Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9261861" data-attributes="member: 71699">Why on Earth would I spend time here dishonestly pondering and engaging in conversation about these things?! It sometimes feels like the first thing I have to do is defend my right to interrogate and discuss things that interest me. That's exhausting. What I'm interested in here is the work done by principles. TTRPG designers no longer assume that rules alone will reliably achieve the play they intend.This is somewhat surprising to read, given that it was me who introduced the relevant blogpost with its linked references to this thread. Having read them I felt they were salient. You can see where some of VB's observations cited in the OP came from, in comments by Emily Care. ConsiderThe blogpost I linked in my #2603 draws a distinction between FKR and other forms of principled freeform. I accept Pemerton's view "that FKR is a special case of principled and/or procedural freeform: one in which the principles and procedures centre one participant - the GM/referee - in a distinctive fashion." I know of three examples of extended (years or decades long) GM-d freeform where intense play incorporated the unwelcome and unwanted to all players. In that sort of play, a notable risk is that some occasion of the unwelcome could feel imposed rather than emergent. By contrast, the AM play described appears to be that of GMing for one another (I recall VB saying as much, somewhere). I don't know if that should be seen as GM-less or not: what do you think?VB remarks in one commentI think here that he is still referring to his experiences with AM. Procedure (appoint a GM) can sustain the unwelcome and unwanted for all players (no written rules required.) Recollect that I have suggested counting GM among lusory-means, i.e. consider them in the same light as mechanics. I don't know why, but folk haven't really engaged with this... i.e. that promotion of the unwelcome and unwanted has to be located in the lusory-means, and can only be meaningfully unwelcome/unwanted to players. This is all consistent with remarks I've made elsewhere about game-as-artifact being a tool for fabricating play. In two of the examples I am thinking of, an important GM job was procuring that players escalate their conflicts rather than resolving them in clouds of good will. (PvP has always been on the table for us in freeform... have your experiences been similar?)Looking over the above, I would be delighted to read your contrasting experiences. To start with, what sort of FF have you been engaged in - using the distinctions explained in the <a href="https://rolltodoubt.wordpress.com/2023/12/14/principled-freeform-and-fkr/" target="_blank">blogpost</a>?</blockquote>

Verification