[D&D3.0] Zac's examples (split)

Started by Abkajud, November 19, 2011, 01:32:25 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

David Berg

Quote from: Abkajud on November 21, 2011, 08:52:05 PM
David, can you give me an AP (or hypothetical play) example of how
1- such a thing could happen
2- such a thing could be communicated effectively, either before play or during play

Which thing?  

The thing I said was a possible activity, but not CA-coherent RP?  If so, why do you want the example?
here's my blog, discussing Delve, my game in development

Ron Edwards


This isn't a moderator post necessarily, but I hope it has the effect of one ... my problem with this thread is that I don't understand it. I don't think that's an artifact of my splitting it out, either; Zac, I don't understand your opening post, and didn't back when it was in my thread. I'd hoped that getting it into its own thread would clarify that for me, but after 14 replies, that hasn't happened.

Zac, can you please clarify your first post? The first paragraph ends in a fragment, which makes the opening of the second paragraph completely obscure to me as it's clearly supposed to be a logical progression from something. I may be wrong but I think the replies are not really replies, but hunting around for meaning.

Best, Ron


Ron, I agree: the replies are an attempt to hunt for meaning, yeah. That makes sense.

My original purpose was to give an example of incipient Narrativism and a way that it can get shut down - - if a player can't engage in the kind of Exploration that they want to, it's very possible that they won't be able to address theme the way they want to.

On that note, David, the "thing" I was cryptically referring to was:
QuoteI don't see any problem with on person throwing in fictional stuff that no one is allowed to use to address premise.
I was saying that I would like a concrete example of how one could communicate "this is mine! Don't touch it" in play or through play.

Mask of the Emperor rules, admittedly a work in progress - http://abbysgamerbasement.blogspot.com/

David Berg

All I was trying to say was that not every piece of fictional content falls in the "toy that everyone needs access to" category.  For example, sometimes the GM will add background color which, because of the goals of the group, ought to stay background color, instead of (e.g.) being latched onto as premise by players. 

The statement "if one person gets to use that toy to address premise, then we all do" makes sense to me, but that's predicated on the "to address premise" part.
here's my blog, discussing Delve, my game in development