Why is it a bad thing to optimise?

[ExploderWizard]

Again, how is this not plot? Plot=events or situations (to use Pemerton's term). The keyed encounters in a dungeon are plot. The random encounter table is also plot. These are events that occur during the game that must be resolved.

What?

An orc sitting in a dungeon room is not plot. If I remember correctly one of the biggest complaints about early dungeon modules ( you know those dungeon maps with keyed encounter areas and random tables) was a lack of plot. The modules contained only threats and treasures without any plot.

So now all of sudden these classic adventures are brimming with plot content?

 

[Hussar]

It's really not what I mean at all. Don't say what I mean when you're wrong, please.

As always, play what you like

Really?

The first two quotes of setting are relevant, and instead of carrying the connotation of guidance, carry one of scenery. Setting is the framing of situations, not necessarily with an ending or progression in mind. The second definition even includes all background, such as scenery (landmarks) and properties (social setting, creatures, etc.) of the setting.

While "plot" has connotations of "guidance" or "main story", setting has connotations of "game world" with no such story in mind. I like using the phrase "evolving setting" because of the connotations of each word. Here's evolving:

Sorry, not seeing the difference here. Setting is not the "framing of situations". That's not what the word means. Setting=location. Full stop. As soon as you add situation, then it's not longer setting. And, like it or not, every DM guides the game.

There's a reason setting does not have any connotations of story. That's because setting has nothing to do with the events in the story, beyond supplying the stage and the background scenary.

And, still, no one has answered why a randomly generated landslide is not plot.

 

[pemerton]

I mean, "Evolving setting"? Really? Just step up and say plot. It's exactly what you mean. Event A occurs. For whatever reason, could be DM framed, could be player driven, could be randomly generated, doesn't matter. Event B chains off of Event A because none of us play in a purely abstract game where consequence has no meaning.

Event B might be linear, it might not. Depends on the campaign and what, exactly, Event A was. But, Event B will be tied to Event A.

And, since we're talking about a series of events in a fictional construct, that's plot.

Hussar, I don't disagree with this. But I think all the action, as far as understanding RPGing is concerned, is in the way that Event A is framed, the way that it progesses to Event B, the way that B in turn leads to C, and so on.

Different systems, and different groups, distribute authority for establishing these starting points, and these connections, in different ways. If these differences are ignored, confusion in discussion and comparison will be the result. If attention is paid to these differences, some insight into different playstyles, and the tools that can help them or hinder them, may emerge.

I feel like a bit of a killjoy in saying so, but VB's suggestion that "we're all playing more-or-less the same" I think tends to towards the same sort of obscurity rather than clarity.

 

[Andor]

And, still, no one has answered why a randomly generated landslide is not plot.

plot   /plɒt/ Show Spelled [plot] Show IPA noun, verb, plot·ted, plot·ting.
noun
1. a secret plan or scheme to accomplish some purpose, especially a hostile, unlawful, or evil purpose: a plot to overthrow the government.
2. Also called storyline. the plan, scheme, or main story of a literary or dramatic work, as a play, novel, or short story.
3. a small piece or area of ground: a garden plot; burial plot.
4. a measured piece or parcel of land: a house on a two-acre plot.
5. a plan, map, diagram, or other graphic representation, as of land, a building, etc.
6. a list, timetable, or scheme dealing with any of the various arrangements for the production of a play, motion picture, etc.: According to the property plot, there should be a lamp stage left.
7. a chart showing the course of a craft, as a ship or airplane.
8. Artillery . a point or points located on a map or chart: target plot.
verb (used with object)
9. to plan secretly, especially something hostile or evil: to plot mutiny.
10. to mark on a plan, map, or chart, as the course of a ship or aircraft.
11. to draw a plan or map of, as a tract of land or a building.
12. to divide (land) into plots.
13. to determine and mark (points), as on plotting paper, by means of measurements or coordinates.

If you are using plot as a noun, as you insist, then only definition number 2 suits the discussion.

Is the theme of the campaign surviving landslides? If not, then the landslide is not plot.

Unless it buries someone, then it's definition number 3.

Or they sell the landslide to an interested party, then it's definition number 4.

Otherwise? Plot requires deliberation, as all of the active uses will show you.

A story without a plot is mere noise.

In a sandbox game, the GM does not provide the story, he provides the setting in which the players tell their own story about their characters.

In a normal campaign, the GM provides the story: For example 'The defense of the town of blargh against the invading giants of Zim.' The players take on the role of the main characters in that story, but if they decide to go farm sheep instead the game is de-railed and the campaign ends. In this sort of game a landslide that impacts the story of the defense against the giants is plot, one that does not is mere dressing, or perhaps a sub-plot if it furthers a different goal.

 

[The Shaman]

It's sandbox because my players are exploring their likes and dislikes . . . .

Stop there.

Unless your setting is called the Wilderlands of Likes and Dislikes, this is not a sandbox.


My opinion, your mileage, et cetera.

 

[The Shaman]

A sandbox at its core should be a setting with events that the players react to. Do we agree?

It depends on how you're using "event."

If opening a tomb and encountering animated skeletons qualifies as an "event that the players react to," then perhaps. If not, then no, we don't agree.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Really?

Yes, I really don't want you misrepresenting my view.

Sorry, not seeing the difference here.

You not seeing the difference still doesn't make it okay in my mind for you to tell me what I mean. Because, it's not what I mean. Don't tell me to "step up" and say something the way you think is right, simply because you don't see the difference. The difference is clear to me.

Setting is not the "framing of situations". That's not what the word means. Setting=location. Full stop.

First, I strongly disagree with you cutting off the actual definition in this discussion. It can mean location, but it can include other aspects, as well. I even linked the definition to clear that up.

setting
1. the surroundings in which something is set; scene

You can see in the first definition, it's includes "scene", as well as "the surroundings in which something is set". This does not stop at location, according to the definition. The setting might be, "a train station, with 4 thugs surrounding a frightened couple. The thugs are brandishing weapons, and are looking to get into a fight."

setting
2. (Performing Arts / Theatre) (Performing Arts) the scenery, properties, or background, used to create the location for a stage play, film, etc.

This definition clearly supports the same. In creating the location, you also give scenery (trash cans, litter, etc.), properties (oddities, etc.), and background (thugs surrounding the couple, king of the country mobilizing troops, etc.).

Both definitions include framing a scene, which extends to "framing of situations" such as the thugs and the couple at the train station. The fact that you disagree does in no way give you the right to tell me what I mean. Please don't do that.

The connotation of the word "setting" and that of the word "plot" is clear to me. The former involves framing a scene, while the latter involves guiding it along a narrative path. You don't have to agree. Don't say what I mean.

As soon as you add situation, then it's not longer setting. And, like it or not, every DM guides the game.

Again, you may not be able to see why I disagree. That's fine. Again, please don't tell me what I think, or tell me to "step up" and phrase something the way you want me to because you don't see it, or don't agree with it.

There's a reason setting does not have any connotations of story. That's because setting has nothing to do with the events in the story, beyond supplying the stage and the background scenary.

Basically true, yep. Framing the scene (and the situation the couple finds themselves in), as it were.

And, still, no one has answered why a randomly generated landslide is not plot.

This really depends on its implementation. Added for "story element" as compared to, say, random chance. One is framing a scene (setting), while the other is progressing a story (plot).

As always, play what you like

 

[Hussar]

In a sandbox game, the GM does not provide the story, he provides the setting in which the players tell their own story about their characters.

Ballocks. This is simply not true.

The DM, even in a sandbox game, has total control over everything that is not the PC's right? Unless the DM is doing nothing but reacting to the PC's, he has plots in his game.

And, since when does player generated mean that it's no longer a plot?

 

[Hussar]

Yeah JC, we're not going to agree on this.

Four thugs threatening an old couple is not setting, that's plot. It's an event that's meant to be interacted with.

But, having engaged in more than enough silly buggers dueling dictionaries, I'm going to be smart enough to bow out here.

 

[Paradox]

Optimizing isn't bad. Telling other people how they should optimized thier own character, is.

A friend of mine wanted me to optimize my fighter by taking some levels in ranger. (3e). I wanted just a plain fighter, but because fighters don't get anything at level 5, somehow, this is wrong.

Well, he kept insisting I take some ranger levels, so to keep group harmony, I did. The thing is, I NEVER used any of my ranger abilities. So in the end, the optimizer totally unoptimized my character.

In a later 4e game, I had a warlock. Warlocks have pacts, but you don't HAVE to take powers associated with your pact. For a while, my star pact warlock had an infernal pact power- because I wanted something with fire.

While it's true that the star pact for that level would be "better", I didn't want it.

At some point I changed the infernal power out for a star pact power only because I started to wonder just how many warlocks would I get to play over the years. I may never play one again and I wanted to check out as many powers as I could.