Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8668954" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Sure! Again, as I said above to [USER=7025508]@Crimson Longinus[/USER] this tangent of the conversation came about when someone said that social mechanics should not be used. None of us are saying that the method we'd classify as traditional isn't valid. We're just saying why there are other methods and what makes them valid and/or appealing. Those dramatic places are indeed the point. In PbtA and similar games (I think Hillfolk applies here, I'm only familiar with it because you've mentioned it and I looked into it a bit!) everything is meant to be in service to those dramatic points. I'm playing Stonetop (a Dungeon World hack) and my character has Harmony as his instinct. His sense of Harmony is constantly being challenged or brought up during play. Can he find a harmonious solution? Is there something for which he'd set Harmony aside? That's what play is about. Right, but then you are largely creating the criteria that is allowed to work. Talking will only work if they find out about the guard's vice, but they can always stab him! You're narrowing the paths forward. And this isn't necessarily a bad thing, it just is a thing. It has an impact on play. It shifts it more toward &quot;let's figure out the solution the GM has in mind for this&quot; and away from &quot;let's come up with a solution for this&quot;. So I have a question and it is sincere.... do you think this is because most players are perfectly fine to just kind of play along to the GM's story? I don't mean that as an insult. I played that way for many years and loved quite a bit of it. I still play that way at times. Just not all the time. It's a perfectly fun way to play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 8668954, member: 6785785"] Sure! Again, as I said above to [USER=7025508]@Crimson Longinus[/USER] this tangent of the conversation came about when someone said that social mechanics should not be used. None of us are saying that the method we'd classify as traditional isn't valid. We're just saying why there are other methods and what makes them valid and/or appealing. Those dramatic places are indeed the point. In PbtA and similar games (I think Hillfolk applies here, I'm only familiar with it because you've mentioned it and I looked into it a bit!) everything is meant to be in service to those dramatic points. I'm playing Stonetop (a Dungeon World hack) and my character has Harmony as his instinct. His sense of Harmony is constantly being challenged or brought up during play. Can he find a harmonious solution? Is there something for which he'd set Harmony aside? That's what play is about. Right, but then you are largely creating the criteria that is allowed to work. Talking will only work if they find out about the guard's vice, but they can always stab him! You're narrowing the paths forward. And this isn't necessarily a bad thing, it just is a thing. It has an impact on play. It shifts it more toward "let's figure out the solution the GM has in mind for this" and away from "let's come up with a solution for this". So I have a question and it is sincere.... do you think this is because most players are perfectly fine to just kind of play along to the GM's story? I don't mean that as an insult. I played that way for many years and loved quite a bit of it. I still play that way at times. Just not all the time. It's a perfectly fun way to play. [/QUOTE]

Verification