Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7401018" data-attributes="member: 29398">Yes, he has. That those instances of play occurred I obviously can't dispute. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />What I can and will dispute is that this sort of play can provide a campaign that is and remains sustainable for the long term (by which I mean anything beyond just a few sessions), without a ridiculous amount of work probably done by the GM to record everything about the setting that comes up in play so as to be consistent should it ever be encountered again.&nbsp;&nbsp; [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] 's game logs - those that we've seen - are exhaustive in their mechanical detail as well as their events recording and probably do give enough info to provide at least some long-term consistency...and in this I maintain that he's so unusual as to possibly be unique. (that's supposed to be a compliment, in case you're wondering!)In the immediate, it can and apparently does provide all three.&nbsp; I dispute that it can continue to do so over time, as things get forgotten or numbers/time/distance/locations shift or morph in ways they shouldn't or things get skipped between scenes that end up needing to be retconned.And note I'm not necessarily suggesting that traditional play (including worldbuilding) doesn't have rocks of its own to run aground on.&nbsp; It does, and over time I think I've probably hit them all. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; But I also think it's got more versatility in what it can do or be made to do in terms of what type-style-length-size of games or campaigns it can support, which gives it the advantage.Lan-&quot;having just said I've hit all the rocks, just watch me find another this weekend&quot;-efan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 7401018, member: 29398"] Yes, he has. That those instances of play occurred I obviously can't dispute. :) What I can and will dispute is that this sort of play can provide a campaign that is and remains sustainable for the long term (by which I mean anything beyond just a few sessions), without a ridiculous amount of work probably done by the GM to record [B]everything[/B] about the setting that comes up in play so as to be consistent should it ever be encountered again. [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] 's game logs - those that we've seen - are exhaustive in their mechanical detail as well as their events recording and probably do give enough info to provide at least some long-term consistency...and in this I maintain that he's so unusual as to possibly be unique. (that's supposed to be a compliment, in case you're wondering!) In the immediate, it can and apparently does provide all three. I dispute that it can continue to do so over time, as things get forgotten or numbers/time/distance/locations shift or morph in ways they shouldn't or things get skipped between scenes that end up needing to be retconned. And note I'm not necessarily suggesting that traditional play (including worldbuilding) doesn't have rocks of its own to run aground on. It does, and over time I think I've probably hit them all. :) But I also think it's got more versatility in what it can do or be made to do in terms of what type-style-length-size of games or campaigns it can support, which gives it the advantage. Lan-"having just said I've hit all the rocks, just watch me find another this weekend"-efan [/QUOTE]

Verification