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
Monte Cook On Fumble Mechanics
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: 7695251" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Also, it cannot be attempted again. That matters in classic D&D, where retries are often permitted (the cost being ingame time, and hence wandering monster checks and torch depletion).</p><p></p><p>What I actually said, and what you quoted, is that if it doesn't escalate the challenge then it's not a good "GM intrusion" (which, in post 246 upthread, a designer for that system has equated with "escalated challenge").</p><p></p><p>I can think of all sorts of complications that don't deplete resources. I even gave two actual play examples upthread: mine, in which the PCs were looking for a mace but instead found black arrows; and [MENTION=99817]chaochou[/MENTION]'s, in which the PC got put into the effigies that s/he had urged her followers to construct.</p><p></p><p>This is not universally true. It's not even universally true for classic D&D play, where a challenge may be very great, may be overcome by clever play, and as a result no resource is depleted (". . . and we didn't even lose a hit point"). It's certainly not true in RPGs in which the characters (and hence players) have goals not defined in resource terms.</p><p></p><p>For instance, the challenge of dealing with the discovery of the black arrows may be very great - much greater than dealing with the fouled waterhole - although no resources are consumed in deciding how to respond to it.</p><p></p><p>Finding the water polluted doesn't escalate the challenge. But it does deplete resources. I never said that it escalated the challenge; in fact, as I think I explained upthread it has quite a different pacing implication. Escalating the challenge by having a nemesis guard the waterhole would increase the playtime spent on something that was somewhat peripheral to the main action (of getting to the tower so the PCs could rest and recuperate, and so - at the metagame level - some backstory issues could be brought to the forefront and addressed).</p><p></p><p>Although the fouled waterhole doesn't escalate the challenge, it is a bigger problem for the PCs then escalating the challenge would be, because of the immediate pressure it puts on a vital resource (namely, remaining points of Forte). That feeds into the choice of it as a failure result: it causes some immediate stress (by putting pressure on a vital resource); but it takes up relatively little time at the table (because it doesn't complicate the challenge); and it seeds a future conflict (with the dark elf) that ties into various PC beliefs, including most immediately the elven ronin's commitment to <em>always keeping the elven ways</em>.</p><p></p><p>There is no generalisable relationship between "bigger problem" andl "more interesting complication" or "better for play". Judging these things is part of the role of the GM.</p><p></p><p>I'll ask again - how much experience do you have playing in and/or GMing "fail forward" or "no whiffing"-style systems? As I've said upthread, your insistence that "no whiffing" = "success with complications" = "partial success" = (it now seems) "resource depletion" suggests to me that you don't have a great deal of such experience. Because these different options all have different implications for pacing, for the way PCs are framed and engaged (in relation to and/or by reference to relevant flags), etc. You don't seem very sensitive to or interested in those differences, but they are pretty crucial in this sort of play.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7695251, member: 42582"] Also, it cannot be attempted again. That matters in classic D&D, where retries are often permitted (the cost being ingame time, and hence wandering monster checks and torch depletion). What I actually said, and what you quoted, is that if it doesn't escalate the challenge then it's not a good "GM intrusion" (which, in post 246 upthread, a designer for that system has equated with "escalated challenge"). I can think of all sorts of complications that don't deplete resources. I even gave two actual play examples upthread: mine, in which the PCs were looking for a mace but instead found black arrows; and [MENTION=99817]chaochou[/MENTION]'s, in which the PC got put into the effigies that s/he had urged her followers to construct. This is not universally true. It's not even universally true for classic D&D play, where a challenge may be very great, may be overcome by clever play, and as a result no resource is depleted (". . . and we didn't even lose a hit point"). It's certainly not true in RPGs in which the characters (and hence players) have goals not defined in resource terms. For instance, the challenge of dealing with the discovery of the black arrows may be very great - much greater than dealing with the fouled waterhole - although no resources are consumed in deciding how to respond to it. Finding the water polluted doesn't escalate the challenge. But it does deplete resources. I never said that it escalated the challenge; in fact, as I think I explained upthread it has quite a different pacing implication. Escalating the challenge by having a nemesis guard the waterhole would increase the playtime spent on something that was somewhat peripheral to the main action (of getting to the tower so the PCs could rest and recuperate, and so - at the metagame level - some backstory issues could be brought to the forefront and addressed). Although the fouled waterhole doesn't escalate the challenge, it is a bigger problem for the PCs then escalating the challenge would be, because of the immediate pressure it puts on a vital resource (namely, remaining points of Forte). That feeds into the choice of it as a failure result: it causes some immediate stress (by putting pressure on a vital resource); but it takes up relatively little time at the table (because it doesn't complicate the challenge); and it seeds a future conflict (with the dark elf) that ties into various PC beliefs, including most immediately the elven ronin's commitment to [I]always keeping the elven ways[/I]. There is no generalisable relationship between "bigger problem" andl "more interesting complication" or "better for play". Judging these things is part of the role of the GM. I'll ask again - how much experience do you have playing in and/or GMing "fail forward" or "no whiffing"-style systems? As I've said upthread, your insistence that "no whiffing" = "success with complications" = "partial success" = (it now seems) "resource depletion" suggests to me that you don't have a great deal of such experience. Because these different options all have different implications for pacing, for the way PCs are framed and engaged (in relation to and/or by reference to relevant flags), etc. You don't seem very sensitive to or interested in those differences, but they are pretty crucial in this sort of play. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Monte Cook On Fumble Mechanics
Top