Wherein he goes into the difference between Player driven and GM driven gameplay, and how to break it down. I especially like this quote.

QuoteAngry's Law of Plot Dynamics
GM Driven Adventures provide the players with scenes and events to react to. Player Driven Adventures provide the players with opportunities to plan and resources to use.

http://theangrygm.com/whos-driving-this-adventure-anyway/

QuoteAngry’s Law of Plot Dynamics
GM Driven Adventures provide the players with scenes and events to react to. Player Driven Adventures provide the players with opportunities to plan and resources to use.

False Dichotomy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

ETA: changed to make my response more specific

Quote from: Tod13;930002False Dichotomy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Did you read the article?

Quote from: Ratman_tf;930003Did you read the article?

Yes. My response was to the quotation--I fixed my post to reflect it. But, it is typical for my response to this sort of discussion in general.

Quote from: Tod13;930004Yes. My response was to the quotation--I fixed my post to reflect it. But, it is typical for my response to this sort of discussion in general.

I disagree that it's a false dichotomy. It think it's a helpful generalization.

Yeah. That doesnt read right at all?

QuoteAngry’s Law of Plot Dynamics
GM Driven Adventures provide the players with scenes and events to react to. Player Driven Adventures provide the players with opportunities to plan and resources to use.

Thats essentially the same thing. You would need other qualifiers like sandbox vs story or plot hooks vs railroads or such.

Quote from: Omega;930026Yeah. That doesnt read right at all?

Thats essentially the same thing. You would need other qualifiers like sandbox vs story or plot hooks vs railroads or such.

He's defining GM Driven Adventures as the GM having pre-done scenes and events that the players react to and the GM won't allow anything else to happen.

He's defining Player Driven Adventures as the GM having to do a lot of world building to prepare for anything the players do. (Emphasis added by me.)

My belief is he's defining a false dichotomy. I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority, at least of active posters, on this site. But I'm OK with that.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;929989Another great article from Angry GM

How exactly are you using the word "great" here?

I mean, if we're talking "of a kind characterized by relative largeness," as in 'word count' or 'bombast' or 'concentrated drivel,' then we are in accord.

The GM designs the world and all it's situations, so at the highest level, things are GM-Driven,
But then players choose how to interact with that world, so it's player-driven,
Then the GM, in Playing the World, dynamically adjusts what's happening, so then it's GM-driven,
then the players...etc.

If you're specifically designing for this as a GM that just means you haven't internalized it yet to where it's natural, which means, you still suck.

Quote from: CRKrueger;930035If you're specifically designing for this as a GM that just means you haven't internalized it yet to where it's natural, which means, you still suck.

Mean Green speaks for me.

Shit on toast with cream sauce, I get to use the same C.S. Lewis quote twice in two days.  This time I even looked it up.

"My dear Wormwood,

It seems to me that you take a great many pages to tell a very simple story. "

This guy has the worst case of logorrhea I've seen in years.  More technically, he has diarrhea of the mouth and constipation of the brain.

Most of what he says is, in fact, pure blather.  And what isn't blather is drivel, and that which is neither blather nor drivel is simply wrong.

"I've spilled a lot of virtual ink describing the structure of role-playing adventures. I've talked about how every adventure is just a way of joining up a bunch of scenes and then providing a motivation to push the players and their characters to navigate the scenes until they reach a resolution. Right?"

Wrong.  Horribly wrong in almost every particular.

I really should thank Ratso though for alterting me to yet another self appointed expert to avoid.

He lost me when he didn't know the basic plot of The Hobbit.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;930040This guy has the worst case of logorrhea I've seen in years.  More technically, he has diarrhea of the mouth and constipation of the brain.

Most of what he says is, in fact, pure blather.  And what isn't blather is drivel, and that which is neither blather nor drivel is simply wrong.

Funny story. Opened a ton of different threads on different tabs and thought this was a politics thread — so for a monent there I believed you were talking about the President-Elect.

Quote from: CRKrueger;930035The GM designs the world and all it's situations, so at the highest level, things are GM-Driven,
But then players choose how to interact with that world, so it's player-driven,
Then the GM, in Playing the World, dynamically adjusts what's happening, so then it's GM-driven,
then the players...etc.

If you're specifically designing for this as a GM that just means you haven't internalized it yet to where it's natural, which means, you still suck.

I'm assuming the quote is about differentiating between the "usual" GM-construct games and those where the GM doesn't necessarily design all the world's situations. Or perhaps he means situations where the GM might do the design from an initial player riff. Having switched to the World series of games, I can see that a lot of where the game is going comes from me reacting to the players, though the initial scenario was designed, in large part by me.  

Anyhoo, perhaps that's what that quote's about?  I couldn't say, honestly. It sure feels like "six of one..." I mean a difference which makes no difference...

*shrug* I liked it.