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
*Dungeons & Dragons
Of all the complaints about 3.x systems... do you people actually allow this stuff ?
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: 5796294" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Actually, that's your paraphrase. I said "no failure offscreen". Or, if you want an "always" in there, "signficant consequences for the PCs will always unfold onscreen." What counts as unfolding onscreen is going to depend on the details - but like I said in my earlier post, knowledge by the players of the stakes, and absence of anti-climax, are going to be part of this. Conversely, failing to save the world because you got stuck in traffic is not going to cut it.</p><p></p><p>No. I canvassed two variants on the princess scenario, one in which the players no the stakes and one in which they don't. And related knowledge of the stakes to more broader notions of significance.</p><p></p><p>No I didn't. I said that not getting there on time because you got stuck at a red light would be anticlimactic. This is true whether or not the red light happend on screen.</p><p></p><p>I am not applying a double standard. I am applying the same standard. The standard is one, according to which getting stuck at a traffic light is anticlimactic, but being in the same room as the prisoner and failing to save them because you are too cowardly is climactic. The standard is a pretty conventional aesthetic standard. I also noted that if one is playing a certain sort of modernist or post-modernist game, which would use a less conventional, more cynical or ironic or nihilistic standard, then getting stuck at the traffic light <em>might</em> be significant. But I don't play D&D in that sort of fashion.</p><p></p><p>What do you mean by "insignificant to the actual plot of the game"? I can only make sense of that if the game has a predetermined plot. My game does not have a predetermined plot. And does not have "real plot locations".</p><p></p><p>If you are asking, what happens in my game if the players abandon their goal of rescuing the prisoner? Then the prisoner can die offstage. The players have, in effect, indicated that it is no longer important to them that their PCs engage with that situation.</p><p></p><p>There is a big difference between "getting there on time" and "saving the princess". The first is about situation. The second is about plot. These are different things, especially in an RPG where there are multiple participants all hoping to shape the plot.</p><p></p><p>Does "consquences" here mean operational consequences? Causal consequences? Moral consequences? Thematic consequences? No operational cosequences is roughly true, although in the detail of play actually a bit simpistic. Causal consequences is not true - there can be causal consequences that are not operational - eg in an earlier scene an NPC may have been given some information, and that now changes the ingame situation. And thematic and moral consequences obviously can flow from a previous scene even if that scene does not constrain the timing of a subsequent scene.</p><p></p><p>So do I. That is why the distinction beteen situational authority and plot authority is central. That is why I don't undestand what you mean by phases like "next real plot location", "signiicant to the plot", etc. I don't see how those phrases can have any meaning unless the story is predetermind. And if the story is predetermined then I don't see how their can be surprises (other than perhaps a PC engaging in some witty repartee in combat - ie a bit of colour and characterisation).</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure whay you mean by "trashed". Given that I don't have expcations about how situations will resolve - this is up to the players - then I don't think the notion of "trashing" has any work to do in my game.</p><p></p><p>The most dramatic unexpected resolution I've GMed, I think, is still the occasion when one of the players decided that his PC would join with the "evil" cultists and permit the sacrifice of a fellow PC to Incabulos. Although the recent occasion when the players promised allegiance to Kas, that I linked to upthread, was also pretty unexpected.</p><p></p><p>No. I don't have pre-determined "cool set pieces". I frame situations in response to the resolution of earlier situations, along the lines of the Czege quote in my earlier post.</p><p></p><p>But anyway, let's flip your example around. If the players are very keen to resolve a certain situation - say, the final confrontation with their campaign-long nemesis - and I set up another situation in the meantime - say, a cat for them to rescue from a tree - why would it necessarily improve my game to say "By the way, because you spent time rescuing that cat, the world ends as your nemesis finishes the ritual before you get there. Sucks to be you, I guess!"</p><p></p><p>One underlying premise of Gygaxian/Pulsipherian play, in which the backstory is rocksolid and measuring time and operational success/failure is key, is that the participants in the game will place more importance on "skilled play" than on "not missing out on fighting your nemesis". Change those priorities among the participants, and the advice from Gygax and Pulsipher is no longer applicable.</p><p></p><p>Once again, this seems to run together situational with plot authority, and also to assume that operational consequences are the only significant consequences.</p><p></p><p>In your trap example (from the comic strip), if the players are making a random choice, and the GM decides that whatever way they go they will find a strap, player agency has not necessarily been undermined at all, because there is no agency in making a random choice. Now, if the social contract of the game is one in which luck in exploration is expected to matter, the GM would be breaking the contract - cheating, in effect. If the social contract of the game is one in which the players exepect the GM to confront their PCs with hard challenges, then the GM might <em>have</em> to put the trap in the PCs' path in order to comply with the contract - and then let them exercise their agency in dealing with the trap.</p><p></p><p>Which all goes back to my original comment to Auld Grump - whether or not timelines as a solution to the 15 minute day will work depends upon scenario design and playstyle.</p><p></p><p>And if you're wondering what a situation-focused, non-operationally focused game looks like - and how GMing that sort of game works, and how "significance" (which is the more general principle of which "no failure offscreen" is a special case) plays a central role (in Czege's terms, as quoted by me upthread, "push[ing] and pull[ing] in ways that are interesting to me and to the player"), have a look at these <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-4th-edition-discussion/309950-actual-play-my-first-social-only-session.html" target="_blank">actual</a> <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-4th-edition-discussion/312367-actual-play-another-combat-free-session-intra-party-dyanmics.html" target="_blank">play</a> <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/313724-actual-play-pcs-successfully-negotiated-kas.html" target="_blank">posts</a>. Apart from anything else, they show the distinction between situational authority and plot authority in action.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5796294, member: 42582"] Actually, that's your paraphrase. I said "no failure offscreen". Or, if you want an "always" in there, "signficant consequences for the PCs will always unfold onscreen." What counts as unfolding onscreen is going to depend on the details - but like I said in my earlier post, knowledge by the players of the stakes, and absence of anti-climax, are going to be part of this. Conversely, failing to save the world because you got stuck in traffic is not going to cut it. No. I canvassed two variants on the princess scenario, one in which the players no the stakes and one in which they don't. And related knowledge of the stakes to more broader notions of significance. No I didn't. I said that not getting there on time because you got stuck at a red light would be anticlimactic. This is true whether or not the red light happend on screen. I am not applying a double standard. I am applying the same standard. The standard is one, according to which getting stuck at a traffic light is anticlimactic, but being in the same room as the prisoner and failing to save them because you are too cowardly is climactic. The standard is a pretty conventional aesthetic standard. I also noted that if one is playing a certain sort of modernist or post-modernist game, which would use a less conventional, more cynical or ironic or nihilistic standard, then getting stuck at the traffic light [I]might[/I] be significant. But I don't play D&D in that sort of fashion. What do you mean by "insignificant to the actual plot of the game"? I can only make sense of that if the game has a predetermined plot. My game does not have a predetermined plot. And does not have "real plot locations". If you are asking, what happens in my game if the players abandon their goal of rescuing the prisoner? Then the prisoner can die offstage. The players have, in effect, indicated that it is no longer important to them that their PCs engage with that situation. There is a big difference between "getting there on time" and "saving the princess". The first is about situation. The second is about plot. These are different things, especially in an RPG where there are multiple participants all hoping to shape the plot. Does "consquences" here mean operational consequences? Causal consequences? Moral consequences? Thematic consequences? No operational cosequences is roughly true, although in the detail of play actually a bit simpistic. Causal consequences is not true - there can be causal consequences that are not operational - eg in an earlier scene an NPC may have been given some information, and that now changes the ingame situation. And thematic and moral consequences obviously can flow from a previous scene even if that scene does not constrain the timing of a subsequent scene. So do I. That is why the distinction beteen situational authority and plot authority is central. That is why I don't undestand what you mean by phases like "next real plot location", "signiicant to the plot", etc. I don't see how those phrases can have any meaning unless the story is predetermind. And if the story is predetermined then I don't see how their can be surprises (other than perhaps a PC engaging in some witty repartee in combat - ie a bit of colour and characterisation). I'm not sure whay you mean by "trashed". Given that I don't have expcations about how situations will resolve - this is up to the players - then I don't think the notion of "trashing" has any work to do in my game. The most dramatic unexpected resolution I've GMed, I think, is still the occasion when one of the players decided that his PC would join with the "evil" cultists and permit the sacrifice of a fellow PC to Incabulos. Although the recent occasion when the players promised allegiance to Kas, that I linked to upthread, was also pretty unexpected. No. I don't have pre-determined "cool set pieces". I frame situations in response to the resolution of earlier situations, along the lines of the Czege quote in my earlier post. But anyway, let's flip your example around. If the players are very keen to resolve a certain situation - say, the final confrontation with their campaign-long nemesis - and I set up another situation in the meantime - say, a cat for them to rescue from a tree - why would it necessarily improve my game to say "By the way, because you spent time rescuing that cat, the world ends as your nemesis finishes the ritual before you get there. Sucks to be you, I guess!" One underlying premise of Gygaxian/Pulsipherian play, in which the backstory is rocksolid and measuring time and operational success/failure is key, is that the participants in the game will place more importance on "skilled play" than on "not missing out on fighting your nemesis". Change those priorities among the participants, and the advice from Gygax and Pulsipher is no longer applicable. Once again, this seems to run together situational with plot authority, and also to assume that operational consequences are the only significant consequences. In your trap example (from the comic strip), if the players are making a random choice, and the GM decides that whatever way they go they will find a strap, player agency has not necessarily been undermined at all, because there is no agency in making a random choice. Now, if the social contract of the game is one in which luck in exploration is expected to matter, the GM would be breaking the contract - cheating, in effect. If the social contract of the game is one in which the players exepect the GM to confront their PCs with hard challenges, then the GM might [I]have[/I] to put the trap in the PCs' path in order to comply with the contract - and then let them exercise their agency in dealing with the trap. Which all goes back to my original comment to Auld Grump - whether or not timelines as a solution to the 15 minute day will work depends upon scenario design and playstyle. And if you're wondering what a situation-focused, non-operationally focused game looks like - and how GMing that sort of game works, and how "significance" (which is the more general principle of which "no failure offscreen" is a special case) plays a central role (in Czege's terms, as quoted by me upthread, "push[ing] and pull[ing] in ways that are interesting to me and to the player"), have a look at these [url=http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-4th-edition-discussion/309950-actual-play-my-first-social-only-session.html]actual[/url] [url=http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-4th-edition-discussion/312367-actual-play-another-combat-free-session-intra-party-dyanmics.html]play[/url] [url=http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/313724-actual-play-pcs-successfully-negotiated-kas.html]posts[/url]. Apart from anything else, they show the distinction between situational authority and plot authority in action. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Of all the complaints about 3.x systems... do you people actually allow this stuff ?
Top