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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Talking About An Apocalypse: Looking At Apocalypse World 2E
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="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 7747244" data-attributes="member: 6688937"><p>This example, and a lot of discussion I've seen about it bother me. IMO, they skip over the importance of setting the stakes of the conflict in the first place, and the necessity of rules involving that in a game that utilizes Conflict Resolution. This makes the difference between conflict and task resolution appear much more like an arbitrary matter of scale rather than a qualitative difference. </p><p></p><p>I didn't really get Conflict Resolution until I played <em>Capes</em> (an obscure indie game I bring up perhaps a bit too often around here). In that game, which relies entirely on Conflict Resolution, Players can put conflicts into play* (like..."We discover dirt on the bad guy".) As play progresses, players vie for control of the final resolution of that conflict. Two rules govern what they may narrate for their actions:</p><p><strong>"And then..."</strong> If you fail to take the lead in control of the Conflict, you may narrate your action, but the controller gets to add additional narration possibly explaining what went wrong.</p><p>and</p><p><strong>"Not Yet"</strong> You cannot narrate anything that would effectively resolve a goal that is in play. (Unless you have just won that goal.)</p><p></p><p>So, unless someone put a "the safe is opened" event in play, you can use your action to open the safe or not.</p><p></p><p>Interestingly, the "Not Yet" rule can be used to control the speed/flow of narration, by introducing a goal that blocks certain actions until the goal is won. So, If I throw out "Medusa turns a hero to stone", then a player (the medusa or anyone else) needs to win that goal before it can happen. (Hero players might vie for control as a defensive measure.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I've seen this before, and I tend to think not, because "10 points of damage" isn't a narrative event or description, but only mechanical. Although IMO cumulative "Roll to hit, roll damage" rolls usually <em>approach</em> Conflict Resolution, but the GM can abort it by introducing a call to surrender or similar event. i.e. The Conflict to be resolved is only presumed to be "which characters or monsters will die in this fight?", but that isn't clearly only table, its only a presumption.</p><p></p><p>I'm very curious about the Index Card rpg, which (If I understand it) adds mechanics similar to HP and countdown timers to non-combat resolution. I don't know if that approaches Conflict Resolution.</p><p></p><p>I don't think the PbtA engine really adds anything in particular to Conflict Resolution. Although I would suppose that would depend greatly on the wording of the moves in question.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>*There are also a few rules about objecting to poorly-worded goals or events, and resolving or rewording them.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ratskinner, post: 7747244, member: 6688937"] This example, and a lot of discussion I've seen about it bother me. IMO, they skip over the importance of setting the stakes of the conflict in the first place, and the necessity of rules involving that in a game that utilizes Conflict Resolution. This makes the difference between conflict and task resolution appear much more like an arbitrary matter of scale rather than a qualitative difference. I didn't really get Conflict Resolution until I played [I]Capes[/I] (an obscure indie game I bring up perhaps a bit too often around here). In that game, which relies entirely on Conflict Resolution, Players can put conflicts into play* (like..."We discover dirt on the bad guy".) As play progresses, players vie for control of the final resolution of that conflict. Two rules govern what they may narrate for their actions: [B]"And then..."[/B] If you fail to take the lead in control of the Conflict, you may narrate your action, but the controller gets to add additional narration possibly explaining what went wrong. and [B]"Not Yet"[/B] You cannot narrate anything that would effectively resolve a goal that is in play. (Unless you have just won that goal.) So, unless someone put a "the safe is opened" event in play, you can use your action to open the safe or not. Interestingly, the "Not Yet" rule can be used to control the speed/flow of narration, by introducing a goal that blocks certain actions until the goal is won. So, If I throw out "Medusa turns a hero to stone", then a player (the medusa or anyone else) needs to win that goal before it can happen. (Hero players might vie for control as a defensive measure.) I've seen this before, and I tend to think not, because "10 points of damage" isn't a narrative event or description, but only mechanical. Although IMO cumulative "Roll to hit, roll damage" rolls usually [I]approach[/I] Conflict Resolution, but the GM can abort it by introducing a call to surrender or similar event. i.e. The Conflict to be resolved is only presumed to be "which characters or monsters will die in this fight?", but that isn't clearly only table, its only a presumption. I'm very curious about the Index Card rpg, which (If I understand it) adds mechanics similar to HP and countdown timers to non-combat resolution. I don't know if that approaches Conflict Resolution. I don't think the PbtA engine really adds anything in particular to Conflict Resolution. Although I would suppose that would depend greatly on the wording of the moves in question. *There are also a few rules about objecting to poorly-worded goals or events, and resolving or rewording them. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Talking About An Apocalypse: Looking At Apocalypse World 2E
Top