Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4e Compared to Trad D&D; What You Lose, What You Gain
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 7528104" data-attributes="member: 6688937"><p>You could make that comparison. But at that level of "parallel", is there any system that couldn't be seen as symmetrical? That is, <em>any</em> system that is going to have the property of taking steps towards conclusion/resolution of the conflict. (or a clock, as PbtA would have it). If two systems are going to be symmetrical, then the methods of taking those steps (and perhaps framing and creating the conflicts in the first place) are going to be identical or nearly so.</p><p></p><p>In this case, I would point to things like movement, conditions, and HP ablation (which creates a degree of success rather binary result) as things that give the combat resolution system much more "volume" than the mechanics for SCs without homologous mechanics on the SC side. I contrast that with Fate. With Fate, in any kind of scene, players have the option of Creating an Advantage, Attacking, Defending, or Overcoming Obstacles; and even the "damage" mechanics from Fate make use of (and can be utilized by players with) the same framework of Aspects that the rest of the game relies upon. Fate does give a bit of a miss to a unified framing mechanic for conflicts and challenges, but that seems an intentional choice to facilitate play more in concert with traditional rpgs. However, its trivial (at least mechanically) for a Fate GM to frame complex challenges as "adversaries" using the bronze rule*, but the rules don't demand it.</p><p></p><p></p><p>*The Bronze rule in Fate basically allows you to construct and use anything as a character.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ratskinner, post: 7528104, member: 6688937"] You could make that comparison. But at that level of "parallel", is there any system that couldn't be seen as symmetrical? That is, [I]any[/I] system that is going to have the property of taking steps towards conclusion/resolution of the conflict. (or a clock, as PbtA would have it). If two systems are going to be symmetrical, then the methods of taking those steps (and perhaps framing and creating the conflicts in the first place) are going to be identical or nearly so. In this case, I would point to things like movement, conditions, and HP ablation (which creates a degree of success rather binary result) as things that give the combat resolution system much more "volume" than the mechanics for SCs without homologous mechanics on the SC side. I contrast that with Fate. With Fate, in any kind of scene, players have the option of Creating an Advantage, Attacking, Defending, or Overcoming Obstacles; and even the "damage" mechanics from Fate make use of (and can be utilized by players with) the same framework of Aspects that the rest of the game relies upon. Fate does give a bit of a miss to a unified framing mechanic for conflicts and challenges, but that seems an intentional choice to facilitate play more in concert with traditional rpgs. However, its trivial (at least mechanically) for a Fate GM to frame complex challenges as "adversaries" using the bronze rule*, but the rules don't demand it. *The Bronze rule in Fate basically allows you to construct and use anything as a character. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4e Compared to Trad D&D; What You Lose, What You Gain
Top