This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The message boards have been upgraded. Please log in to your existing account by clicking here. It will ask twice, so that it can properly update your password and login information. If it has trouble recognizing your password, click the 'Forgot your password?' link to reset it with a new password sent to your email address on file.

Author Topic: Char-Gen and Situation-Gen: The Interface  (Read 1266 times)

TonyLB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • T
  • Posts: 2274
    • View Profile
Char-Gen and Situation-Gen: The Interface
« Reply #30 on: March 25, 2007, 04:17:30 PM »
This may sound a little strange ... but is an Editor who says "No, you cannot add this to the world" just one side of the coin?

Like, you could just as easily say that there is a role in which you are validating the input of your fellow players ... and that the editorial "blocking" that we've been talking about above is a case where you cease to be in that role.

Or, again, you could say that there is a role where you are judging the input of others, and that both blocking and accepting are consequences of that.

I'm not actually trying to make the whole conversation muddier :sweatdrop:  It's just that, once I started thinking about this, I noticed that you can come at the same editorial moment from a lot of different angles, depending on where you sort of "frame the picture" in terms of what other things you think about as well.  Is there a reason to pick the editorial act of saying "No" in preference to some of those other understandings?
Superheroes with heart:  Capes!

The Yann Waters

  • Doesn\'t Hate
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • T
  • Posts: 2691
    • View Profile
Char-Gen and Situation-Gen: The Interface
« Reply #31 on: March 25, 2007, 07:04:49 PM »
Quote from: -E.
But maybe Amber is significantly different: In games I *am* familiar with (GURPS, Hero), the GM has full and final editorial control and can reject any suggested contact, patron, or DNPC or (less dramatically) minimize it's impact on the game by steering the story away from the player-created artifact.
Predictably, I might also point at Nobilis which explicitly expects the rest of the group to take part in creating the world of the game and at the very least cautions the GM to roll with whatever they come up with: "The Hollyhock God arranges most of the game's setting, themes, and inhabitants. It's the players, however, who create the most important person and the most important place in the game: their Imperator and their Chancel."
Previously known by the name of "GrimGent".

Marco

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • M
  • Posts: 336
    • View Profile
    • http://www.jagsrpg.org
Char-Gen and Situation-Gen: The Interface
« Reply #32 on: March 26, 2007, 05:03:33 PM »
Quote from: TonyLB
Is there a reason to pick the editorial act of saying "No" in preference to some of those other understandings?


I think there is. I think it has to do with ownership of the element in question. I beleive there is a fundamentally different act internally between creating and deyning. A person who is responsible for some domain (their character/the world) is behaving differently than someone who is collaborating in the creation of something that is not their domain.

So I think that I have "editor" power over my character when I am a player (trad-game) and when someone makes suggestions in my space, my approach may be very different than if we are just riffing off some commonly shared element (or an element belonging to another person).

If there is a person who must accept, modify, or deny for a specific element, then I think when they are doing that, they are acting as an editor even if their modification of input also has some creative juice to it.

-Marco
JAGS Wonderland, a lavishly illlustrated modern-day horror world book informed by the works of Lewis Carroll. Order it Print-on-demand or get the PDF here free.

Just Released: JAGS Revised Archetypes . Updated, improved, consolidated. Free. Get it here.

James J Skach

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5007
    • View Profile
Char-Gen and Situation-Gen: The Interface
« Reply #33 on: March 27, 2007, 09:14:41 AM »
I think what Tony is asking, however, is if the ownership only consists of saying "No." Can a person saying "Yes" still be an Editor. You're equating Editing with denying.

Is saying "Yes" creating? I tend to agree with Tony's assertion (if I have the right of it) that it's not.

I'd say "Yes" is probably the overwhelming majority of actions the Editor takes. We all only see the "No" because it stands out against the background.
The rules are my slave, not my master. - Old Geezer

The RPG Haven - Talking About RPGs

Marco

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • M
  • Posts: 336
    • View Profile
    • http://www.jagsrpg.org
Char-Gen and Situation-Gen: The Interface
« Reply #34 on: March 27, 2007, 09:50:04 AM »
Correct: Saying "Yes" is Editor in my formulation the same as saying "No." It's the act of using editorial power with editorial intent over an element the player is responsible for that, in my formulation, makes it "Editor."

-Marco
JAGS Wonderland, a lavishly illlustrated modern-day horror world book informed by the works of Lewis Carroll. Order it Print-on-demand or get the PDF here free.

Just Released: JAGS Revised Archetypes . Updated, improved, consolidated. Free. Get it here.

TonyLB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • T
  • Posts: 2274
    • View Profile
Char-Gen and Situation-Gen: The Interface
« Reply #35 on: March 28, 2007, 12:19:00 PM »
So what does that say about the tacit act of saying yes by letting something slide ... affirmation by not contesting something?  Is that still Editor?

Are we getting into an area where we can talk meaningfully about the difference between (1) the GM smiling internally at your stupid plan and letting you go ahead with it because it'll be fun, (2) the GM hating your plan with the passion of a thousand suns, but letting you run long enough that he can squash you like the maggot you are and (3) the GM not even quite registering your plan at all, because he was thinking about cheese?

Those are humorous extremes, but I actually think that kind of distinction is worth investigating.  A new thread, perhaps?
Superheroes with heart:  Capes!