Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9084219" data-attributes="member: 71699">I feel like you are showing that a group can drive a subset of purposes so hard that they drown out others, and that can likely be done for any subset. Another example that I can think of: a group solely want to play &quot;Arena of Death&quot; where they generate optimised characters and fight deadly encounters one after another in the eponymous arena - and nothing else! It seems very evidently possible for them to leave zero space for protagonism, story creation, investigating subject, and so on (unless the subject is the game's combat system, I guess.)Could I run a simmy version of Stonetop, I'm certain it's possible, and will try it out when I get the books to test that hypothesis. As Eero saysSo, when you run Stonetop in the ways you have described, does it drown out non-nar purposes? You vividly illustrate that the answer is &quot;Yes!&quot; I felt I'd clearly conceded this up-thread, for example when I saidIn using words like &quot;consistently&quot; and &quot;ruthlessly&quot; I meant to evoke instances of play in the region of that you describe. On the other hand, what I also said is that where nar choices fit subject, then those choices will not be jarring to sim. So far as I can see, nothing you said refutes it. There can be instances of play that are not in the region you describe.The vivid case you have presented reinforces that - as I put it - &quot;a group can drive a subset of purposes so hard that they drown out others.&quot; I'm not sure how one would show that drowning out other purposes is inevitable, given the unbounded heterogeneity of play. But I accept that a group can opt into play where it will be; and of course they might prefer the committed roleplaying that could drive.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9084219, member: 71699"] I feel like you are showing that a group can drive a subset of purposes so hard that they drown out others, and that can likely be done for any subset. Another example that I can think of: a group solely want to play "Arena of Death" where they generate optimised characters and fight deadly encounters one after another in the eponymous arena - and nothing else! It seems very evidently possible for them to leave zero space for protagonism, story creation, investigating subject, and so on (unless the subject is the game's combat system, I guess.) Could I run a simmy version of Stonetop, I'm certain it's possible, and will try it out when I get the books to test that hypothesis. As Eero says So, when you run Stonetop in the ways you have described, does it drown out non-nar purposes? You vividly illustrate that the answer is "Yes!" I felt I'd clearly conceded this up-thread, for example when I said In using words like "consistently" and "ruthlessly" I meant to evoke instances of play in the region of that you describe. On the other hand, what I also said is that where nar choices fit subject, then those choices will not be jarring to sim. So far as I can see, nothing you said refutes it. There can be instances of play that are [I]not[/I] in the region you describe. The vivid case you have presented reinforces that - as I put it - "[I]a group can drive a subset of purposes so hard that they drown out others[/I]." I'm not sure how one would show that drowning out other purposes is [I]inevitable[/I], given the unbounded heterogeneity of play. But I accept that a group can opt into play where it will be; and of course they might prefer the committed roleplaying that could drive. [/QUOTE]

Verification