"No, but." "Yes, and."
Friends, the conjunction that has brought the most power to my games is not "but" or "and." It's "because."
"Yes, because" and "No, because" are powerful. They are grounded in the fiction, they /establish/ meaning. They are just harder to wield and require more consensus.
Friends, the conjunction that has brought the most power to my games is not "but" or "and." It's "because."
"Yes, because" and "No, because" are powerful. They are grounded in the fiction, they /establish/ meaning. They are just harder to wield and require more consensus.
Comments
I’ll try and adopt this usage. It’s extremely practical.
2/2
1/2
"Because" points toward the list of things we know and says, "now does any of this work here? Yes? Invoke it. No? Guess it's time to make something up together."
For the kind of writer's room games that I tend to run, it's basically the great equalizer in narrative authority. It would be a lot harder to swing in a game of clear yeses and nos.
No, no.
"Because it reminds me of a ballad I once heard in a smoky tavern and the clever hero did thusly..."
But do not forget 'Because'. Your world gets richer for it.
"Can I read the inscription."
"Yes, you can read the language of Lost Tanelorn because..."
"Oh...uh, because I...uh...maybe I can't."
"That's fine. But if you've got a reason, you can."
I just wake up this way.