Quote from: mcbobbo;626470I don't give two shits about your pissing contest, so please don't drag me into that.

*YOU* dragged yourself into it by jumping on a replay I made to him.

Seriously, dude. Be aware of your own actions.

Quote from: mcbobbo;626470Remember, I brought up Gygax, and I did so specifically to corner your position on whether or not he is a representitive sample of a 'good GM' for a 'traditional RPG'.

And Benoist brought up a 26 year old book.

I gave my position on what a good GM is, and I gave my opinion on what Gygax would think of it in recent times. I think that rather ends my interest in the subject.

Quote from: The Traveller;626382Well you can't really decide how to achieve something until you've fully decided what you want to achieve first. That's one of the places we're trying to get to here. Also and importantly a clear, succinct definition of what a GM is rather than reaching for one or two of the hats a GM wears will be handy in getting new gamers on board.

Well I can't argue with that kind of logic.

Looking forward to the companion thread then.

Quote from: Catelf;626542"In my view" ... I love those words in cases like this, ....

I'm not sure wether to agree with you or not, because i, as a GM, prefer to use a setting that i already has made up, i already have a sandbox, but sometimes i need to define it further, with plots, NPC's ... and things the Characters only will encounter if they walk down that specific alley, and opens that specific door ... and similar, that will later have effects on the characters if they stay in the area or goes away but comes back just in time ...
Like ...
Someone is ordered to spy on the characters in a city, but that spy is brutally murdered by a serial killer that roams the city for the time being. The characters sleeps at an inn, but the door to the winecellar also leads to the rooms where a Necromancer is planning to raise all the recently dead in the area ... and so on.

So to me, story is very much important, but since i tend to use a sandbox, you may be right as well ...
Hmm ...

What I mean by "plot vs. premise", elucidated further, is sort of that you can define a point A and point B, and let the players find their way in between, and that's fine.

But when you define points C, D, E, and so forth and expect the players to follow each one in turn, they're either not going to do it, or they're going to have to be forced to follow them.  In the former, the GM has wasted his time, and in the latter, the players are miserable because their characters have no freedom.

So you can say, "Here is the dungeon, and there's a thing somewhere in here you should find for the king," but after they get in there all bets should be off, and there should be plenty of paths for the characters to follow on their way to the MacGuffin or whatever.

Quote from: gleichman;626543*YOU* dragged yourself into it by jumping on a replay I made to him.

Seriously, dude. Be aware of your own actions.




And Benoist brought up a 26 year old book.

I gave my position on what a good GM is, and I gave my opinion on what Gygax would think of it in recent times. I think that rather ends my interest in the subject.

Is your dodge skill maxed, or did you roll a natural 20?

Quote from: J Arcane;626513the core tenets of my opinion on the matter can be summed up in two phrases: "Premise is better than plot," and "The GM is a world builder, not a storyteller."

I understood what you meant, and I can get behind both of those.

Quote from: mcbobbo;626607Is your dodge skill maxed, or did you roll a natural 20?

You asked the question, and I gave you a truthful and complete answer. It was to be expected that it didn't make you happy as you really weren't interested in getting the truth- just scoring points.

Quote from: gleichman;626611You asked the question, and I gave you a truthful and complete answer. It was to be expected that it didn't make you happy as you really weren't interested in getting the truth- just scoring points.

Mirror mirror - you're projecting.

Your words:

Quote from: gleichman;625866In a traditional PnP RPG:

- The GM must ensure that both the NPCs and the PCs follow all the rules of the game (referee)

Gary's words:

Quote from: DMG 1E Pg 230IT IS THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME, NOT THE LETTER OF THE RULES, WHICH IS IMPORTANT. NEVER HOLD TO THE LETTER WRITTEN, NOR ALLOW SOME BARRACKS ROOM LAWYER TO FORCE QUOTATIONS FROM THE RULE BOOK UPON YOU, IF IT GOES AGAINST THE OBVIOUS INTENT OF THE GAME. AS YOU HEW THE LINE WITH RESPECT TO CONFORMITY TO MAJOR SYSTEMS AND UNIFORMITY OF PLAY IN GENERAL, ALSO BE CERTAIN THE GAME IS MASTERED BY YOU AND NOT BY YOUR PLAYERS. WITHIN THE BROAD PARAMETERS GIVEN IN THE ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS VOLUMES, YOU ARE CREATOR AND FINAL ARBITER. BY ORDERING THINGS AS THEY SHOULD BE, THE GAME AS A WHOLE FIRST, YOUR CAMPAIGN NEXT, AND YOUR PARTICIPANTS THEREAFTER, YOU WILL BE PLAYING ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS AS IT WAS MEANT TO BE. MAY YOU FIND AS MUCH PLEASURE IN SO DOING AS THE REST OF US DO!

I like this one as well...

Quote"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own."

And this one...

Quote"Send anyone claiming that their RPG activity is an art form my way, and I'll gladly stick a pin in their head and deflate it just to have the satisfaction of the popping sound that makes.

One might play a game artfully, but that makes neither the game nor its play art."

With all respect to tradition, the 'art' of being a GM is nothing as close to cut and dried as you represent it to be.

Quote from: mcbobbo;626663With all respect to tradition, the 'art' of being a GM is nothing as close to cut and dried as you represent it to be.

Quote the old books all you want, I content with how Mr. Gygax viewed the concepts I've put forth.

Quote from: gleichman;626668Quote the old books all you want, I content with how Mr. Gygax viewed the concepts I've put forth.

As you wish.  Take care to make no claim over anything but forum combat in the future, though, if you're going to retreat to such a shitty intellectual position.

I thought maybe we might talk about games.

Quote from: mcbobbo;626672As you wish.  Take care to make no claim over anything but forum combat in the future, though, if you're going to retreat to such a shitty intellectual position.

Little child, you have no idea what you're talking about. If I had any respect or even a faint hope you were capable of learning something- I'd explain your error.

But I don't waste my time on fools.

Quote from: J Arcane;626513In general though, the core tenets of my opinion on the matter can be summed up in two phrases: "Premise is better than plot," and "The GM is a world builder, not a storyteller."

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;626608I understood what you meant, and I can get behind both of those.

Great stuff, boiled right down to the essentials.  

Quote from: gleichman;626674Little child, you have no idea what you're talking about. If I had any respect or even a faint hope you were capable of learning something- I'd explain your error.

But I don't waste my time on fools.

Quote from: J Arcane;626580What I mean by "plot vs. premise", elucidated further, is sort of that you can define a point A and point B, and let the players find their way in between, and that's fine.
-----
So you can say, "Here is the dungeon, and there's a thing somewhere in here you should find for the king," but after they get in there all bets should be off, and there should be plenty of paths for the characters to follow on their way to the MacGuffin or whatever.

Hm, i think that i what i call "plot", you call "premise" ....
I have always had problems understanding what "premise" really meant ... or the problems arose when i first joined the Forge ...

To me, a plot do not always have to be followed, especially not if one does it "sandbox-style" ... and clearly not when i'm the GM.
But you say that's really the "premise" ....
I think premise means "situation that holds requirements" ... oh no, i think i just made the understanding worse this time ...
Sorry, i have no idea how to express it in a good way at the moment.
I seem to agree with you though, just that i seem to use the word "plot" as you use "premise" ...
:huhsign::confused:

Quote from: Catelf;626807Hm, i think that i what i call "plot", you call "premise" ....
I have always had problems understanding what "premise" really meant ... or the problems arose when i first joined the Forge ...

To me, a plot do not always have to be followed, especially not if one does it "sandbox-style" ... and clearly not when i'm the GM.
But you say that's really the "premise" ....
I think premise means "situation that holds requirements" ... oh no, i think i just made the understanding worse this time ...
Sorry, i have no idea how to express it in a good way at the moment.
I seem to agree with you though, just that i seem to use the word "plot" as you use "premise" ...
:huhsign::confused:

I think the important point is that a premise (or plot if you like) can have a "default path" - a path which events will take absent the PCs' involvement.  And if they waltz in, take stock of events, shrug their shoulders and walk away, that's what will happen.  But if PCs actually take an interest, that's a catalyst that can change everything.  It's when GMs fall in love with their "storylines", and wish to protect them from being befouled by PC action, that you run into trouble.  For me (and, I think, many here) the term "premise" (or "scenario") is clear, where "plot" or "story" is less so.

Quote from: gleichman;626541It's that.

One of the greatest faults of mankind is their ability to ignore the sins of people who believe as they do. And who I might add, they share those same sins with.

Again, applying the concept of "sins" to discussing roleplaying games suggests to  me that you really take this stuff way too seriously.  Do you think people are "sinners" for not playing Monopoly the way you like? Even if I ascribed to the Judeo-Christian concept of sin as part of my worldview (which I don't), calling people who have differing ideas on how to play games than I do "sinners" would suggest a Kirk Cameron-level of fanaticism and self-absorption

Quote from: DestroyYouAlot;626811I think the important point is that a premise (or plot if you like) can have a "default path" - a path which events will take absent the PCs' involvement.  And if they waltz in, take stock of events, shrug their shoulders and walk away, that's what will happen.  But if PCs actually take an interest, that's a catalyst that can change everything.  It's when GMs fall in love with their "storylines", and wish to protect them from being befouled by PC action, that you run into trouble.  For me (and, I think, many here) the term "premise" (or "scenario") is clear, where "plot" or "story" is less so.

Ah, Scenario!
That is something that i understand fully.... i think.
And yes, i do think all plots, scenarios, and so on should have default paths, not only makes it the Players happier to not having to be forced into a set or semi-set story, it also makes the world seem "alive", in a way.

Hm, it seems i use "story" different as well:
The reasoning you just gave, gives me the impression that people here see "Story" as "Enforced Story", while i see "Story" as ... the paths that may be taken when the players encouter the plots ... or the premises ... or scenarios, no matter whether they decide to affect the plot/storyline or not ...

Hm, i think that is one of the things that really troubled me when i was on the Forge, i used the words to my understanding ... and they meant something else.
..... I hate when people that is supposed to be using the same language really doesn't ... but it also pleases me when understanding is finally reached, like now.
The differences in the same language still annoys me, though.

Oh, and thank you for explaining.
:thanx: