Started by Paolo D., February 24, 2011, 01:02:05 PM
QuoteThat is a totally fair observation, and I agree: the SS text doesn't go into much detail on many specific nuances of Story Guiding. This is largely because I wanted to keep the scope of the text limited, tutorial-like, instead of allowing parts of it like the Story Guiding chapter to expand into independent treatises on their own. Thus there are many places where I say what should be done, but do not explify on how I accomplish these things in detail. Even the Story Guiding chapter is more of a crash course on the duties involved than anything approaching lucid - it does the job for an experienced GM who merely needs to know which of his toolsets to engage for this particular game, and I think it does a reasonable job as an introduction upon which to build from other sources and practice for those who are unfamiliar with this GMing style, but there are definitely things that are left unsaid for simple lack of space.
Quote from: Paolo D. on March 08, 2011, 01:00:12 PMHowever, with my "no safety net in the SS" issue, I'm talking of something that should be part of the minimun instructions required to play the SS safely*, and therefore, that deserves to be part of the core of the SS just like the rules to extend a conflict, to hit a Key or to do any other basic thing.
QuoteI continue harping about this perhaps fatuous-seeming point of postmodern text critique for one simple reason: I am not prepared nor willing to be the tin god against which dogmatic interpretations of the Solar System are backstopped, and therefore I am not comfortable discussing what "should" be said in "the" Solar System game text like it was some unitary canon with weight separate from its contents. That would be wrong not only because this isn't a game I designed in the first place (that would be Clinton, not me), but also because I did not write the Solar System booklet as an official statement on anything. The epistemic context for my SS booklet is that it's a snapshot in time of my then-current thinking regarding the discipline of "playing Solar System", not that it's a thing in itself.If the above seems like an useless nitpick, then that's probably because it is that for this discussion; for me personally the specific nature of "game" as a textual object and a discrete product to be transmitted against the nature of "game" as a practice or discipline has been central when I've developed my understanding of what it means for me to be writing about (not "write a game" but "write about a game", note) a game somebody else has designed, but I freely admit that I might just sound confused for no reason to anybody outside my own head on this topic.
QuoteAll well and good, I'm just stuck on my personal text-analytic obsession about whether it can be said that the game as a social activity can be said to lack something if a particular game text lacks it.