Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8655226" data-attributes="member: 42582">The focus here seems to be on geography: there's a single tunnel with things spread along it.So the linearity is the geography.But there seems to be some other premise at work that I'm not quite getting. Still looking at the dungeon scenario that [USER=7030755]@Malmuria[/USER] linked to, I don't see how each of the dungeon rooms is a scene. Different scenes could happen in the same room: for instance, a Halfling could sneak forward from room 2 to room 4, get spotted by the boss, call for help, and then when their bigger friends come running the pressure plate triggers. Now we've had two different scenes in room 3.I'm still not really getting it. On top of the example I just gave, one group might read all the stuff in room 2 first time through, whereas another group - in a hurry to avoid being ambushed by Goblins - keeps going, but then has to backtrack to try and solve the riddle.This seems to be all about geography. And also seems to equate adventure (as in &quot;linear adventure&quot;) with exploration of the imagined geography. And for the reasons I've give above, I don't really see how geography and scenes are being correlated.This, on the other hand, doesn't seem to have anything to do with maps or geography at all. It seems to be about GMing techniques.This seems like a consensual variation of what you've called &quot;illusionism&quot;. (I'm not sure if you're meaning to use illusionism in the Forge sense or not. If you are, then they had a corresponding bit of jargon for consensual illusionism: participationism. But maybe you're using &quot;illusionism&quot; in some other sense? I'm not sure.)Anyway, as I said I don't really get what people mean by linear adventures and I'm still pretty unclear, as it seems to rest on some distinctions I'm not sensitive to, or some premise I don't get, around the relationship between maps and geography, GM techniques, and exploratory play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8655226, member: 42582"] The focus here seems to be on [i]geography[/i]: there's a single tunnel with things spread along it. So the linearity is the geography. But there seems to be some other premise at work that I'm not quite getting. Still looking at the dungeon scenario that [USER=7030755]@Malmuria[/USER] linked to, I don't see how each of the dungeon rooms is a scene. Different scenes could happen in the same room: for instance, a Halfling could sneak forward from room 2 to room 4, get spotted by the boss, call for help, and then when their bigger friends come running the pressure plate triggers. Now we've had two different scenes in room 3. I'm still not really getting it. On top of the example I just gave, one group might read all the stuff in room 2 first time through, whereas another group - in a hurry to avoid being ambushed by Goblins - keeps going, but then has to backtrack to try and solve the riddle. This seems to be all about geography. And also seems to equate [i]adventure[/i] (as in "linear [i]adventure[/i]") with exploration of the imagined geography. And for the reasons I've give above, I don't really see how [i]geography[/i] and [i]scenes[/i] are being correlated. This, on the other hand, doesn't seem to have anything to do with maps or geography at all. It seems to be about GMing techniques. This seems like a consensual variation of what you've called "illusionism". (I'm not sure if you're meaning to use [i]illusionism[/i] in the Forge sense or not. If you are, then they had a corresponding bit of jargon for consensual illusionism: [i]participationism[/i]. But maybe you're using "illusionism" in some other sense? I'm not sure.) Anyway, as I said I don't really get what people mean by [i]linear adventures[/i] and I'm still pretty unclear, as it seems to rest on some distinctions I'm not sensitive to, or some premise I don't get, around the relationship between maps and geography, GM techniques, and exploratory play. [/QUOTE]

Verification