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
*Dungeons & Dragons
Chases, Simplified
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="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6819723" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>No, what you presented is most definitely abstract. It's not most definitely simple. The two often overlap. We worry about fewer details to make things simple. The fewer details we worry about, the more abstract it seems. But in an RPG we have to integrate the fiction with the mechanics, and whenever we do that, if the mechanics don't provide an answer it doesn't matter how abstract the system is, it's not simple.</p><p></p><p>You run into this immediately....</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Bam. Now your abstract system isn't providing you with the answer you want. This is particularly true in the context of your complications system. If you narrate that someone slips and falls down, and that's the reason the party is caught, you've introduced a fiction your system doesn't easily handle. You've now got to translate from one fiction to another. Everyone may at this point have in their mind and entirely different idea about where everyone is at. This is going to be particularly true if party cohesion is breaking down and that chaotic ranged weapon wielder is like, "I never once slipped. I'm at least 20 squares ahead of everyone else!" Now your system amounts to arguing in the metagame over wherever it makes sense for everyone to be. The result isn't simple. Leaving it up to the DM to work it all out without a lot of guidance is not 'simple'. </p><p></p><p>Your making the same mistake a lot of designers do in assuming that if you don't write the rules down, the rules are short and simple. But rules and guidelines that you need to make rulings, but which are not written down but rather left up to 'realism', 'social contract', 'concensus', or 'reasonable' or some other metagame metric are not actually simple.</p><p></p><p>And again, you've hit this multiple times in your discussion of how the rules work. For example:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>"It depends" is not a simple rules system. Does the darkness spell give them an automatic check on the escape box or not? If the answer is, "It depends", or "It's left up to the DM to figure out how to test that proposition, and we are providing no guidelines.", then it's not a simple rules system. It might work for you, because you already have all those answers up in your head without thinking about them and those answers work well for you. But having a bunch of house rules in your head is not the same as having a simple system.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Is it intended to be as exciting as combat? Is it intended to be as engrossing as combat? Is it intended to be as satisfying as combat? </p><p></p><p>Because if the answer to any of that is 'No', based on the old writer's adage that you should skip the boring parts, perhaps you should just do combat instead? If you are going to spend time on it, it should matter as much as combat. Otherwise, use a real simple system like a coin flip.</p><p></p><p>I love that you are considering a chase system. I think that's a great thing to do. I ought to formalize my own rules regarding chases at some point as well. You have some good ideas. All I'm saying is don't mistake 'short on paper' for 'simple in play' much less 'very useful in play'. I think you are falling into some of the same traps as the 4e skill challenge system.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6819723, member: 4937"] No, what you presented is most definitely abstract. It's not most definitely simple. The two often overlap. We worry about fewer details to make things simple. The fewer details we worry about, the more abstract it seems. But in an RPG we have to integrate the fiction with the mechanics, and whenever we do that, if the mechanics don't provide an answer it doesn't matter how abstract the system is, it's not simple. You run into this immediately.... Bam. Now your abstract system isn't providing you with the answer you want. This is particularly true in the context of your complications system. If you narrate that someone slips and falls down, and that's the reason the party is caught, you've introduced a fiction your system doesn't easily handle. You've now got to translate from one fiction to another. Everyone may at this point have in their mind and entirely different idea about where everyone is at. This is going to be particularly true if party cohesion is breaking down and that chaotic ranged weapon wielder is like, "I never once slipped. I'm at least 20 squares ahead of everyone else!" Now your system amounts to arguing in the metagame over wherever it makes sense for everyone to be. The result isn't simple. Leaving it up to the DM to work it all out without a lot of guidance is not 'simple'. Your making the same mistake a lot of designers do in assuming that if you don't write the rules down, the rules are short and simple. But rules and guidelines that you need to make rulings, but which are not written down but rather left up to 'realism', 'social contract', 'concensus', or 'reasonable' or some other metagame metric are not actually simple. And again, you've hit this multiple times in your discussion of how the rules work. For example: "It depends" is not a simple rules system. Does the darkness spell give them an automatic check on the escape box or not? If the answer is, "It depends", or "It's left up to the DM to figure out how to test that proposition, and we are providing no guidelines.", then it's not a simple rules system. It might work for you, because you already have all those answers up in your head without thinking about them and those answers work well for you. But having a bunch of house rules in your head is not the same as having a simple system. Is it intended to be as exciting as combat? Is it intended to be as engrossing as combat? Is it intended to be as satisfying as combat? Because if the answer to any of that is 'No', based on the old writer's adage that you should skip the boring parts, perhaps you should just do combat instead? If you are going to spend time on it, it should matter as much as combat. Otherwise, use a real simple system like a coin flip. I love that you are considering a chase system. I think that's a great thing to do. I ought to formalize my own rules regarding chases at some point as well. You have some good ideas. All I'm saying is don't mistake 'short on paper' for 'simple in play' much less 'very useful in play'. I think you are falling into some of the same traps as the 4e skill challenge system. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Chases, Simplified
Top