Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CharlesRyan" data-source="post: 5013270" data-attributes="member: 5265">Au contraire.I've posited that most people experience a great similarity between roleplaying and other fictional environments, and their expectations reflect that. If you are going to deliver an experience that diverges from their expectations, and you don't let them know, you shouldn't be surprised by some degree of frustration on your part or theirs.And I've said that if you are frustrated that your players treat your campaign like a story, you should consider the possibility that that's because they want some story in their game.No value judgement one way or the other. I have my own preferences, but who doesn't?I don't see it the same way. There's a whole gamut of experiences that RPGs can deliver that are not a possibility in your play style. Some of the most satisfying and thrilling moments I've experienced in 30 years of gaming (on both sides of the screen) could not happen in a sandbox style game.RC's point (if I may put words in his mouth) is that player agency opens a toolbox of GMing techniques that he (and I presume you) find valuable. My point is that story structure opens a different toolbox. RC and I seem to have reached an accord that both sets are valid, and that they are not even completely mutually exclusive.Your point (again, if I may) seems to be that story structure is A) equals railroading (or at least is inherently more restrictive than sandbox); B) isn't the &quot;true&quot; way to play D&amp;D, because in the old days it was all sandbox all the time; and C) is just an exercise in pretension.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CharlesRyan, post: 5013270, member: 5265"] Au contraire. I've posited that most people experience a great similarity between roleplaying and other fictional environments, and their expectations reflect that. If you are going to deliver an experience that diverges from their expectations, and you don't let them know, you shouldn't be surprised by some degree of frustration on your part or theirs. And I've said that if you are frustrated that your players treat your campaign like a story, you should consider the possibility that that's because they want some story in their game. No value judgement one way or the other. I have my own preferences, but who doesn't? I don't see it the same way. There's a whole gamut of experiences that RPGs can deliver that [I]are not a possibility[/I] in your play style. Some of the most satisfying and thrilling moments I've experienced in 30 years of gaming (on both sides of the screen) [I]could not happen[/I] in a sandbox style game. RC's point (if I may put words in his mouth) is that player agency opens a toolbox of GMing techniques that he (and I presume you) find valuable. My point is that story structure opens a different toolbox. RC and I seem to have reached an accord that both sets are valid, and that they are not even completely mutually exclusive. Your point (again, if I may) seems to be that story structure is A) equals railroading (or at least is inherently more restrictive than sandbox); B) isn't the "true" way to play D&D, because in the old days it was all sandbox all the time; and C) is just an exercise in pretension. [/QUOTE]

Verification