thread: 2011-04-25 : We are creative equals
On 2011-04-26, Paul T. wrote:
Great stuff!
Two questions:
Why (or how) did your freeform game give you a sense of long-term creative intimacy that you think you wouldn't get from a well-designed structured game? (Post #4.)
Why do you think you wouldn't get this sense from a more structured GM-less/GM-ful game that went on for years and years with the same three participants?
Second, you say that this principle "positively defies any more game text"... but I'm sure there are not only content-specific principles which were in play (as you have all contributed in this thread), but also larger-scale Techniques, like Emily's "start a session by asking who's doing what."
Is there some reason that you feel those specifics were not a significant part of your game? The "how" of what you did, I would imagine, would be a pretty significant factor. For instance, would the three of you have been just as capable of creating this game had you, say, tried to do it five years (or ten years) earlier, with far less life experience?
I can see that many of these principles flow logically from the "fundamental principle". But I don't think that means they are tautological: communicating them (as in a game text) hardly seems like a futile endeavour.
What makes you feel that way? (Or let me know if I've completely misread you, on the other hand.)
