What is the difference between "narrative control" and "shared world building?" Your example of the name of the pub I would normally consider the latter. However I'm now thinking that the "shared world building", at least in this case, is the affect of "the narrative control." I like this, but, where would you get "shared world building" without "narrative control?" I would like to think that it is possible without it being an out of game activity. Also can you have "narrative control" without "world building?" -what would that look like?
Another question: Would you consider your example of the sleepy guard or USB key to be in the same vain as Blades in the Dark's heist mechanic, only for the present? Either way I like it - YOINK!
I think that's a difference in nomenclature more than a difference in concept. However, narrative control without worldbuilding could be as simple as allowing the player to decide what happened to the NPC they just critted rather than having the GM do it. Numenera/Cypher System does this a little withe the open-ended special effects players are granted when they roll a 19 or 20.
I'm only passing familiar with Blades in the Dark, but I would say that it plays heavily with both agency and narrative control. I believe that game plays more with "I would have done this before..." style control, and Stealing Stories for the Devil plays with "I am changing this now..."
Hmmm, what about when a playing a module or "linear" style game where you go from scene to scene and you can't really affect anything other than how you talked your way past the guard or what happened when you crit. It is technically defining a permanent mark on the world but its effectively transient and doesn't matter except in that moment. That seems to be narrative control and not world building. Which makes it a matter of resolution in a way? When a PC's action moves from immediate and transient to permanent and tangibly so? Like the name of the pub. That seems to make time a primary axis of measurement...
I take issue with some people deciding if it is not a sandbox where they can go anywhere and do anything, then they are being railroaded. Its never happened to me back in the day, but I get the impression its more common now.
If the DM spent two weeks writing material for his village, the forest and a dungeon, it is in poor taste if the players decide to choose a far away city on the map and just go there, forcing the DM to adlib and make up stuff with no preparation, and it is not railroading if he or she redirects them to their content.
Obviously experienced DMs, or module designers will be much more flexible with making it feel like a sandbox. But lets face it, preparing professional grade sandbox content allows dozens of options, each with different outcomes increases the work of the DM tenfold.
I certainly didn't mean to imply that anything short of "completely open ended" is "railroading." And I'd even go so far as to say that railroading--in certain instances with certain groups--isn't always bad. When I ran a city-based game in 3rd Edition D&D (called Ptolus), I started out right off the bat saying to the players, "don't leave the city. The city is the campaign." Everyone was fine with that.
What is the difference between "narrative control" and "shared world building?" Your example of the name of the pub I would normally consider the latter. However I'm now thinking that the "shared world building", at least in this case, is the affect of "the narrative control." I like this, but, where would you get "shared world building" without "narrative control?" I would like to think that it is possible without it being an out of game activity. Also can you have "narrative control" without "world building?" -what would that look like?
Another question: Would you consider your example of the sleepy guard or USB key to be in the same vain as Blades in the Dark's heist mechanic, only for the present? Either way I like it - YOINK!
I think that's a difference in nomenclature more than a difference in concept. However, narrative control without worldbuilding could be as simple as allowing the player to decide what happened to the NPC they just critted rather than having the GM do it. Numenera/Cypher System does this a little withe the open-ended special effects players are granted when they roll a 19 or 20.
I'm only passing familiar with Blades in the Dark, but I would say that it plays heavily with both agency and narrative control. I believe that game plays more with "I would have done this before..." style control, and Stealing Stories for the Devil plays with "I am changing this now..."
Hmmm, what about when a playing a module or "linear" style game where you go from scene to scene and you can't really affect anything other than how you talked your way past the guard or what happened when you crit. It is technically defining a permanent mark on the world but its effectively transient and doesn't matter except in that moment. That seems to be narrative control and not world building. Which makes it a matter of resolution in a way? When a PC's action moves from immediate and transient to permanent and tangibly so? Like the name of the pub. That seems to make time a primary axis of measurement...
I take issue with some people deciding if it is not a sandbox where they can go anywhere and do anything, then they are being railroaded. Its never happened to me back in the day, but I get the impression its more common now.
If the DM spent two weeks writing material for his village, the forest and a dungeon, it is in poor taste if the players decide to choose a far away city on the map and just go there, forcing the DM to adlib and make up stuff with no preparation, and it is not railroading if he or she redirects them to their content.
Obviously experienced DMs, or module designers will be much more flexible with making it feel like a sandbox. But lets face it, preparing professional grade sandbox content allows dozens of options, each with different outcomes increases the work of the DM tenfold.
I certainly didn't mean to imply that anything short of "completely open ended" is "railroading." And I'd even go so far as to say that railroading--in certain instances with certain groups--isn't always bad. When I ran a city-based game in 3rd Edition D&D (called Ptolus), I started out right off the bat saying to the players, "don't leave the city. The city is the campaign." Everyone was fine with that.
No I didn't mean you, or this article, I just meant people on forums and reddit do it a lot nowadays.
is that railroading though? i see that more as defining the boundaries of the shared space :)