Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9257082" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't know what you mean by this.The following is from Vincent Baker, as quoted in <a href="https://rolltodoubt.wordpress.com/2023/12/14/principled-freeform-and-fkr/" target="_blank">the blog</a>:You can change people’s normal social system with content. “Your character is the captain of a space ship; mine is her first mate.” You can change people’s normal social system with principles. “Your right to say what your character does ends at my character’s skin. You can say your character punches mine, but I get to say how it affects my character.” You can change people’s normal social system with procedural cues. “We roll dice. If you have the highest sum, you get to say what happens.” Procedural cues tell you how to interact, without reference to the content of the fiction you’re creating. You can change people’s normal social system with mediating cues (popularly, mechanics). “When your character does something that would expose her to danger, stop! Roll dice for her ‘I’m craven.’ If the high die is 1-3, she’s too craven to do it.”The blog notes thatLet’s look at that definition of Principled Freeform, or freeform that uses content (the fictional world and premise) and the laws of engagement the players agree. You may notice that it doesn’t mention a GM figure as requirement, nor for it or freeform at large. . . . The rebellion against rulesets as primary source of play and the employment of a technology heavily associated with FKR (description and logic to figure things out) suggests association, as well as resolution procedures on the fly, but in FKR that’s the purview of the referee.Baker doesn't mention the GM, because he is setting out general concepts. A special case of principles is that each participants controls the fiction concerning one character except for the "GM" participant, who controls everyone and everything else. Procedural and mediating cues can also be deployed ad hoc as stipulated by the GM, in such a way as to reinforce this: eg the GM gets to say whatever they want unless another participant whose character is in the scene succeeds at a certain roll, in which case they can say only how their PC escapes/avoids whatever it is the GM is describing.Well, I don't see how it is going to happen otherwise. Principles and procedural cues regulate who can speak, about what. By definition, they don't compel anyone to generate any particular content.</blockquote>

Verification