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
*TTRPGs General
A thought about Social Mechanics
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="Emberashh" data-source="post: 9200675" data-attributes="member: 7040941"><p>Emergence doesn't rely on explicitly written rules. They're things that <em>emerge</em> from the game as designed. </p><p></p><p>I really can't simplify that. Emergent gameplay isn't written into the game because it fundamentally can't be; it wouldn't be emergent if it was. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Acting has nothing to do with anything I'm talking about. Referring to Improv =/= acting. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ie the same thing Im saying. Its an <em>emergent</em> problem resulting from the game's design centering almost entirely on task-based resolution which then interacts with the expectation of in-character improv being utilized during social interaction, which regardless of whether its explicitly written into the game or not, <em>is</em> an endemic expectation of the hobby, whether one likes it or not. </p><p></p><p>This topic and the idea in the OP revolves around the premise of addressing the problem in a context that assumes doing both variants (improv + roll, as physical actions representing a combination of player and character skill) are both going to be and are desirable to have as part of the game. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This was already explained in the OP. A failed roll making otherwise good improv pointless, not just in terms of invalidating player skill but also in depressing the desire to roleplay the interaction at all. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That isn't the two ideas combining, you're just describing a procedure that puts one before the other. </p><p></p><p>There is no way to reconcile the simultaneous application of player skill and character skill in games like this that isn't either A) not using them simultaneously or B) making up houserules. </p><p></p><p>The games were not designed for this.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Which again has a high probability of conflicting with what was actually said. </p><p></p><p>It occurs to me that you don't seem to be picking up on the idea that the problem is in an emergent contradiction, where a person recognizes what they said would under no reasonable circumstance be the same thing as rolling a nat 1 or any other number that counts as a failure. </p><p></p><p>The point here is to eliminate the possibility of contradiction. Both are utilized simultaneously, and failure rests in the other person's reaction to what was said, which is mechanized through a combination of classic character skill mechanics and a new, independent system to grade improv and incorporate the numbers for both into a target number for the target to save against. </p><p></p><p>This by the way, more closely models in the broad strokes how real social interactions work. </p><p></p><p>One could be presenting an idea to fix a specific problem people have, and someone else on hearing their arguments could fundamentally reject their premise and never come around, and it doesn't even have to be because the person speaking is unskilled. It could just be because the other person just doesn't want to agree, and no amount of applied skill is going to change that. </p><p></p><p>Either way the outcome goes, it doesn't reflect on their attempts. Only they can decide if a lack of skill is the problem or not. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Idk, considering that isn't the dynamic that was presented in the example nor any that Ive posted.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Emberashh, post: 9200675, member: 7040941"] Emergence doesn't rely on explicitly written rules. They're things that [I]emerge[/I] from the game as designed. I really can't simplify that. Emergent gameplay isn't written into the game because it fundamentally can't be; it wouldn't be emergent if it was. Acting has nothing to do with anything I'm talking about. Referring to Improv =/= acting. Ie the same thing Im saying. Its an [I]emergent[/I] problem resulting from the game's design centering almost entirely on task-based resolution which then interacts with the expectation of in-character improv being utilized during social interaction, which regardless of whether its explicitly written into the game or not, [I]is[/I] an endemic expectation of the hobby, whether one likes it or not. This topic and the idea in the OP revolves around the premise of addressing the problem in a context that assumes doing both variants (improv + roll, as physical actions representing a combination of player and character skill) are both going to be and are desirable to have as part of the game. This was already explained in the OP. A failed roll making otherwise good improv pointless, not just in terms of invalidating player skill but also in depressing the desire to roleplay the interaction at all. That isn't the two ideas combining, you're just describing a procedure that puts one before the other. There is no way to reconcile the simultaneous application of player skill and character skill in games like this that isn't either A) not using them simultaneously or B) making up houserules. The games were not designed for this. Which again has a high probability of conflicting with what was actually said. It occurs to me that you don't seem to be picking up on the idea that the problem is in an emergent contradiction, where a person recognizes what they said would under no reasonable circumstance be the same thing as rolling a nat 1 or any other number that counts as a failure. The point here is to eliminate the possibility of contradiction. Both are utilized simultaneously, and failure rests in the other person's reaction to what was said, which is mechanized through a combination of classic character skill mechanics and a new, independent system to grade improv and incorporate the numbers for both into a target number for the target to save against. This by the way, more closely models in the broad strokes how real social interactions work. One could be presenting an idea to fix a specific problem people have, and someone else on hearing their arguments could fundamentally reject their premise and never come around, and it doesn't even have to be because the person speaking is unskilled. It could just be because the other person just doesn't want to agree, and no amount of applied skill is going to change that. Either way the outcome goes, it doesn't reflect on their attempts. Only they can decide if a lack of skill is the problem or not. Idk, considering that isn't the dynamic that was presented in the example nor any that Ive posted. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A thought about Social Mechanics
Top