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 coming! 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
*TTRPGs General
G/N/S epiphany
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: 9250880" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>System mastery is one manifestation of "step on up" <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/21/" target="_blank">as Edwards uses that phrase</a>. To quote:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">[Gamism] operates at two levels: the real, social people and the imaginative, in-game situation.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">1. The players, armed with their understanding of the game and their strategic acumen, have to <strong>Step On Up</strong>. Step On Up requires strategizing, guts, and performance from the real people in the real world. This is the inherent "meaning" or agenda of Gamist play (analogous to the Dream in Simulationist play).</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Gamist play, socially speaking, demands <em>performance with risk</em>, conducted and perceived by the people at the table. What's actually at risk can vary - for this level, though, it must be a social, real-people thing, usually a minor amount of recognition or esteem. The commitment to, or willingness to accept this risk is the key - it's analogous to committing to the sincerity of The Dream for Simulationist play. This is the whole core of the essay, that such a commitment is fun and perfectly viable for role-playing, just as it's viable for nearly any other sphere of human activity.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">2. The in-game characters, armed with their skills, priorities, and so on, have to face a <strong>Challenge</strong>, which is to say, a specific Situation in the imaginary game-world. Challenge is about the strategizing, guts, and performance of the characters in this imaginary game-world.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">For the characters, it's a risky situation in the game-world; in addition to that all-important risk, it can be as fabulous, elaborate, and thematic as any other sort of role-playing. Challenge is merely plain old Situation - it only gets a new name because of the necessary attention it must receive in Gamist play. Strategizing in and among the Challenge is the material, or arena, for whatever brand of Step On Up is operating.</p> </p><p></p><p>In the essay, he goes on to discuss the extent to which competition can be high or low at level 1, or level 2, or both, or neither. The following summarises rather than quotes:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">*High competition among players, but not PCs, is team-based play with individual XP or other rewards (some classic D&D; Agon 2e);</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">*Low competition among players, but high among PCs, would be low-stakes intra-party scheming play (perhaps some Paranoia?);</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">*Both low would be team-based play with group XP or similar (eg some classic D&D tournament play, or a similar approach to a modern AP);</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">*Both high is competition among the PCs that translates into genuine competition among players, analogous to a wargame but via the RPG vehicle - a lot of D&Ders would see this as pretty munchkin-y stuff, I think.</p><p></p><p>I think Torchbearer is either the first or the third, depending on how much competition there is among the players to collect advancement ticks and earn Fate and Persona (especially MVP).</p><p></p><p>The essay also distinguishes between "the gamble" and "the crunch". To quote again:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">The <strong>Gamble</strong> occurs when the player's ability to manipulate the odds or clarify unknowns is seriously limited. "Hold your nose and jump!" is its battle-cry. Running a first-level character in all forms of D&D is a Gamble; all of Ninja Burger play is a Gamble. More locally, imagine a crucial charge made by a fighter character toward a dragon - his goal is to distract it from the other character's coordinated attack, and he's the only one whose hit points are sufficient to survive half its flame-blast. Will he make the saving roll? If he doesn't, he dies. Go!</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">The <strong>Crunch</strong> occurs when system-based strategy makes a big difference, either because the Fortune methods involved are predictable (e.g. probabilities on a single-die roll), or because effects are reliably additive or cancelling (e.g. Feats, spells). Gamist-heavy Champions play with powerful characters is very much about the Crunch. The villain's move occurs early in Phase 3; if the speed-guy saves his action from Phase 2 into Phase 3 to pre-empt that action, and if the brick-guy's punch late on Phase 3 can be enhanced first by the psionic-guy's augmenting power if he Pushes the power, then we can double-team the villain before he can kill the hostage.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">The distinction between Gamble and Crunch isn't quite the same as "randomness;" it has more to do with options and consequences. Fortune can be involved in both of them, and it doesn't <em>have</em> to be involved in either (see Diplomacy for a non-RPG example).</p><p></p><p>Torchbearer strongly leans towards Crunch. So does 4e D&D combat.</p><p></p><p>I wasn't there, and so can only make informed conjectures about your TB2e play. My default conjecture would be that your experience of both gamist and simulationist play is more likely to be the sort of shift that Edwards describes. For instance, in a conflict it is probably gamist priorities, with some colour overlay drawn from Beliefs, Goals, etc; but then when it comes time to negotiate a compromise that colour gets prioritised in a more narrativist fashion.</p><p></p><p>But your experience may belie my conjecture!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9250880, member: 42582"] System mastery is one manifestation of "step on up" [URL='http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/21/']as Edwards uses that phrase[/URL]. To quote: [INDENT][Gamism] operates at two levels: the real, social people and the imaginative, in-game situation. [INDENT]1. The players, armed with their understanding of the game and their strategic acumen, have to [B]Step On Up[/B]. Step On Up requires strategizing, guts, and performance from the real people in the real world. This is the inherent "meaning" or agenda of Gamist play (analogous to the Dream in Simulationist play). Gamist play, socially speaking, demands [I]performance with risk[/I], conducted and perceived by the people at the table. What's actually at risk can vary - for this level, though, it must be a social, real-people thing, usually a minor amount of recognition or esteem. The commitment to, or willingness to accept this risk is the key - it's analogous to committing to the sincerity of The Dream for Simulationist play. This is the whole core of the essay, that such a commitment is fun and perfectly viable for role-playing, just as it's viable for nearly any other sphere of human activity. 2. The in-game characters, armed with their skills, priorities, and so on, have to face a [B]Challenge[/B], which is to say, a specific Situation in the imaginary game-world. Challenge is about the strategizing, guts, and performance of the characters in this imaginary game-world. For the characters, it's a risky situation in the game-world; in addition to that all-important risk, it can be as fabulous, elaborate, and thematic as any other sort of role-playing. Challenge is merely plain old Situation - it only gets a new name because of the necessary attention it must receive in Gamist play. Strategizing in and among the Challenge is the material, or arena, for whatever brand of Step On Up is operating.[/INDENT][/indent] In the essay, he goes on to discuss the extent to which competition can be high or low at level 1, or level 2, or both, or neither. The following summarises rather than quotes: [INDENT]*High competition among players, but not PCs, is team-based play with individual XP or other rewards (some classic D&D; Agon 2e); *Low competition among players, but high among PCs, would be low-stakes intra-party scheming play (perhaps some Paranoia?); *Both low would be team-based play with group XP or similar (eg some classic D&D tournament play, or a similar approach to a modern AP); *Both high is competition among the PCs that translates into genuine competition among players, analogous to a wargame but via the RPG vehicle - a lot of D&Ders would see this as pretty munchkin-y stuff, I think.[/indent] I think Torchbearer is either the first or the third, depending on how much competition there is among the players to collect advancement ticks and earn Fate and Persona (especially MVP). The essay also distinguishes between "the gamble" and "the crunch". To quote again: [indent]The [B]Gamble[/B] occurs when the player's ability to manipulate the odds or clarify unknowns is seriously limited. "Hold your nose and jump!" is its battle-cry. Running a first-level character in all forms of D&D is a Gamble; all of Ninja Burger play is a Gamble. More locally, imagine a crucial charge made by a fighter character toward a dragon - his goal is to distract it from the other character's coordinated attack, and he's the only one whose hit points are sufficient to survive half its flame-blast. Will he make the saving roll? If he doesn't, he dies. Go! The [B]Crunch[/B] occurs when system-based strategy makes a big difference, either because the Fortune methods involved are predictable (e.g. probabilities on a single-die roll), or because effects are reliably additive or cancelling (e.g. Feats, spells). Gamist-heavy Champions play with powerful characters is very much about the Crunch. The villain's move occurs early in Phase 3; if the speed-guy saves his action from Phase 2 into Phase 3 to pre-empt that action, and if the brick-guy's punch late on Phase 3 can be enhanced first by the psionic-guy's augmenting power if he Pushes the power, then we can double-team the villain before he can kill the hostage. The distinction between Gamble and Crunch isn't quite the same as "randomness;" it has more to do with options and consequences. Fortune can be involved in both of them, and it doesn't [I]have[/I] to be involved in either (see Diplomacy for a non-RPG example).[/indent] Torchbearer strongly leans towards Crunch. So does 4e D&D combat. I wasn't there, and so can only make informed conjectures about your TB2e play. My default conjecture would be that your experience of both gamist and simulationist play is more likely to be the sort of shift that Edwards describes. For instance, in a conflict it is probably gamist priorities, with some colour overlay drawn from Beliefs, Goals, etc; but then when it comes time to negotiate a compromise that colour gets prioritised in a more narrativist fashion. But your experience may belie my conjecture! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
G/N/S epiphany
Top