thread: 2013-10-02 : The GM: Holding the Object for the Group

On 2013-10-07, Rickard wrote:

I know this is not part of the question but is it even fair to say that ?find out what these characters will make of their world? is the object of the game?

I would say "no". It's as vague as to say that the object of the game is to have fun. It's something missing in Vincent's goal, because having a object like that is like pushing the responsibility to make the game work into the participants' laps.

(If I may generalize: roleplaying games are really good at doing this.)

I just realized, is that I find it hard to distinguish object of a game from the object of a character (or group of characters). These are different things, sure, but they should support each other.

I don't agree, actually. I can take it two steps further. The goal of the game can be different for the creator of the game (often a vague one), the game master, the players, and their characters. They can be the same, but they don't have to be.

If Vincent's goal for AW is the one stated above, what's the game master's object? What if a player wants it's character to fail with what it strives for? When all these objects come together, things will happen.

So I don't really agree with what Vincent first stated; that the game master is holding the object of the game for the whole group.


This makes...
short response
optional explanation (be brief!):

if you're human, not a spambot, type "human":