Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 7406842" data-attributes="member: 16586">Here's what I really want to talk about: Playing and Designing with Purpose. The reason I make the distinction between setting design and world building&nbsp; is entirely focused on what the driving force or motivating energy is behind the design. What I really want to discuss is designing to enable active play versus designing to share content for others to appreciate after the fact. When I run a game I my primary responsibility is to frame situations that allow the other players to make consequential decisions that impact the fiction through their characters. The role that setting plays in my games is to provide context for what's happening in the fiction right now. The situation is primary. Setting is secondary and should remain so for my play priorities.When I speak about active play I am really talking about collaborative play, but not in the conch passing or Fate point sense. I am talking about the sort of play environment where we all bring something to the table - characters, setting, prep, whatever. Stuff that we are not all that precious about. Through play of these characters/setting/prep/whatever we get to mess with each others stuff and something that no one could ever plan or would plan comes out simply through skilled play where we advocate for our characters.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Aside: I do not personally have the same issues with being true to your unrevealed prep that&nbsp;&nbsp; [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] does.&nbsp; I think it can enhance play if utilized in a principled manner. What is important to me is that players can reliably discover it and utilize it for their own ends based on their skill at playing the game. I do not want it used as a means to control and shape the narrative, or to purposefully frustrate players, or to carefully choose when and where players allowed to have an impact on the fiction through their characters.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Campbell, post: 7406842, member: 16586"] Here's what I really want to talk about: [B]Playing and Designing with Purpose.[/B] The reason I make the distinction between setting design and world building is entirely focused on what the driving force or motivating energy is behind the design. What I really want to discuss is designing to enable active play versus designing to share content for others to appreciate after the fact. When I run a game I my primary responsibility is to frame situations that allow the other players to make consequential decisions that impact the fiction through their characters. The role that setting plays in my games is to provide context for what's happening in the fiction right now. The situation is primary. Setting is secondary and should remain so for my play priorities. When I speak about active play I am really talking about collaborative play, but not in the conch passing or Fate point sense. I am talking about the sort of play environment where we all bring something to the table - characters, setting, prep, whatever. Stuff that we are not all that precious about. Through play of these characters/setting/prep/whatever we get to mess with each others stuff and something that no one could ever plan or would plan comes out simply through skilled play where we advocate for our characters. [B]Aside:[/B] I do not personally have the same issues with being true to your unrevealed prep that [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] does. I think it can enhance play if utilized in a principled manner. What is important to me is that players can reliably discover it and utilize it for their own ends based on their skill at playing the game. I do not want it used as a means to control and shape the narrative, or to purposefully frustrate players, or to carefully choose when and where players allowed to have an impact on the fiction through their characters. [/QUOTE]

Verification