Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 7402327" data-attributes="member: 23751">That isn't what I said, though.&nbsp; I said there was no term &quot;setting building&quot;,&nbsp; not that world building and setting were the same.&nbsp; World building is the act.&nbsp; Setting is the result.&nbsp; This applies whether you are world building as you go along, or if you prepare it in advance.&nbsp; I don't agree with this.&nbsp; First, a shared setting can exist in the minds of multiple people outside of the duration of the sharing(game play).&nbsp; Second, I can share something I own, so even if the DM did own it, which I don't agree with, setting can still be a shared thing.I don't agree that it removes those distinctions.&nbsp; When designing a building, the architect still has to design floors, and arches, and more.&nbsp; Those sub-categories building design still have meaning.&nbsp; The same with scenario design and adventure design.&nbsp; I leave out setting design, because that's the actual world building, with setting being the result.It has the same independent existence that world design has.&nbsp; It independently exists in the minds of all who share it.&nbsp; Every person can recall at any time what happened and go over things in their heads, not just during game play.&nbsp; I don't need to call a Banana Split shared ice cream in order to understand that it is a shared desert.I have conversations with people who use shared fiction all the time.&nbsp; I understand that it means the same thing as my terminology does.&nbsp;&nbsp; You call it shared fiction.&nbsp; I call it a game world.&nbsp; It's the exact same thing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 7402327, member: 23751"] That isn't what I said, though. I said there was no term "setting building", not that world building and setting were the same. World building is the act. Setting is the result. This applies whether you are world building as you go along, or if you prepare it in advance. I don't agree with this. First, a shared setting can exist in the minds of multiple people outside of the duration of the sharing(game play). Second, I can share something I own, so even if the DM did own it, which I don't agree with, setting can still be a shared thing. I don't agree that it removes those distinctions. When designing a building, the architect still has to design floors, and arches, and more. Those sub-categories building design still have meaning. The same with scenario design and adventure design. I leave out setting design, because that's the actual world building, with setting being the result. It has the same independent existence that world design has. It independently exists in the minds of all who share it. Every person can recall at any time what happened and go over things in their heads, not just during game play. I don't need to call a Banana Split shared ice cream in order to understand that it is a shared desert. I have conversations with people who use shared fiction all the time. I understand that it means the same thing as my terminology does. You call it shared fiction. I call it a game world. It's the exact same thing. [/QUOTE]

Verification