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 LIVE! 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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Elephant in the room: rogue and fighter dailies.
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: 5927356" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>"Change" in the last sentence here is a bit loaded - from the point of view of those who are playing as Hypersmurf describes, it is not changing the situation but adding to it, amplifying it, or rendering it more precise and detailed.</p><p></p><p>The Burning Wheel Adventure Burner gives a simple example: my guy is fighting in a kitchen, and I want to perform an Assess action to spot a kettle of scalding water. The book suggests that, on a successful Perception check the GM should say yes - not thereby <em>changing</em> the situation, but rendering it more precise in a plausible fashion.</p><p></p><p>This is the BW approach to setting writ small (I'm thinking of the Adventure Burner here). It's an approach I'm a big fan of - the Adventure Burner is the single best GM book I know, and I find it on the whole to be a better help for running 4e than the 4e DMG.</p><p></p><p>Paul Czege talks about the same sort of approach to adjudicating NPC personalities <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=1361" target="_blank">here</a>, and I'm a big fan of that too:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">I frame the character into the middle of conflicts I think will push and pull in ways that are interesting to me and to the player. I keep NPC personalities somewhat unfixed in my mind, allowing me to retroactively justify their behaviors in support of this.</p><p></p><p>Ron Edwards, in his <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/21/" target="_blank">gamism essay</a>, makes the following observation:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Step On Up is actually quite similar, in social and interactive terms, to Story Now. Gamist and Narrativist play often share the following things: </p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">*Common use of player Author Stance (Pawn or non-Pawn) to set up the arena for conflict. This isn't an issue of whether Author (or any) Stance is employed at all, but rather when and for what. </p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">*Fortune-in-the-middle during resolution, to whatever degree - the point is that Exploration as such can be deferred, rather than established at every point during play in a linear fashion. </p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">*More generally, Exploration overall is negotiated in a casual fashion through ongoing dialogue, using system for input (which may be constraining), rather than explicitly delivered by system per se. </p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">*Reward systems that reflect player choices (strategy, aesthetics, whatever) rather than on in-game character logic or on conformity to a pre-stated plan of play.</p><p></p><p>I think this is a pretty good list of the features of 4e that (i) bug the "dissociated mechanics" crowd, (ii) make it appealing to me, and (iii) explain why it can be used as both a light narrativist vehicle (my approach) or a light gamist vehicle ([MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION]'s approach).</p><p></p><p>Whereas part of what I like about Rolemaster over Runequest is that it has certain mechanical points of choice that open a door, however modestly, to player metagame agendas. In action resolution, these are the need to make decisions about how to allocate an overall bonus in melee combat, and how to balance risk vs resource expenditure in spell casting. In character building, these are decisions about how to spend build points every time a level is earned.</p><p></p><p>Runequest does not have the same sorts of choices: attack and defence are separate skills, and all character development is driven and constrained by ingame fictional considerations.</p><p></p><p>For me, 4e does better what I used to do with RM, which is allow a light, mechanically fairly vanilla, narrativism, with a very mechanically heavy resolution and build system of the sort that a fairly conventional roleplayer has grown up on and enjoys deploying. (These same priorities make Burning Wheel look appealing, although the narrativism in BW is obviously a bit less vanilla.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5927356, member: 42582"] "Change" in the last sentence here is a bit loaded - from the point of view of those who are playing as Hypersmurf describes, it is not changing the situation but adding to it, amplifying it, or rendering it more precise and detailed. The Burning Wheel Adventure Burner gives a simple example: my guy is fighting in a kitchen, and I want to perform an Assess action to spot a kettle of scalding water. The book suggests that, on a successful Perception check the GM should say yes - not thereby [I]changing[/I] the situation, but rendering it more precise in a plausible fashion. This is the BW approach to setting writ small (I'm thinking of the Adventure Burner here). It's an approach I'm a big fan of - the Adventure Burner is the single best GM book I know, and I find it on the whole to be a better help for running 4e than the 4e DMG. Paul Czege talks about the same sort of approach to adjudicating NPC personalities [url=http://www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=1361]here[/url], and I'm a big fan of that too: [indent]I frame the character into the middle of conflicts I think will push and pull in ways that are interesting to me and to the player. I keep NPC personalities somewhat unfixed in my mind, allowing me to retroactively justify their behaviors in support of this.[/indent] Ron Edwards, in his [url=http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/21/]gamism essay[/url], makes the following observation: [indent]Step On Up is actually quite similar, in social and interactive terms, to Story Now. Gamist and Narrativist play often share the following things: *Common use of player Author Stance (Pawn or non-Pawn) to set up the arena for conflict. This isn't an issue of whether Author (or any) Stance is employed at all, but rather when and for what. *Fortune-in-the-middle during resolution, to whatever degree - the point is that Exploration as such can be deferred, rather than established at every point during play in a linear fashion. *More generally, Exploration overall is negotiated in a casual fashion through ongoing dialogue, using system for input (which may be constraining), rather than explicitly delivered by system per se. *Reward systems that reflect player choices (strategy, aesthetics, whatever) rather than on in-game character logic or on conformity to a pre-stated plan of play.[/indent] I think this is a pretty good list of the features of 4e that (i) bug the "dissociated mechanics" crowd, (ii) make it appealing to me, and (iii) explain why it can be used as both a light narrativist vehicle (my approach) or a light gamist vehicle ([MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION]'s approach). Whereas part of what I like about Rolemaster over Runequest is that it has certain mechanical points of choice that open a door, however modestly, to player metagame agendas. In action resolution, these are the need to make decisions about how to allocate an overall bonus in melee combat, and how to balance risk vs resource expenditure in spell casting. In character building, these are decisions about how to spend build points every time a level is earned. Runequest does not have the same sorts of choices: attack and defence are separate skills, and all character development is driven and constrained by ingame fictional considerations. For me, 4e does better what I used to do with RM, which is allow a light, mechanically fairly vanilla, narrativism, with a very mechanically heavy resolution and build system of the sort that a fairly conventional roleplayer has grown up on and enjoys deploying. (These same priorities make Burning Wheel look appealing, although the narrativism in BW is obviously a bit less vanilla.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Elephant in the room: rogue and fighter dailies.
Top