experience, a typical traditional D&amp;D game is much closer to Prince Valiant in this respect than to Classic Traveller. An exception might be if the players are resolving a situation primarily via spellcasting, and so are on the clock of rest - rememorise spells - cast spells - repeat. This is part of the significance of spell casting as a mechanic in traditional D&amp;D - it shifts control over the fiction out of the hands of the GM and into the hands of the players. Gygax didn't describe it in those terms, but was clearly aware of the phenomenon. So was Lewis Pulsipher when he wrote that most experienced D&amp;D players prefer to play MUs.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9040872, member: 42582"] I think it's a fair statement, in the sense that what you're saying is that - in establishing the scene "After the passage of 10 years, . . . . " - a GM might apply different principles. I don't think one could infer, from the adoption of different principles, anything specific about the content of the fiction. Probably not even if one knew all the parameters of the established fiction. (Beyond trivialities that follow from genre.) How is the passage of fictional time ("X days") established as a part of the shared fiction? One of the tightest games I know for this is Classic Traveller: jumping between worlds takes a week; time in port between jumps is a week; mortgages and crew salaries must be paid every month; the roll to meet a patron can be made once per week; etc. So Classic Traveller can unfold in a way rather like a "clock". On the other hand, in Prince Valiant the GM declaring that something will happen in X days (say, a curse will come to fruition after a week, if it is not lifted in some fashion) is just colour. There are no resolution processes or framing processes that take ingame time as an input or generate ingame time as an output. The GM can narrate stormy weather that makes travel near-impossible, or a horse coming down lame, or the roads being clear of bandits such that travel is quick and peaceful, just as they have a mind to. In my experience, a typical traditional D&D game is much closer to Prince Valiant in this respect than to Classic Traveller. An exception might be if the players are resolving a situation primarily via spellcasting, and so are on the clock of rest - rememorise spells - cast spells - repeat. This is part of the significance of spell casting as a mechanic in traditional D&D - it shifts control over the fiction out of the hands of the GM and into the hands of the players. Gygax didn't describe it in those terms, but was clearly aware of the phenomenon. So was Lewis Pulsipher when he wrote that most experienced D&D players prefer to play MUs. [/QUOTE]

Verification