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
Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition
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: 5968200" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I'm not a big fan of the GM having a story. As I posted upthread (I think - some of these threads run together in my memory!) I'm an orthodox Forge-ite when it comes to the GM suspending the action resolution mechanics in the so-called "interests of the story" ie I'm against it.</p><p></p><p>I find it somewhat amusing and ironic to find myself characterised as a "mother may I" GM! (That's not a criticism of you. That's an attempt to communicate the fact that I'm sitting here laughing at myself and the situation.)</p><p></p><p>I'll say more about DC-setting, genre logic and player agency below.</p><p></p><p>This is one way of going. I think I prefer my way.</p><p></p><p>I can think of at least two ways of doing genre logic and DC setting.</p><p></p><p>One combines Nagol and JC's suggested approaches: objective DCs defined upfront, the GM describes the situation, the players choose their PCs' actions.</p><p></p><p>The other is the approach I use in 4e, which reads 4e in the spirit of HeroQuest revised (and feels affirmed in that reading by the fact that Robin Laws cribbed extensive sections of HQrev into the 4e DMG2). The GM describes the situation, the players describe their PC actions, in cases where they seem particularly gonzo or wacky (like the "hands in forge" example) they look to the GM for permission. In all situations in which the GM says yes, DCs are set using level-scaling guidelines.</p><p></p><p>I think the second approach more strongly involves the players in pushing the boundaries of situations, mutually defining what is permitted within the "genre logic" context, etc. Nothing is per se off limits, and if they want to push the boundaries of what has happened before in play, or what the rulebooks suggest (eg the list of stunts included in the Essentials skill descriptions), they only have to talk it through with the GM. Possibilities in play are open-ended, and the comparitive simplicity of the resolution mechanics (a single roll against a level-appropriate DC) tends to prevent "probabibility traps" of the sort [MENTION=43019]keterys[/MENTION] mentioned from arising.</p><p></p><p>Burning Wheel has more definite genre (and genre limitations) built in to the mechanics, and uses different techniques to get the players involved in the pushing-and-shaping stuff (Wises, Circles, relationships, etc).</p><p></p><p>These are different techniques for supporting player agency, and reducing the domination of the GM over the content of the fiction that arises out of play.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5968200, member: 42582"] I'm not a big fan of the GM having a story. As I posted upthread (I think - some of these threads run together in my memory!) I'm an orthodox Forge-ite when it comes to the GM suspending the action resolution mechanics in the so-called "interests of the story" ie I'm against it. I find it somewhat amusing and ironic to find myself characterised as a "mother may I" GM! (That's not a criticism of you. That's an attempt to communicate the fact that I'm sitting here laughing at myself and the situation.) I'll say more about DC-setting, genre logic and player agency below. This is one way of going. I think I prefer my way. I can think of at least two ways of doing genre logic and DC setting. One combines Nagol and JC's suggested approaches: objective DCs defined upfront, the GM describes the situation, the players choose their PCs' actions. The other is the approach I use in 4e, which reads 4e in the spirit of HeroQuest revised (and feels affirmed in that reading by the fact that Robin Laws cribbed extensive sections of HQrev into the 4e DMG2). The GM describes the situation, the players describe their PC actions, in cases where they seem particularly gonzo or wacky (like the "hands in forge" example) they look to the GM for permission. In all situations in which the GM says yes, DCs are set using level-scaling guidelines. I think the second approach more strongly involves the players in pushing the boundaries of situations, mutually defining what is permitted within the "genre logic" context, etc. Nothing is per se off limits, and if they want to push the boundaries of what has happened before in play, or what the rulebooks suggest (eg the list of stunts included in the Essentials skill descriptions), they only have to talk it through with the GM. Possibilities in play are open-ended, and the comparitive simplicity of the resolution mechanics (a single roll against a level-appropriate DC) tends to prevent "probabibility traps" of the sort [MENTION=43019]keterys[/MENTION] mentioned from arising. Burning Wheel has more definite genre (and genre limitations) built in to the mechanics, and uses different techniques to get the players involved in the pushing-and-shaping stuff (Wises, Circles, relationships, etc). These are different techniques for supporting player agency, and reducing the domination of the GM over the content of the fiction that arises out of play. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition
Top