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
Game Mechanics And Player Agency
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="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7742696" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>Particularly in the subjective sense, and by past experiences and expectations. Something familiar seems more intuitive and simpler than something new, even if, objectively, they're the /same/ thing, viewed from different perspectives. D&D is very complex, but the more you play it, the less you notice that complexity. Similarly, D&D deviates radically from many of it's sources of inspiration, so if you come into it with expectations formed from those same sources, it'll seem less intuitive than if you come to it with expectations shaped by past editions of the same game, or by, say CRPGs or MMOs - or fiction based on them - that cribbed heavily from D&D, themselves.</p><p></p><p> Your level of concern or knowledge of past editions doesn't change the facts. If you present 5e as having 'done' something for the first time that a past edition actually did first - and took further - you are simply wrong. I accept your explanation for the mistake you made, but it does not change the facts. </p><p></p><p>It's more like neutral simplified. In the classic game, 'Neutral' represented the rarefied philosophy of maintaining global moral/ethical balance in the broader world - typified by Druids - but also represented individuals who had no such philosophy, merely no strong commitment to any moral or ethical extreme, /and/ also those creatures that lacked the faculties to engage in morals & ethics in the first place (like animals). At various times, these were called 'Neutral' or 'True Neutral' or given parenthetical 'tendencies,' or characterized as lacking alignment. TN, in particular, could be unintuitive to those uninitiated into the inner mysteries of the 9-alignment system. And, mechanically, the balanced-committed Druid and the non-committal everyman - and the donkey they rode in on - were zapped the same by alignment-based gotchyas. </p><p>Unaligned, OTOH, was simply opting out of the already simplified other 4 alignments (LG, G, E, & CE), if a player happened to envision something like LN or CN or TN, it'd fall under that, as would any more intuitive/realistic/complex outlook & set of motivations.</p><p></p><p> There's an innate problem with a game having a skill like 'Persuasion' in the first place, I suppose. Earlier versions of D&D didn't have it, IIRC. Diplomacy in 3.5 mechanically shifted attitudes, for instance, the Diplomancer could make an openly hostile enemy 'Helpful,' instead, but he couldn't use that helpfulness to get the target to do things it was unalterably opposed to doing - a helpful thief will steal from you, a helpful Paladin take on a dragon for you, the reverse is unlikely. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> In 4e Diplomacy was simply dealing honestly in a negotiation (as opposed to Bluff), and any more meaningful/important negotiation would likely be a Skill Challenge, for the party, which means they wouldn't be being diplomasized into doing something, but would be trying to achieve a given goal going into it.</p><p></p><p> Hey, at least 3e didn't actually have a 'Persuade' skill.</p><p></p><p> Nod: a compromise between modelling the abilities of the characters in question and using those of the DM/players in their place.</p><p></p><p> Psychological limitations, flaws that model addiction, and willpower as a limited, player managed resource, are some ways games have dealt with those sorts of things in the past - as early as 1981, now that I think of it. In that sense, D&D is still a 70's RPG, and maybe not the best example of mechanics supporting player agency....</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7742696, member: 996"] Particularly in the subjective sense, and by past experiences and expectations. Something familiar seems more intuitive and simpler than something new, even if, objectively, they're the /same/ thing, viewed from different perspectives. D&D is very complex, but the more you play it, the less you notice that complexity. Similarly, D&D deviates radically from many of it's sources of inspiration, so if you come into it with expectations formed from those same sources, it'll seem less intuitive than if you come to it with expectations shaped by past editions of the same game, or by, say CRPGs or MMOs - or fiction based on them - that cribbed heavily from D&D, themselves. Your level of concern or knowledge of past editions doesn't change the facts. If you present 5e as having 'done' something for the first time that a past edition actually did first - and took further - you are simply wrong. I accept your explanation for the mistake you made, but it does not change the facts. It's more like neutral simplified. In the classic game, 'Neutral' represented the rarefied philosophy of maintaining global moral/ethical balance in the broader world - typified by Druids - but also represented individuals who had no such philosophy, merely no strong commitment to any moral or ethical extreme, /and/ also those creatures that lacked the faculties to engage in morals & ethics in the first place (like animals). At various times, these were called 'Neutral' or 'True Neutral' or given parenthetical 'tendencies,' or characterized as lacking alignment. TN, in particular, could be unintuitive to those uninitiated into the inner mysteries of the 9-alignment system. And, mechanically, the balanced-committed Druid and the non-committal everyman - and the donkey they rode in on - were zapped the same by alignment-based gotchyas. Unaligned, OTOH, was simply opting out of the already simplified other 4 alignments (LG, G, E, & CE), if a player happened to envision something like LN or CN or TN, it'd fall under that, as would any more intuitive/realistic/complex outlook & set of motivations. There's an innate problem with a game having a skill like 'Persuasion' in the first place, I suppose. Earlier versions of D&D didn't have it, IIRC. Diplomacy in 3.5 mechanically shifted attitudes, for instance, the Diplomancer could make an openly hostile enemy 'Helpful,' instead, but he couldn't use that helpfulness to get the target to do things it was unalterably opposed to doing - a helpful thief will steal from you, a helpful Paladin take on a dragon for you, the reverse is unlikely. ;) In 4e Diplomacy was simply dealing honestly in a negotiation (as opposed to Bluff), and any more meaningful/important negotiation would likely be a Skill Challenge, for the party, which means they wouldn't be being diplomasized into doing something, but would be trying to achieve a given goal going into it. Hey, at least 3e didn't actually have a 'Persuade' skill. Nod: a compromise between modelling the abilities of the characters in question and using those of the DM/players in their place. Psychological limitations, flaws that model addiction, and willpower as a limited, player managed resource, are some ways games have dealt with those sorts of things in the past - as early as 1981, now that I think of it. In that sense, D&D is still a 70's RPG, and maybe not the best example of mechanics supporting player agency.... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Game Mechanics And Player Agency
Top