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
Rules Transparency - How much do players need to know?
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: 6972071" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>If you are assuming that game rules are "physics computations", you're already making assumptions about the relationship between rules, fiction and outcomes that you might want to share with your players!</p><p></p><p>If the player doesn't know how many turns the climbing takes, what the effect is on his/her PC's vulnerability (in 3E, for instance, I think a climbing character forfeits some defences), whether or not being in a tree will give a bonus to defence, etc, then how does the player know whether or not a "decent outcome" is realistically possible.</p><p></p><p>A key issue here, in combat rules, is how the action economy interacts with the "physics computations". In AD&D, the basic rule is one attack per minute - so if the GM thinks the tree can be climbed in about a minute (pretty plausible for some trees) then the action declaration doesn't cost the player much.</p><p></p><p>In 3E, the basic rule is 10 attacks per minute (one per 6 seconds) - so if the GM thinks climbing the tree will take about a minute, then the action declaration will take the whole combat and the player misses out on having his/her PC shoot.</p><p></p><p>These differences in action economy are not about "physics computation". They're metagame constructs, and if players don't know what they are or how they work, it's hard to make effective action declarations.</p><p></p><p>At this point, it looks like it is the GM deciding outcomes, not the player by way of action declarations for his/her PCs.</p><p></p><p>That's one way to run a RPG. It's obviously not the only way, though!</p><p></p><p>But what is "reasonable" is often a function of mechanics, including action economy.</p><p></p><p>Can I reasonably climb a tree without being shot by arrows? In AD&D the answer is yes. In 3E the answer might well be no. But that's not because trees, or human archery abilities, are different in each system. It's because the systems use different action economies, different resolution rules for climb checks, etc.</p><p></p><p>Can I reasonably sneak a look in a spellbook and try and cast a spell? The answer to this is another part of the game rules. There is not inuitive answer to the question - is this reasonable?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6972071, member: 42582"] If you are assuming that game rules are "physics computations", you're already making assumptions about the relationship between rules, fiction and outcomes that you might want to share with your players! If the player doesn't know how many turns the climbing takes, what the effect is on his/her PC's vulnerability (in 3E, for instance, I think a climbing character forfeits some defences), whether or not being in a tree will give a bonus to defence, etc, then how does the player know whether or not a "decent outcome" is realistically possible. A key issue here, in combat rules, is how the action economy interacts with the "physics computations". In AD&D, the basic rule is one attack per minute - so if the GM thinks the tree can be climbed in about a minute (pretty plausible for some trees) then the action declaration doesn't cost the player much. In 3E, the basic rule is 10 attacks per minute (one per 6 seconds) - so if the GM thinks climbing the tree will take about a minute, then the action declaration will take the whole combat and the player misses out on having his/her PC shoot. These differences in action economy are not about "physics computation". They're metagame constructs, and if players don't know what they are or how they work, it's hard to make effective action declarations. At this point, it looks like it is the GM deciding outcomes, not the player by way of action declarations for his/her PCs. That's one way to run a RPG. It's obviously not the only way, though! But what is "reasonable" is often a function of mechanics, including action economy. Can I reasonably climb a tree without being shot by arrows? In AD&D the answer is yes. In 3E the answer might well be no. But that's not because trees, or human archery abilities, are different in each system. It's because the systems use different action economies, different resolution rules for climb checks, etc. Can I reasonably sneak a look in a spellbook and try and cast a spell? The answer to this is another part of the game rules. There is not inuitive answer to the question - is this reasonable? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Rules Transparency - How much do players need to know?
Top