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
Everybody Cheats?
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: 7753644" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Your "however thin" is my point. These weren't stories. The Talisman boardgame has backstory too, but it's not a story. The Warlock of Firetop Mountain has backstory, but it's not a story - it's an exploration-oriented single player wargame.</p><p></p><p>I don't know why you're attributing obviousluy stupid beliefs to me. I'm not, and have never asserted, that all AD&D play followed Gygax's precepts.</p><p></p><p>I'm saying that <em>Gygax's books</em>, which do advocate those precepts, do not advocate a "rule zero" of the type that many in this thread have done.</p><p></p><p>And saying that "exploration serves the same purpose that story serves now", is like saying that cooking (on Master Chef) serves the same purpose as explosions (on Mission Impossible). I mean, I guess so, insofar as people watch Master Chef for cooking and Mission Impossible for explosions, but that doesn't mean we can learn about cooking by reflecting on explosions, nor vice versa.</p><p></p><p>Homogenising all ways of RPGing into some single thing is the antithesis of both serious analysis, and serious understanding of the range of play that is going on in the world.</p><p></p><p>Yes. I quoted that passage upthread well before yuou did. I'm familiar with it. Likewise, in the same passage where he says that allowing victory over wandering monsters by fudging woudl be <em>contrary to the major precepts of the game</em>, he says that a GM can ignore wandering monster rolls in circumstances where players are playing with skill and another encounter with wanderers would be frustrating.</p><p></p><p>Which is my point. Gygax encourages the GM to judiciously modulate content introduction, overriding randmo content generation, in the interests of increasing excitement and reducing frustration (provided said frustration is not the result of bad play, which players are expected to suck up). But he describes fudging a combat outcome, by allowing the PCs an easy victory or unnatural escape, as <em>contrary to the major precepts of the game</em>.</p><p></p><p>To reiterate: no one in this thread, least of all me, is talking about "following the rules without intelligent input". I'm talking about <em>changing outcomes which otherwise would follow from the rules that have been applied</em>.</p><p></p><p>Being <em>about exploration</em> isn't a precept. The precept, clearly, is that skilled play should be rewarded and unskilled player should suffer for it (within the context of the game). Hence Gygax's repeated suggestion (pp 9, 110) that:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">If a party deserves to have these beasties inflicted upon them, that is another matter, but in the example above it is assumed that they are doing everything possible to travel quickly and quietly to their planned destination. . . . When they have done something stupid or have not taken precautions, then let the dice fall where they may!</p><p></p><p>There is nothing magical about that precept. My own RPGing doesn't really adhere to it. But all that means is that I can't find advocacy, of my own approach to RPGing, in Gygax's DMG. Nor can those who adhere to the expansive reading of "rule zero".</p><p></p><p>If the game is a RPG and not a wargame or boardgame, then those conditions will include references to circumstances within the fiction. And then someone will have to make a judgement about the fiction, and the fictional positioining of the PCs. In most traditional RPGing, that person is the GM.</p><p></p><p>This has nothing to do with "rule zero" or fudging.</p><p></p><p>I think that your unfamiliarity with these games is showing in your description of them.</p><p></p><p>There are (at least) two ways of thinking about RPG mechanics. One is that they are a device that the GM might pay regard to in deciding what story to tell the players. Another is that they are devices for allocating (in various more-or-less complex ways) authority over the content and development of the shared fiction. This is not <em>reducing the influence of the GM</em> unless we take the view that the default, for an RPG, is that the GM tells the players whatever story s/he wants. But that has never been the default except perhaps for a period in the late 80s through 90s.</p><p></p><p>Preferring the second approach to mechanics over the first, GM story-telling, approach doesn't mean that one thinks the first is <em>bad</em>. It's not a moral judgement. It's an aesthetic preference - for my part, if I want to be told a story I'll sign on for that, and if I want to play a RPG then I want to have robust mechanics that mean that the game is not one of storytelling.</p><p></p><p>If I signed on for a game of "Gygaxian AD&D", and then found the GM was fudging or doing other stuff <em>contrary to the major precepts of the game</em>, I'd be a bit irritated, for much the same sorts of reasons as if I learned that someone was playing with loaded dice.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7753644, member: 42582"] Your "however thin" is my point. These weren't stories. The Talisman boardgame has backstory too, but it's not a story. The Warlock of Firetop Mountain has backstory, but it's not a story - it's an exploration-oriented single player wargame. I don't know why you're attributing obviousluy stupid beliefs to me. I'm not, and have never asserted, that all AD&D play followed Gygax's precepts. I'm saying that [I]Gygax's books[/I], which do advocate those precepts, do not advocate a "rule zero" of the type that many in this thread have done. And saying that "exploration serves the same purpose that story serves now", is like saying that cooking (on Master Chef) serves the same purpose as explosions (on Mission Impossible). I mean, I guess so, insofar as people watch Master Chef for cooking and Mission Impossible for explosions, but that doesn't mean we can learn about cooking by reflecting on explosions, nor vice versa. Homogenising all ways of RPGing into some single thing is the antithesis of both serious analysis, and serious understanding of the range of play that is going on in the world. Yes. I quoted that passage upthread well before yuou did. I'm familiar with it. Likewise, in the same passage where he says that allowing victory over wandering monsters by fudging woudl be [I]contrary to the major precepts of the game[/I], he says that a GM can ignore wandering monster rolls in circumstances where players are playing with skill and another encounter with wanderers would be frustrating. Which is my point. Gygax encourages the GM to judiciously modulate content introduction, overriding randmo content generation, in the interests of increasing excitement and reducing frustration (provided said frustration is not the result of bad play, which players are expected to suck up). But he describes fudging a combat outcome, by allowing the PCs an easy victory or unnatural escape, as [I]contrary to the major precepts of the game[/I]. To reiterate: no one in this thread, least of all me, is talking about "following the rules without intelligent input". I'm talking about [I]changing outcomes which otherwise would follow from the rules that have been applied[/I]. Being [I]about exploration[/I] isn't a precept. The precept, clearly, is that skilled play should be rewarded and unskilled player should suffer for it (within the context of the game). Hence Gygax's repeated suggestion (pp 9, 110) that: [indent]If a party deserves to have these beasties inflicted upon them, that is another matter, but in the example above it is assumed that they are doing everything possible to travel quickly and quietly to their planned destination. . . . When they have done something stupid or have not taken precautions, then let the dice fall where they may![/indent] There is nothing magical about that precept. My own RPGing doesn't really adhere to it. But all that means is that I can't find advocacy, of my own approach to RPGing, in Gygax's DMG. Nor can those who adhere to the expansive reading of "rule zero". If the game is a RPG and not a wargame or boardgame, then those conditions will include references to circumstances within the fiction. And then someone will have to make a judgement about the fiction, and the fictional positioining of the PCs. In most traditional RPGing, that person is the GM. This has nothing to do with "rule zero" or fudging. I think that your unfamiliarity with these games is showing in your description of them. There are (at least) two ways of thinking about RPG mechanics. One is that they are a device that the GM might pay regard to in deciding what story to tell the players. Another is that they are devices for allocating (in various more-or-less complex ways) authority over the content and development of the shared fiction. This is not [I]reducing the influence of the GM[/I] unless we take the view that the default, for an RPG, is that the GM tells the players whatever story s/he wants. But that has never been the default except perhaps for a period in the late 80s through 90s. Preferring the second approach to mechanics over the first, GM story-telling, approach doesn't mean that one thinks the first is [I]bad[/I]. It's not a moral judgement. It's an aesthetic preference - for my part, if I want to be told a story I'll sign on for that, and if I want to play a RPG then I want to have robust mechanics that mean that the game is not one of storytelling. If I signed on for a game of "Gygaxian AD&D", and then found the GM was fudging or doing other stuff [I]contrary to the major precepts of the game[/I], I'd be a bit irritated, for much the same sorts of reasons as if I learned that someone was playing with loaded dice. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Everybody Cheats?
Top