thread: 2011-02-21 : Into the Unknown?
On 2011-03-31, Josh W wrote:
No, I think Dave put a flowchart link in this thread? Yeah he did, search for "desired experience".
I was responding directly to the "GM ad-lib comment", because I think that they involve too quite different thought processes:
Rather than the GM add libbing in responce to the players until he ends up with one of the outcomes, based on what responce he feels is plausible, it seems to me that kind of outcomes system jumps between the player and the GM, so the GM receives the players contribution and reacts to it in terms of those possible responces.
That's as opposed to eventually finding a way to stitch the appropriate consequence onto the end of his responce to the players: Treating them as a target goal for the scene rather than a guide for your responce right now. Didn't actually mention that cos I'm not sure that's what Dave is suggesting!
I've still got a feeling there's still stuff wrong with my flowchart idea:
Leans to much on GM taking the game from each step to each other step, not really what I meant. So how would you get the right back and forth, but stick with that principle?
It seems like you'd have to have both player and GM channels, something like your moves basically! Or some much broader version, and all piped into each other.
But I feel like that is coming from the wrong angle, because I can't see a way to express one of the things I find really good about Delve, the whole "what could happen" "start with a picture of the world" "crazy magic tool use" stuff, in that framework.
