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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 7568128" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I've posted a few times that my group has had one of it's members AWOL a lot over the past couple of years as he has been buyiing and rebuilding a house. One session where he came along and joined in our Cortex+ game, he was struck by its formal use of the scene and Scene Distinction structure - "Like a film" I think was what he said - although he'd been playing 4e for years and my approach to 4e had been heavily influenced - as you know - by my appreciation of other scene/"story now"-oriented games.</p><p></p><p>Which is to say, I'm agreeing with you about "feel"!</p><p></p><p>I thoiught I'd reply to this in the same post as the above because it touches on some similar points.</p><p></p><p>A first thought: my Google skills are failing me, but I believe a prominent designer (maybe John Harper?) made the point that no one sits down to play poker and starts talking about playing a trump and winning a trick and gathering all the cards up in front of him/her - so why do people approach RPGs like that?</p><p></p><p>A second thought: in the past week or so, in either this thread or its companion one, I commented that some posters post as if there is some a priori notion of <em>what it is to play a RPG</em>, and then read system details, techniques etc through that prism. Which is (I would say) exactly what you are pointing to. And as [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] has pointed out, it's what Ron Edwards was disagreeing with 15+ years ago in his "System Matters" essays.</p><p></p><p>And, indeed, you can see it right here:</p><p></p><p>First, we see the move from <em>the open nature of RPGs</em> to <em>tinkering with rules</em>. This already assumes a certain sort of game design - subsystem based, with the subsystems reflecting various sorts of activities identified by categories of inficiton task. As per my conversation with [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION] upthread, classic D&D and Classic Traveller both exemplify this sort of design, though - in my view, for the reasons I explained - I find Traveller more successful.</p><p></p><p>But as soon as we look at a different sort of game design - say, Fate or Cortex+ Heroic - we see that the subsystems in those games are <em>not</em> defined by reference to inficiton tasks but rather by reference to narrative or mechanical (typically the two are closely related) function. I can't remember all the Fate categories (I think there are 4) but they include Overcome an Obstacle and Create an Advantage (or stuff along those lines). In MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic there is Inflict Stress, Inflict Complication, Create Asset, or Step Bac a Trait (which includes Recovery actions). And every action that can be declared falls into one of those categories. So when a player comes up with a novel idea (<em>I read the rune to see if they tell us where we are in the dungeon</em>) that doesn't require a novel subystem, as that is easily resolved as an attempt to Step Back a Trait (namely, recovery from the Lost in the Dungeon complication).</p><p></p><p>Second, we see the claim about <em>applying various playstyles to any given game</em>. This may be true as a descriptive matter, but that doesn't make it a good idea. A fortiori, the fact that RPGs are open-ended in their permitted moves doesn't make it a good idea to try and use (say) Cortex+ Heroic to play a Gygaxian skilled-play game. And furthermore, "any given game" here means D&D, perhaps GURPS/HERO, maybe Rolemaster or Runequest. Whereas I don't think many people actually <em>are</em> applying "various playstyles" to Cortex+ Heroic, trying to use it to run a ToH-type dungeon crawl; or to Torchbearer, trying to use it to run a 4e-type romp.</p><p></p><p>Returning to more general points: the reason RPG are "open ended" in their moves is because they involve a shared fiction as an essential element of and focus of play. Hence the permitted moves are as varies as will make sense in that shared fiction. But how far does this take us in telling us <em>why we play RPGs</em>, or <em>what sorts of things this type of game is good for</em>? My view is that it doesn't take us far at all. There are any number of reasons we might care to spend time with our friends and establishing and changing a shared fiction; and so any number of possible designs for RPGing, reflecting differences both of goal and of procedure.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7568128, member: 42582"] I've posted a few times that my group has had one of it's members AWOL a lot over the past couple of years as he has been buyiing and rebuilding a house. One session where he came along and joined in our Cortex+ game, he was struck by its formal use of the scene and Scene Distinction structure - "Like a film" I think was what he said - although he'd been playing 4e for years and my approach to 4e had been heavily influenced - as you know - by my appreciation of other scene/"story now"-oriented games. Which is to say, I'm agreeing with you about "feel"! I thoiught I'd reply to this in the same post as the above because it touches on some similar points. A first thought: my Google skills are failing me, but I believe a prominent designer (maybe John Harper?) made the point that no one sits down to play poker and starts talking about playing a trump and winning a trick and gathering all the cards up in front of him/her - so why do people approach RPGs like that? A second thought: in the past week or so, in either this thread or its companion one, I commented that some posters post as if there is some a priori notion of [I]what it is to play a RPG[/I], and then read system details, techniques etc through that prism. Which is (I would say) exactly what you are pointing to. And as [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] has pointed out, it's what Ron Edwards was disagreeing with 15+ years ago in his "System Matters" essays. And, indeed, you can see it right here: First, we see the move from [i]the open nature of RPGs[/I] to [I]tinkering with rules[/I]. This already assumes a certain sort of game design - subsystem based, with the subsystems reflecting various sorts of activities identified by categories of inficiton task. As per my conversation with [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION] upthread, classic D&D and Classic Traveller both exemplify this sort of design, though - in my view, for the reasons I explained - I find Traveller more successful. But as soon as we look at a different sort of game design - say, Fate or Cortex+ Heroic - we see that the subsystems in those games are [I]not[/I] defined by reference to inficiton tasks but rather by reference to narrative or mechanical (typically the two are closely related) function. I can't remember all the Fate categories (I think there are 4) but they include Overcome an Obstacle and Create an Advantage (or stuff along those lines). In MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic there is Inflict Stress, Inflict Complication, Create Asset, or Step Bac a Trait (which includes Recovery actions). And every action that can be declared falls into one of those categories. So when a player comes up with a novel idea ([I]I read the rune to see if they tell us where we are in the dungeon[/I]) that doesn't require a novel subystem, as that is easily resolved as an attempt to Step Back a Trait (namely, recovery from the Lost in the Dungeon complication). Second, we see the claim about [i]applying various playstyles to any given game[/i]. This may be true as a descriptive matter, but that doesn't make it a good idea. A fortiori, the fact that RPGs are open-ended in their permitted moves doesn't make it a good idea to try and use (say) Cortex+ Heroic to play a Gygaxian skilled-play game. And furthermore, "any given game" here means D&D, perhaps GURPS/HERO, maybe Rolemaster or Runequest. Whereas I don't think many people actually [I]are[/I] applying "various playstyles" to Cortex+ Heroic, trying to use it to run a ToH-type dungeon crawl; or to Torchbearer, trying to use it to run a 4e-type romp. Returning to more general points: the reason RPG are "open ended" in their moves is because they involve a shared fiction as an essential element of and focus of play. Hence the permitted moves are as varies as will make sense in that shared fiction. But how far does this take us in telling us [I]why we play RPGs[/I], or [I]what sorts of things this type of game is good for[/I]? My view is that it doesn't take us far at all. There are any number of reasons we might care to spend time with our friends and establishing and changing a shared fiction; and so any number of possible designs for RPGing, reflecting differences both of goal and of procedure. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
Top